Procedural justice in mental health court: an investigation of the relation of perception of procedural justice to non-adherence and termination

Mental health courts (MHCs) operate on the principles of procedural justice (PJ). PJ highlights the importance of process over outcomes in encounters with authority. Subjective perceptions of having voice, being heard by decision-makers, and being treated with respect and concern by figures of authority are influential in assessment of fairness and in cooperation with decisions, regardless of favorability of the outcome. In this paper, we investigate MHC participant perception of PJ in interactions with MHC staff and the association between perceptions and recidivism (i.e. time in jail, new arrests, and probation violations), treatment adherence, and MHC termination. Participants from two MHC programs (n?=?80) took part in this study. Results suggest that perception of PJ during interactions with the entire MHC team is significantly associated with program termination, but not with participant behaviors during MHC. Implications for MHC practitioners and researchers are discussed.     

Service utilization in a cohort of criminal justice-involved men: implications for case management and justice systems

In the era of re-entry, a great deal of attention has been paid to the ‘risk-need-responsivity’ model. Most attention to the utilization of services designed to meet need has focused on post-release behaviors. However, little attention has been paid to the pre-incarceration utilization of services that might influence receptivity to post-release utilization. Using constructs borrowed from health services utilization, the current paper examines the associations among CJ-involvement, social and health services utilization, and health status in a cohort of CJ-involved men living in the community. Results from the current cohort, combined with those of previous research, suggest that follow-through on services by released individuals’ remains problematic. Suggestions for future research and questions about the role of criminal justice agencies in improving follow-through are raised.     

Quality of criminal responsibility reports submitted to the Hawaii judiciary

This paper is the third in a series of research reports on quality of forensic mental health evaluations submitted to the Hawaii judiciary. Previous studies examined quality of reports assessing competency to stand trial (CST) and post-acquittal conditional release, in felony defendants undergoing court-ordered examinations. Utilizing a 44-item quality coding instrument, this study examined quality of criminal responsibility reports in a sample of 150 forensic mental health evaluations conducted between 2006 and 2010 by court-appointed panels. Raters attained high levels of agreement in training and quality coding. Similar to the previous studies, overall quality of reports was mediocre, falling below the .80 quality criterion score for report elements, regardless of evaluator professional identification or employment status. Level of agreement between evaluators and judicial sanity determinations was “fair” using Cicchetti's (1994) standards for interpretation of intra-class correlations. Level of agreement was lower than previously published findings for CST reports and better than conditional release reports. Reasons for mediocre report quality and “fair” inter-rater agreement are discussed, including the fact that criminal responsibility evaluations are complex, retrospective in nature, and involve significant degrees of inference. In contrast to CST evaluations, assessment of criminal responsibility involves a mental state at the time of the offense evaluation. Threats to reliability in forensic reports are discussed. Suggestions for improvement of report quality are proffered, including standardization of procedures and report format and use of forensic assessment instruments.     

Mental health specialized probation caseloads: Are they effective?

With the large and growing number of persons with mental illnesses under probation supervision, a form of specialized probation called specialized mental health caseload (SMHC) has been implemented. This study explores the effectiveness of a prototypic SMHC implemented statewide. A quasi-experimental design was used to compare criminal justice, mental health, and community engagement outcomes among three caseloads: a newly established SMHC supervising no more than 30 clients per officer (N = 1367); an established SMHC supervising roughly 50 clients per officer (N = 495); and a traditional caseload of clients receiving mental health treatment and supervised by officers with average caseloads of over 130 clients (N = 5453). Using a mixed methods approach, we found that the SMHC was implemented with high adherence to fidelity, and comparisons based on different caseload samples generally support the effectiveness of the specialized mental health caseload, particularly on criminal justice outcomes. Future studies using random assignment are needed to examine the connection among mental health symptoms, compliance with treatment and probation supervision, and recidivism.     

Community Wise: Paving the way for empowerment in community reentry

Theoretical approaches traditionally applied in mental health and criminal justice interventions fail to address the historical and structural context that partially explains health disparities. Community Wise was developed to address this gap. It is a 12 week group intervention informed by Critical Consciousness Theory and designed to prevent substance abuse, related health risk behaviors, psychological distress, and reoffending among individuals with a history of incarceration and substance abuse. This paper reports findings from the first implementation and pilot evaluation of Community Wise in two community-based organizations. This pre–posttest evaluation pilot-tested Community Wise and used findings to improve the intervention. Twenty-six participants completed a phone and clinical screening, baseline, 6- and 12-week follow-ups, and a focus group at the end of the intervention. Measures assessed participants' demographic information, psychological distress, substance use, criminal offending, HIV risk behaviors, community cohesion, community support, civic engagement, critical consciousness, ethnic identification, group cohesion, client satisfaction, and acquired treatment skills. Research methods were found to be feasible and useful in assessing the intervention. Results indicated that while Community Wise is a promising intervention, several changes need to be made in order to enhance the intervention. Community Wise is a new approach where oppressed individuals join in critical dialogue, tap into existing community resources, and devise, implement and evaluate their own community solutions to structural barriers.     

Offending and Early Death in the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development

Criminal offending has many negative outcomes. Researchers have recently begun to consider the impact offending has on offenders' health, with a few studies focusing on differential mortality risk. Yet, prior research has been limited due to selective samples, restricted range of follow-up time period, limited set of explanatory variables, and lack of theoretical guidance. This paper examines the risk of early death among 411 South London males in the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development followed into their late 50s. Attention is paid not only to differential risk of death between nonoffenders and offenders, but also to the risk within the population of offenders and through consideration of theoretical frameworks and associated predictor variables. Results show that high-rate chronic offenders evince the highest risk of death, an effect that continues even after controlling for childhood individual and environmental risk factors as well as participation in a range of analogous behaviors.     

反思精神障碍强制医疗的“危险性”原则

很多国家精神卫生立法在强制医疗人院标准方面都适用了“危险性”原则,我国《精神卫生法》也在其列。然而,“危险性”原则是基于三个错误的假设,因此实际上“危险性”原则可能会增加精神疾病对患者的伤害和较大程度增加社区危险的风险。本文呼吁参考Large及Richardson的观点及美国部分州与苏格兰精神卫生立法的实证经验,在“危险性”原则基础上补充“拒绝治疗的能力”评定作为精神障碍者强制医疗入院标准。     

论基本医疗卫生法的立法定位及其主要内容

基本医疗就是要让国民小病看得起、医保广覆盖、医疗服务质量有保障的满足患者基本医疗需求的医疗模式。基本医疗卫生法就是围绕这一核心予以规制和保障的法律。基本医疗卫生法是公民健康保障的基本法律,是跨领域跨专业的综合性法律,是各具体职能部门共同保障基本医疗服务的法律。基本医疗卫生法的立法基本原则是理论与实践相结合的原则、平衡各方利益的原则、厘清争议问题的原则。基本医疗卫生法立法的核心内容包括：基本医疗卫生法的基本原则、政府的基本医疗保障责任、医疗保险付费为主的多渠道医疗费用筹措机制、基层医疗机构担负国民健康守门员的职责、弱势群体医疗救助制度等。     

各利益相关者在医院与社区双向转诊合作中的责任与机制简

针对目前双向转诊中信息不能共享、药品获得和费用报销障碍、社区人力服务水平相对较差等问题,从双向转诊中各利益相关者角度分析在双向转诊实施过程中政府、医疗机构（医院与社区卫生服务机构）、患者与家属各自应当承担的责任,提出相应的措施及改进机制。     

论强制医疗启动程序决定主体

强制医疗制度是国家医疗保健制度的有机组成部分,强制医疗有广义与狭义之分。狭义的强制医疗,如实施危害行为的精神病患者、甲类传染病患者等;广义的强制医疗,包括预防接种、指定医保单位就医等。强制医疗程序启动的决定主体必须是国家赋予相应权力的机关,其他任何单位不具有这样的权力,因而无权决定强制医疗程序启动。强制医疗主体的确定取决于强制医疗对象的危害程度、广度及时间等因素。