The relationship of mental illness to targeted contact behavior toward state government agencies and officials

Abstract

Research in the burgeoning field of threat assessment has illuminated the importance of mental illness factors when considering risk of targeted violence-particularly related to government agencies and officials. The authors analyzed 127 cases investigated by a state law enforcement agency regarding threatening or other contacts toward public officials or state agency employees prompting security intervention. Univariate and discriminant analysis indicated that mentally ill subjects were significantly more likely to engage in more contacts as well as to make specific demands during such contacts. Mentally ill subjects were also more likely to articulate help-seeking concerns and employ religious themes, as opposed to using insulting, degrading, or ominous language toward the target or issuing complaints regarding policy issues. Contrary to other research, the mentally ill subjects within this sample were not significantly more likely to engage in approach behavior, a threshold for higher risk of violence. Implications for threat assessment activity are discussed.

The problem behavior model: the development of a stalkers clinic and a threateners clinic

“…There is a modest literature that empirically examines threats (Calhoun, 1998;Dietz et al, 1991aDietz et al, , 1991bMeloy, 2001;Scalora, Baumgartner, & Plank, 2003). One of the few systematic studies of psychiatric assessment after uttering a homicidal threat reported nearly half to be psychotic and most of the rest personality disordered (MacDonald, 1968).…”

Mental Health Treatment Fearfulness and Help-Seeking

“…Factor analysis was conducted on the OTUSRS for community residents who sought help from CMHC during 2003(Zartaloudi, 2008, resulting in three factors. Factor 1, Interpersonal communication (items indicating the usefulness of seeking help and a positive history with social or informal help-seeking); Factor 2, Distrust (items indicating that others cannot be trusted); Factor 3, Isolation (items indicating the non-usefulness of seeking help and a negative history with social or informal helpseeking).…”

“…Factor analysis was conducted on the ATSPPHS for the population of the community residents who sought help from CMHC during 2003(Zartaloudi, 2008, resulting in four factors. Factor 1, Assertiveness toward help-seeking; Factor 2, Isolation; Factor 3, Ambivalence toward help-seeking; and Factor 4, Stigma.…”

“…The lack of knowledge of mental health treatment effectiveness (Angermeyer & Matschinger, 1996;Scalora, Baumgartner, & Plank, 2003) and the belief that a person should deal with his or her problems alone, without external help, are common reasons that decrease the possibility of help-seeking. Attitudes and beliefs about help-seeking, together with opinions about psychiatry and social network orientation, were found to be predictive of seeking help from a mental health professional.…”

Outcome and Efficacy of Interventions by a Public Figure Threat Assessment and Management Unit: A Mirrored Study of Concerning Behaviors and Police Contacts Before and After Intervention

“…In an increasingly active research field, further detailed work on associations of concerning communications and approaches to public figures has been carried out in the USA (Scalora et al, ,b; Scalora, Baumgartner, & Plank, ; Schoeneman‐Morris, Scalora, Chang, Zimmerman, & Garner, ; Schoeneman et al, ) and in the UK (James et al, ; ,c; , et al, ,b), among other places. (A summary of contemporary research can be found in Hoffman, Meloy, & Sheridan, .)…”