The Violent and Illegal Behavior of Mental Patients Reconsidered

Link, Bruce G.; Andrews, Howard; Cullen, Francis T.

doi:10.2307/2096235

Cited by 468 publications

(301 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

277

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mental illness is only a modest risk factor for the occurrence of violence, and in the case of psychosis, only individuals with current psychotic symptoms carry significantly increased risk (Link et al, 1991). Those with only historical psychotic symptoms carry a much lower risk of violence.…”

Section: The Inexorable Rise Of 'Risk'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Forensic psychiatry and general psychiatry: re-examining the relationship

Turner¹,

Salter²

2008

Psychiatr. bull.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Something is going wrong with forensic psychiatry, as a concept and as a service. Beds in medium secure units are logjammed, and relations with general adult services increasingly fraught with disputes over resources and responsibilities. Despite a remarkable investment in buildings, and the 300% growth of the forensic specialty (Goldberg, 2006), offending behaviour by individuals with mental illness shows no sign of decline, either in terms of prison numbers (at record high levels in the UK) or the countless demands for risk assessment (Duggan, 1997; Moon, 2000).

show abstract

Section: The Inexorable Rise Of 'Risk'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Forensic psychiatry and general psychiatry: re-examining the relationship

Turner¹,

Salter²

2008

Psychiatr. bull.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the positive associations relating mental illness to dangerousness have been characterised as at best moderate and limited (Eronen et al 1998, Link et al 1992, Steadman et al 1998, and at worst questionable on the grounds of validity and bias as discussed above, policy debates over whether enhanced control is required over`the mentally ill in the community' attest to a widespread perception ± among the general public as well as stakeholders more involved in the mental health system as administrators, practitioners and family members ± of a relationship between mental illness and violence much more broadly based than the existing literature indicates (Weitz 2000). The close association in the public's mind between mental illness and dangerousness is directly and indirectly manifested in the way that`mental illness' and`dangerousness' are constructed and subsequently operationalised within the mental health system.…”

Section: The Question Of the Relationship Between Mental Illness And mentioning

confidence: 99%

Civil commitment due to mental illness and dangerousness: the union of law and psychiatry within a treatment‐control system

Dallaire

McCubbin²,

Morin³

et al. 2000

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses the use of`dangerousness' as a legal criterion for civil commitment. The notion of dangerousness is defined within the perspective of the relationship between judicial and medical-psychiatric institutions. By reviewing empirical evidence concerning the possibility of a link between mental illness and dangerousness, we critically evaluate the main postulate supporting the inclusion of this notion in the civil laws. We then examine empirical studies of psychiatric expertise in dangerousness assessment and risk prediction. By using observational studies of civil commitment proceedings, we examine how the legal criterion of danger to self or others is actually operationalised into a series of heuristic criteria. These criteria are teleological statements: if being mentally ill and being dangerous are, in this context, interchangeable, so are the finalities of treating and controlling. We conclude that, at the psychiatry-justice interface exemplified by civil commitment, treatment and control have been equated conceptually and in practice, even if the written law clearly distinguishes the concepts. With respect to civil commitment, the institutions of mental health and justice are not, as usually depicted in sociological analysis, two different systems that meet and compete at this junction. Rather, they join together ± becoming, in effect, one actor ± within a treatment-control system which has as its function and aim to`take care of' residual cases viewed as problematic for society.

show abstract

“…Conversely, members of the general public who view people with mental illness as victimized by their symptoms (i.e., not to blame) are likely to react with pity and offer help; e.g., rehabilitation services. The second model of stigmatizing attitudes is based on Link's theory about dangerousness (Link, Andrews, & Cullen, 1992;Link, Monahan, Stueve, & Cullen, 1999;Link, Phelan, Bresnahan, Stueve, & Pescosolido, 1999). Namely, members of the general public who view people with mental illness as dangerous are likely to fear and avoid them; e.g., not hire or rent apartments to them.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%