Mentally disordered offenders in Sweden.

This article reviews the laws in Sweden concerning mentally disordered offenders. It also contains some figures on the relationship between mentally disordered offenders and other offenders sentenced to prison. The rules in Sweden are very different from other countries in that the responsibility concept has been abolished and thus there is no acquittal on a psychiatric basis.     

Mentally disordered criminal offenders: Legal and criminological perspectives

Legal research in Sweden has traditionally focused on a systematization of the legal rules and their practical application, while the task of studying the effects of the application of the laws has been handed over to other branches of the social sciences. In contrast, new legal theories focusing on proactive and therapeutic dimensions in law have gained increasing attention in the international arena. These approaches may be better suited for evaluating legislation governing compulsory psychiatric care. Theoretical discussions and studies of causal mechanisms underlying criminal behaviour, as well as the implementation and value of instruments for predicting behaviour, are relevant to contemporary criminological research. Criminal behaviour varies across different groups of perpetrators, and the causes can be sought in the interplay between the individual and social factors. Multi-disciplinary efforts, integrating research from forensic psychiatry, psychology, sociology, and criminology, would be beneficial in leading to a better understanding of the causes underlying criminal behaviour.     

Mentally disordered offenders and the European Court of Human Rights

Mentally disordered offenders find themselves at the intersection of the healthcare system and the criminal justice system in most European countries. Decisions on their care often involve lengthy discussions in relation to care versus control in society. In this article, the focus is on one aspect of this debate — that of human rights. An analysis of cases, taken to the European Court of Human Rights by mentally disordered offenders, demonstrates the difficulties inherent in ensuring appropriate care to individuals and safeguards to the public at the same time. The issues raised include the problems raised by indeterminate sentences, the use of detention for preventive purposes, and debates about treatment.The countries represented in this selection of cases are Belgium, Norway, Poland, the Netherlands, Russia and the United Kingdom.     

Mentally ill offenders in prison: the Belgian case

According to the EUPRIS-study on mental health in prisons (2007), available data on mental disorders in prison are scarce. Therefore, this study aims at summarizing and discussing the available knowledge on incarcerated mentally ill offenders concerning: (1) the screening and assessment for detecting mental health; (2) the psychiatric expertise in order to evaluate the mental status; and (3) the development and provision of forensic psychiatric treatment and care. These findings will be applied to the current situation in Belgium, which is a particularly interesting case. Belgium is currently facing difficulties concerning a large population of interned mentally ill offenders residing in correctional establishments.Implications with regard to the penal code, general or mental health legislation, screening, assessment, and treatment could deliver interesting viewpoints on how this problem could be tackled more effectively. Therefore, the findings will be discussed with reference to the international scientific and policy debate, focusing on ethical implications.     

Homeless mentally disordered offenders and violent crimes

This study examines the prevalence of homelessness in a cross-sectional sample of 150 patients retained in a maximum-security hospital for mentally disordered offenders in New York City. The homeless mentally ill comprise only 2% of the city's mentally ill population, yet they account for 50% of the admissions to this forensic facility from the community. Compared to population base rate estimates, forensic patients are homeless at 25 times the rate found in the rest of the city's mentally disordered population and are 50 times more likely to be homeless than the general population. Further, there is a significant association between homelessness at the time of the instant offense and charges for violent crimes, after controlling for age, sex, race, and diagnosis. These data suggest that homelessness greatly increases the risk that mentally disordered persons will be forensically hospitalized and is closely associated with indictments for violent criminal behavior. Alternative explanations for these findings are discussed, emphasizing risk, vulnerability, and criminalization perspectives.Some of the data reported in this article were presented at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, February 24, 1990, in Cincinnati, Ohio. Thanks to Joel Dvoskin, John Monahan, Edward Mulvey, Charles D. H. Parry, Nancy Pruett, Henry Steadman, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.     

White-collar offenders and the jail experience: a comparative analysis

The incarceration experiences of white-collar offenders have received relatively little attention among criminological researchers, and the research that has been conducted has focused on offenders’ experiences in prisons rather than jails. The purpose of this study was to fill this gap by examining approximately 6500 inmates incarcerated in local jails, comparing those classified as white-collar offenders to violent and other non-violent offenders. The differences between offender types based on demographics, psychological adjustment (i.e., mental health issues since arrival to jail), and behavioral adjustment (i.e., institutional misconduct) are examined to see whether white-collar inmates have more difficulty than others adjusting to the jail environment (consistent with the special sensitivity hypothesis). Findings suggest that white-collar jail inmates do not appear to experience symptoms indicative of poor psychological or behavioral adjustment to the jail environment. Implications for policy and future research are discussed.     

Follow-up after release of insanity acquittees, mentally disordered offenders, and convicted felons

The authors compared 127 insanity acquittees in the state of Maryland with a matched prisoner control group of 127 convicted felons and a comparison group of 135 mentally disordered prisoners transferred for hospital treatment. Subjects were followed from five to 17 years after discharge from hospital or release from prison. Subsequent arrests, hospitalizations, employment, and functioning of these large cohorts were studied and compared. The study focused on outcome data at five years after release. The authors found that, at five years postrelease, 54.3 percent of the insanity acquittees, 65.4 percent of the prisoner control group, and 73.3 percent of the mentally disordered prison transfers were rearrested. At 17 years postrelease, rearrest rates increased to 65.8 percent of the insanity acquittees, 75.4 percent of the prisoner controls, and 78.4 percent of the prison transfers. Significantly more mentally disordered prison transfers than NGRIs were rehospitalized during the follow-up period. Overall, the prison transfers had significantly poorer outcomes on nearly all variables studied compared with the other two groups. The authors conclude that although there were a substantial number of rearrests among insanity acquittees, that group had a statistically significantly lower rate of criminal activity compared with the other two groups of offenders.     

Alternative sanctions: myth and reality

For this study the author has reviewed 134 documents from 12 western countries: the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, England, Scotland, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Germany, Austria and France. The documents include the research literature as found in the RDC documentation department and documents obtained by writing to official authorities.