Community sentence with Mental Health Treatment Requirement (MHTR); an exploration into offenders’ experience of psychological therapy

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to explore service users’ experience of psychological therapy as part of a community sentence with a Mental Health Treatment Requirement (MHTR) in Birmingham Courts between January and December 2018. Design/methodology/approach All service users that had therapy in this period were telephoned a month after ending and offered a semi-structured telephone interview. Seven service users agreed to be recorded. This data was then transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis to gain a richer understanding of their lived experience. Findings Themes identified were: Is the MHTR for me? Opening up, enlightening connections and personal change. Service users initially questioned the relevance and burden of the order for them; the experience of therapy allowed them to trust and talk about things unsaid in the past; this helped them to review and reconsider their understanding of themselves and their life choices and what further support they might need. Research limitations/implications Interviews were not completed by an independent interviewer. Experience of working with offender manager supervision additionally available throughout the sentence was not explored. Practical implications What is included in the MHTR information and support needs to be informed by the service user’s perspective, including this can improve engagement. Social implications Therapy was seen as a “a cog in the machine” and wider social inequalities may need to be addressed within the sentence. Originality/value This report focusses on experience of a therapeutic intervention – a key part of a community sentence with an MHTR.

Specialist courts and borderline personality disorder: a pilot study of the efficacy of the assessment and referral court list to reduce recidivist behaviour

“…All court personnel in the problem-solving court model adopt a proactive role by drawing together relevant professionals and services that work to address the offenders often complex range of personal needs. The desired outcome of this model is to divert individuals with psychological disorders out of the criminal justice system and into effective treatment (Odegaard, 2007; Butler and Lewdith, 2021). In doing so, the courts aim to address the root cause of the offending behaviour (Peters et al , 2012).…”

Forensic mental health assessments of juvenile misdemeanor cases involving demoralization (status offenses) and delinquency

“…It is important not only to conduct a reliable psychological investigation and make an accurate diagnosis but also to select and apply appropriate educational, correctional or therapeutic interventions (Fowler et al , 2020). Treatment interventions, including therapy, are not fully used by the judiciary (Long et al , 2018), although they constitute important inhibitors of the demoralization process (Butler and Ledwith, 2021). The selection of an appropriate measure by the court to apply toward the juvenile is supposed to have the function of reducing the rate of relapse into antisocial behaviors (Chesser et al , 2023).…”