Psychiatric Hospital Capacity, Homelessness, and Crime and Arrest Rates*

Abstract

As a result of developments in pharmacology, stricter standards for involuntary commitment, and changes in public expenditures, there has been a dramatic decline in the capacity of public psychiatric hospitals to maintain America's most severely mentally ill. Psychiatric deinstitutionalization has led to an increased presence of persons with mental illness in urban areas, many “falling through the cracks” of community‐based services. This is hypothesized to have contributed to homelessness, crime, and arrests. Individual‐level research has documented disproportionate and increasing numbers of mentally ill persons in jails and prisons. It has also found higher rates of violence and arrest among persons with mental illness compared to the general population. This study takes a macro‐level social control approach and examines the relationships between psychiatric hospital capacity, homelessness, and crime and arrest rates using a sample of eighty‐one U.S. cities. I find that public psychiatric hospital capacity has a statistically significant negative effect on crime and arrest rates, and that hospital capacity affects crime and arrest rates in part, through its impact on homelessness. In addition, I find no crime‐reducing effect of private and general psychiatric hospital capacity.

Reducing the incarceration of the homeless : an examination of multi-service use and the utilization of institutional services.

“…Homeless individuals are overrepresented in the criminal justice system, especially the correctional system (Fitzpatrick & Myrstol, 2011;Greenberg & Fitzpatrick, 2008). The disproportionate confinement is clearly visible even if using a conservative comparison of the lowest rate of incarceration for homeless inmates, 7.8%, and the highest rate, 2%, for domiciled inmates (Eberle et aI., 2000;Fitzpatrick & Myrstol, 2011;Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2008;Markowitz, 2006;Metraux & Culhane, 2006;Schlay & Rossi, 1992;Snow et aI., 1989). Greenberg and Rosenheck (2008) found individuals who had experienced at least one episode of homeless ness during the past year were 7.5 to 11.3 times more likely to be incarcerated in jail when compared to the general population.…”

“…It is estimated that men are ten times more likely to be incarcerated than females and that African Americans are six times more likely to be incarcerated than whites (Fisher et aI., 2011). Of considerable concern is the increasing number of homeless found in our jails and prisons, many of which suffer from mental illness, substance abuse, and co-occurring disorders (Belcher, 1988;Calsyn, Yonker, Lemming, Morse & Klinkenberg, 2005;Fitzpatrick & Myrstol, 2011;Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2008, Golder et aI., 2005Lynch & Sabol, 2004;Markowitz, 2006;Munetz & Griffin, 2006;Perez, Leifman & Estrada, 2003). Greenberg and Rosenheck (2008) suggest that poor health status and disadvantageous socioeconomic characteristics have been found to contribute to the high rates of homeless ness.…”

“…Those who are incarcerated are likely to be poor, marginalized young males (Belcher, 1988;Fagin, 2010;Fisher et aI., 2011;Fitzpatrick & Myrstol, 2011;Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2008;Golder et aI., 2005;Lynch & Sabol, 2004;Markowitz, 2006). It is estimated that men are ten times more likely to be incarcerated than females and that African Americans are six times more likely to be incarcerated than whites (Fisher et aI., 2011).…”

“…Prior research has given considerable attention to the rising numbers of homeless persons found in the criminal justice system (Calsyn et aI., 2005;Fitzpatrick & Myrstol, 2011; Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2008;Markowitz, 2006;Snow et aI., 1989). Previous studies have indicated the number of homeless individuals in the criminal justice system continues to rise (Fitzpatrick & Myrstol, 2011; Greenberg & Rosenheck, 2008;Perez et aI., 2003;Snow, Baker, & Anderson, 1989).…”

“…Various explanations have been given for the sharp increase in incarcerated individuals. Some ofthese explanations include the "get tough" approach to crime, mandatory minimum sentences, reduction of judicial sentencing discretion, the "war on drugs," and crime control functions (Belcher, 1988;Fagin, 2010;Fitzpatrick & Myrstol, 2011;Golder et aI., 2005;Lynch & Sabol, 2004;Markowitz, 2006).…”