Exploring the Intersection of Mental Health and Release Status with Recidivism

Ostermann, Michael; Matejkowski, Jason

doi:10.1080/07418825.2012.677465

Cited by 32 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If those affected by mental health issues never receive parole as a result of these discretionary decisions, it is likely these offenders will max out of their sentence, leaving prison with no supervision. This is a policy concern, since studies have found that parole supervision can aid those with mental health problems in making a successful transition into the community [72]. Thus, a denial of parole, whether justified or not, is likely to play a critical role on the reentry and recidivism outcomes of these offenders, which in turn has a significant impact on public safety.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released

Houser

Vîlcică

Saum

et al. 2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parole decision—the decision to release an incarcerated individual from prison conditionally—is one of the most critical decisions across justice systems around the world. The decision carries with it significant consequences: for the freedom of the individual awaiting release (the parolee); for the safety of the community in which they will return; and for the correctional system overall, especially its organizational capacity. The current study attempts to add to the parole decision-making literature by specifically analyzing the role that mental health factors may play in explaining parole decisions. Research to date is inconclusive on whether or not mental illness is a risk factor for criminal behavior; despite this, individuals with mental health problems generally fare worse on risk assessment tools employed in justice decisions. The study relies on a 1000+ representative sample of parole-eligible individuals in Pennsylvania, United States. To increase reliability, the analyses test for several mental health factors based on information from different sources (i.e., self-reported mental health history; risk assessment tool employed by the Parole Board; and risk assessment tool employed by the Department of Corrections). To address validity concerns, the study controls for other potential correlates of parole decisions. Although the multivariate models explained a considerable amount of variance in parole decisions, the inclusion of mental health variables added relatively little to model fit. The results provide insights into an understudied area of justice decision making, suggesting that despite the stigmatization of mental illness among criminal justice populations, parole board members in Pennsylvania, United States, appear to follow official guidelines rather than to consider more subjective notions that poor mental health should negate parole release.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released

Houser

Vîlcică

Saum

et al. 2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the overrepresentation of mental illness among released offenders, scholars suggest that research examining the independent contribution of MH on recidivism is scarce, as is the nature of the recidivism (Ostermann & Matejkowski, 2014). Studies examining MH do not typically distinguish between singular disorders and comorbid MH and substance use disorders due to limitations in data (Wilson & Wood, 2014).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental Health, Substance Abuse, Co-occurring Disorders, and 3-Year Recidivism of Felony Parolees

Houser¹,

Saum

Hiller

2019

Criminal Justice and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Having a mental health, substance use, or co-occurring disorder (COD) can make successful reintegration a difficult process for returning offenders. However, our understanding of how these disorders varies as far as their impact on recidivism during the reentry stage is lacking. Using a sample of 4,381 parolees released to the City of Philadelphia, this study assessed how disorder type may influence repeat criminal offending by examining the independent effects of mental illness, substance abuse/dependence, and CODs on recidivism controlling for individual and neighborhood contextual factors and nonresidential land uses. In addition, we separated our measure of recidivism into two categories, re-incarceration for a new offense and re-incarceration for a parole violation to see whether different predictors emerged. Our findings showed that there were indeed differences according to disorder type, as well as between neighborhood variables and these findings also varied according to reason for incarceration. Moreover, we found evidence contrary to the assumption that COD offenders would have the worst outcomes due to the comorbid nature of their disorders.

show abstract

“…One possible explanation for this decrease is a change in the preparation and management of the conditional release. Not only is the planning and preparation of the release of vital importance (Kröber, 2011;Scoones, Willis, & Grace, 2012), various studies show the significance of conditional release in general compared to unconditional release (Jeandarme, Habets, Oei, & Bogaerts, 2016;Lund, Forsman, Anckarsäter, & Nilsson, 2012;Norko et al, 2016;Ostermann & Matejkowski, 2014). A study by Wiederanders (1992) compared recidivism of mentally disordered offenders released either conditionally or unconditionally.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Professionalising release management for mentally disordered perpetrators: Benefits in terms of recidivism rates—Results from a study within the Austrian prison system

Stempkowski

2020

Criminal Behav Ment Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In Austria, mentally ill perpetrators not guilty for reasons of insanity are committed into a custodial measure to receive treatment. The rate of these detainees returning after their conditional release because of reoffending or revocation decreased significantly over a period of 15 years. Aims: This study aims at examining this system and the adjustments made over a period of 10 years, in order to identify changes responsible for the observable decline of the recidivism rate. Method: Therefore, a quantitative study of 807 prison and court files was conducted, extracting information concerning former detainees either released in 2001 & 2002 (n ¼ 67) or 2011 & 2012 (n ¼ 134) and subsequently comparing the groups. Additionally, expert interviews were conducted. Results: As one major change, the data revealed improvements regarding the preparation and management of the time on parole. The possibility for detainees to test their readiness for life outside the confinement through temporary interruptions of custody was enhanced, as were post-This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

show abstract

Exploring the Intersection of Mental Health and Release Status with Recidivism

Cited by 32 publications

References 42 publications

Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released

Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released

Mental Health, Substance Abuse, Co-occurring Disorders, and 3-Year Recidivism of Felony Parolees

Professionalising release management for mentally disordered perpetrators: Benefits in terms of recidivism rates—Results from a study within the Austrian prison system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About