Screening for severe mental disorder in jails

Despite the demonstrated prevalence of severe mental disorder among jail detainees and the legal mandate to provide mental health services, most jails do not have the resources to incorporate traditional, time-consuming psychological assessment techniques into their routine intake process. As a result, a number of mentally ill jail detainees remain undetected and untreated. This study outlines the development of the Referral Decision Scale (RDS), which detects persons who have a high probability of having a severe mental disorder so that they can be given a complete diagnostic evaluation. The 14-item RDS was statistically derived using discriminant analysis from data collected via the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule on 728 randomly selected male jail detainees and then validated on 1,149 prison inmates. The final validated version of the RDS had an overall sensitivity of 0.791, specificity of 0.987, and positive and negative predictive value of 0.791 and 0.013, respectively. Since these statistics far exceed current detection rates, the RDS is likely to facilitate the diversion of mentally ill detainees in situations where it is impractical to administer psychological examinations to all incoming inmates. Training requirements for the RDS and directions for future research are discussed.This research was supported in part by National Institute of Mental Health under grant No. R01MH37988. We would like to thank Karl Kilgore, Stuart Michaels, John Lyons, Karen Abram, Richard White, and Christine Davidson for their statistical insights and helpful comments. James Collins is due special thanks for making his North Carolina prison data available. We are also grateful to Philip Hardiman, Thomas Monahan, and Ronald Simmons for their cooperation with the data-collection process.     

For Better or for Worse: Fifty Years Since the Removal of the Marriage Bar in the Australian Public Service

Fifty years ago, in late 1966, the Australian Public Service officially removed the “marriage bar” policy that had prevented the recruitment or continued employment of married women. The anniversary of this historic milestone is an opportunity to reflect on the introduction and removal of the marriage bar and to reflect on the policy change process and lessons that can be applied to the continuing struggle for gender equality at work. The research uses John Kingdon's framework for policy change to examine the delays and obstacles to the removal of the marriage bar. It highlights a number of occasions when the window of opportunity for policy change was briefly open but rapidly closed again due to changing political and economic circumstances.