Mental health, criminal justice and culture : some ways forward?

Objective: This paper aims to offer an overview of the mental health needs of Indigenous men and women in the criminal justice system and how Indigenous cultural perspectives on mental health might infl uence forensic mental health service provision.
Conclusion: There is a need for both mental health and criminal justice agencies to collaborate more closely in developing new models of service provision that incorporate Indigenous perspectives on social and emotional wellbeing, recognize culturally specifi c mental health risk and protective factors in relation to prevention, early intervention and treatment, and take advantage of the opportunities for treatment that arise in the context of criminal justice system intervention.

Capacity to Attend to the Needs of Persons with Dual Diagnoses in the Criminal Justice System: Views of Mental Health and Criminal Justice Professionals

Currently, individuals with intellectual disabilities are overrepresented within the Criminal Justice System (Griffiths, Taillon-Wasmond & Smith, 2002). A primary problem within the Criminal Justice System is the lack of distinction between mental illness and intellectual disabilities within the Criminal Code. Due to this lack of distinction and the overall lack of identification procedures in the Criminal Justice System, individuals with disabilities will often not receive proper accommodations to enable them to play an equitable role in the justice system. There is increasing evidence that persons with intellectual disabilities are more likely than others to have their rights violated, not use court supports and accommodations as much as they should, and be subject to miscarriages of justice (Marinos, 2010). In this study, interviews were conducted with mental health (n=8) and criminal justice professionals (n=8) about how individuals with dual diagnosis are received in the Criminal Justice System. It was found that criminal justice professionals lack significant knowledge about dual diagnosis, including effective identification and therefore appropriate supports and accommodations. Justice professionals in particular were relatively ill-prepared in dealing effectively with this population. One finding to highlight is that there is misunderstanding between mental health professionals and justice professionals about who ought to take responsibility and accountability for this population.

Effectiveness of Criminal Justice Liaison and Diversion Services for Offenders With Mental Disorders: A Review

Objective: The authors evaluated and synthesised the best-available evidence relating to the effectiveness of CJLD service models with respect to changes in mental health status and/or criminal recidivism.Methods: Research examining the effectiveness of CJLD services when compared to traditional Criminal Justice System (CJS) responses was reviewed and systematically appraised according to Campbell/Cochrane guidelines. Key outcomes included a reduction in offending and post-intervention changes in mental health. Results: Comprehensive searches of published and unpublished literature identified 6571 studies which varied considerably in terms of their methodological approach and overall quality. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. The synthesised findings indicated that, when compared to traditional CJS outcomes, CJLD services appeared to be effective in terms of identifying MDOs and impacting positively on criminal justice and mental health outcomes.Conclusions: Although the evidence may be deemed to be moderate in terms of methodological rigour, overall, the findings suggest that CJLD services can be beneficial. The effectiveness of services depends upon the model of service delivery, the availability of community services and the engagement of MDOs.The successful implementation of CJLD services requires a clearer recognition of the importance of system of care principles.

Modes of criminal justice, indigenous youth and social democracy

The political question of how the will of a community is to be democratically formed and adhered to, the question of social democracy, is normatively tied to the mode of criminal justice employed within that democratic public sphere. Liberal, republican, procedural and communitarian forms of democratic will-formation respectively reflect retributive,restorative, procedural and co-operative modes of criminal justice. After first elaborating these links through the critical response of republican and procedural theories of democracy to the liberal practice of democratic will-formation and its retributive mode of justice, our discussion considers the recent practice of restorative and procedural justice with respect to Indigenous youth; and this in the context of a severely diminished role for Indigenous justice agencies in the public sphere. In light of certain shortcomings in both the restorative and procedural modes of justice, and so too with republican and procedural understandings of the democratic public sphere, we turn to a discussion of procedural communitarianism, anchored as it is in Dewey’s notion of social co-operation. From here we attempt a brief formulation of what a socially co-operative mode of justice might consist of; a mode of justice where historically racial and economically coercive injustices are sufficiently recognised.

Review of Health Impact Assessments in the Criminal Justice System, 2001-2016

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2016-06

Validating a screening tool for mental health and substance use risk in an Indigenous prison population

Introduction and Aims: The Indigenous Risk Impact Screen (IRIS) is a validated culturally appropriate and widely used tool in the community for assessing substance use and mental disorder. This research aimed to assess the utility of this tool in an Indigenous prison population. Design and Methods: The study used data collected from a cross-sectional study of mental health among indigenous inmates in Queensland custodial centres (n=395, 84% male). Participants were administered a modified version of the IRIS, and ICD-10 diagnoses of substance use, depressive and anxiety disorders obtained using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). The concurrent validity of the modified IRIS was assessed against those of the CIDI. Results: 312 people screened as high risk for a substance use disorder and 179 were high risk for mental problems. 73% of males and 88% of females were diagnosed with a mental disorder. The IRIS was an effective screener for substance use disorders, with high sensitivity (Se) of 94% and low specificity (Sp) of 33%. The screener was less effective in identifying depression (Se 82%, Sp 59%) and anxiety (Se 68%, Sp 60%). Discussion: The IRIS is the first culturally appropriate screening instrument to be validated for the risk of drug and alcohol and mental disorder among Indigenous adults in custody. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that the IRIS is a valid tool for screening of alcohol and drug use risk among an incarcerated Indigenous population. The IRIS could offer an opportunity to improve the identification, treatment and health outcomes for incarcerated Indigenous adults.