Mental Illness and Criminal Behavior Revisited

Palermo, George B.; Gumz, Edward J.; Liska, Frank J.

doi:10.1177/0306624x9203600106

Cited by 23 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with other studies, most cases in the current study were males [ 8 , 12 ] and previous contact with psychiatric services was found in 58% of cases [ 13 , 14 ]. However, the current study showed that prediction of danger in the murder and robbery groups is questionable, as the last contact of both groups with psychiatric services was significantly shorter than other groups.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Characteristics of mentally ill offenders from 100 psychiatric court reports

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThere is an increasing probability that the psychiatrist will, willingly or not, come into contact with mentally ill offenders in the course of their practice. There are increasing rates of violence, substance abuse and other psychiatric disorders that are of legal importance. Therefore, the aim of this work was to investigate the rates of different mental disorders in 100 court reports and to investigate the characteristics of mentally ill offenders.MethodsAll cases referred from different departments of the legal system to the forensic committee for assessment of legal accountability over 13-months duration were included. A specially designed form was prepared for data collection. Cases were classified into five groups: murder, robbery, financial offences, violent and simple offences and a group for other offences. Data were subjected to statistical analysis and comparisons between different groups of subjects were performed by analysis of variance (ANOVA).ResultsMen constituted 93% of cases. In all, 73% of offenders were younger than 40 years old. Schizophrenia cases made up 13% of the total, substance related cases constituted 56% and amphetamine cases alone made up 21%; 10% of cases were antisocial personality disorders, and 51% of cases were classified as having a low education level. Unemployment was found in 34% of cases. The final decision of the forensic committee was full responsibility in 46% of cases and partial responsibility in 11% of cases, with 33% considered non-responsible. A total of 58% of cases had had contact with psychiatric healthcare prior to the offence and in 9% of cases contact had been in the previous 12 weeks. A history of similar offences was found in 32% of cases. In all, 14% of the offences were murders, 8% were sexual crimes, and 31% were violent/simple crimes.ConclusionsThe ability of the legal system to detect cases was good, while the ability of the healthcare system to predict crimes and offences was weak, as 58% of cases had had previous contact with the healthcare system previously. Substance abuse, especially amphetamine abuse, played an important role.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Characteristics of mentally ill offenders from 100 psychiatric court reports

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, time-series studies produced weak evidence of trans-institutionalization (for supportive evidence, see Palermo, Gumz, & Liska, 1992; for non-supportive evidence, see Grabosky, 1980; Inverarity & Grattet, 1989). Drawing on aggregate national data from 1926 to 1987, Palermo et al (1992) found a significant and negative (bivariate) correlation between mental hospital and jail populations. However, multivariate studies reported that there is no evidence of trade-offs.…”

Section: Empirical Findings Of Deinstitutionalization and Imprisonmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychiatric Deinstitutionalization and Prison Population Growth

Kim

2014

Criminal Justice Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A substantial amount of research has been devoted to explaining the reasons behind the unprecedented explosion of U.S. prison populations. While the majority of prior studies related imprisonment to four factors—specifically crimes, changes in the labor markets, politics, and demographic changes—other relevant factors have not received as much attention. In the historical context of decreases in mental hospital populations resulting from psychiatric deinstitutionalization, imprisonment rates have skyrocketed nationwide since the late 1970s. This inverse relationship between both trends has called for prior research that empirically examines the impact of mental hospitalization on imprisonment, especially through the criminalization of mental illness. However, empirical findings are equivocal in general at the aggregate level. This article conducts a comprehensive and critical literature review, discusses the important conceptual and methodological limitations of the existing literature, and finally provides guidance for future research.

show abstract

“…Although there is adequate literature on clinical outcomes, service-systems designs, and ethics for staff who work with incarcerated mentally ill offenders (Alexander, 1997;Palermo, Gumz, & Liska, 1992;Pollock, 1997; Rice, 1997;Souryal, 1998), there is not much about the influence of unconscious beliefs and values on prison treatment operations. Part of the reason for this is that there are few measurement instruments with adequate scope, reliability, and relevance to describe closely held beliefs and how they translate into behaviors in a complex environment (Roskin, Carsen, Rabiner, & Marell, 1988).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Staff Opinions of Mentally Ill Offenders in a Prison Hospital: Implications for Training and Leadership

Cruser

Diamond

2000

Journal of Correctional Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information from a staff survey of opinions about working with mentally ill prison inmates was used to enhance staff training and cooperation. The survey analysis used Attribution Theory to link the results with four dichotomous custody-therapy policy models typically applied in criminal justice settings: punishment as incarceration, the traditional medical treatment model, education and habilitation, and reparation as restitution. Security and support staff embraced incarceration and traditional treatment, whereas treatment staff supported habilitation. Within groups, all staff favored habilitation over other policies. Differences and shared opinions were used to improve understanding and cooperation between security and treatment roles.

show abstract

Mental Illness and Criminal Behavior Revisited

Cited by 23 publications

References 20 publications

Characteristics of mentally ill offenders from 100 psychiatric court reports

Characteristics of mentally ill offenders from 100 psychiatric court reports

Psychiatric Deinstitutionalization and Prison Population Growth

Staff Opinions of Mentally Ill Offenders in a Prison Hospital: Implications for Training and Leadership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About