Mapping Offender-Patient Pathways

  • Bradley Hillier
  • Christopher Lambourne
  • Pamela TaylorEmail author


Previous reviews have described services for offenders with mental disorder in several European countries, but we wanted to understand how these might apply in an individual case. We used process mapping to record pathways taken through the legal process and other services by offenders suspected of having committed a homicide in four EU countries—Austria, Finland, the Netherlands and the UK. All have the facility to meet some urgent mental health needs at any point in the criminal justice pathway, but countries differ in when evidence on the relevance of mental disorder to the offence may be introduced into the legal process. All countries provide some sort of specialist health service, but the nature of its administration and its placement differs. Austria’s specialist inpatient services are provided entirely within the prison system, the Netherlands in either the Joint Departments of Health and Justice TBS system or prison hospital units. In Finland and the UK, inpatient services are all health service based and clinical input to prisons by health service employees only. Development of offender pathway maps is likely to assist mutual understanding of services. They could be used to inform patients, relatives and victims about what they may expect of the months and years which follow first involvement with the criminal justice system. They may help us to learn from each other’s similarities and differences what works best.



We would like to acknowledge the following clinicians for the original interview data and for patient guidance in subsequent drafts: Dr. Alexander Dvorak, Consultant Psychiatrist, Ministry Of Justice Justizanstalt Göllersdorf, Austria; Dr. Allan Seppanen, Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist and Clinical Director, Helsinki University Hospital, Finland; and Dr. Ellen van Lier and Dr. Hans Hulsbos, Consultant Forensic Psychiatrists, Penitentiary Institution Vught, the Netherlands.


  1. 1.
    Taylor PJ, Dunn E, Felthous AR, Gangé P, Harding T, Kalski S, Kramp P, Lindqvist P, Nedopil N, Ogloff JRP, Skipworth J, Thomson L, Yozhikawa K. Forensic psychiatry and its interfaces outside the UK and Ireland. In: Gunn J, Taylor PJ, editors. Forensic psychiatry, clinical, legal and ethical issues. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2014. p. 111–47.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gunn J, Mevis P. Adversarial versus inquisitorial legal systems. In: Goethals K, editor. Forensic psychiatry and psychology in Europe: a cross-border study guide. Cham: Springer; this volume.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nedopil N, Taylor PJ. Specialist training in forensic psychiatry in Europe. In: Goethals K, editor. Forensic psychiatry and psychology in Europe: a cross-border study guide. Cham: Springer; 2018.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gunn J, Nedopil N. Editorial: European Training in Forensic Psychiatry. Crim Behav Ment Health. 2005;15:207–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hillier B, Lambourne C, Larsen TG. Mapping offender-patient pathways in the different jurisdictions of the European Union. Crim Behav Ment Health. 2012;22:293–6. Scholar
  6. 6.
    NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement. Process mapping—an overview. London: NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement; 2008. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schanda H, Ortwein-Swoboda G, Knecht G, et al. The situation of forensic psychiatry in Austria. Setback or progress? Int J Law Psychiatry. 2000;23:481–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Seppänen A, Eronen M. Mental health law in Finland. Int Psychiatry. 2012;9:91–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Putkonen H, Völlm B. Compulsory psychiatric detention in Finland. Psychiatr Bull. 2007;31:101–3. Scholar
  10. 10.
    WHO. ICD-10 classifications of mental and behavioural disorder: clinical descriptions and disgnostic guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1992.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author APA.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Patana P. Mental Health Analysis Profiles (MhAPs): Finland. OECD Health Working Papers, No. 72, OECD Publishing; 2014.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eronen M, Repo E, Vartiainen H, Tiihonen J. Forensic Psychiatric Organization in Finland. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2000;23:541–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Edworthy R, Sampson S, Völlm B. Inpatient forensic-psychiatric care: legal frameworks and service provision in three European countries. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2016;47:18–27. Scholar
  15. 15.
    Forti A, Nas C, van Geldrop A, Franx G et al. Mental Health Analysis Profiles (MhAPs): Netherlands, OECD Health Working Papers, No. 73, OECD Publishing, Paris; 2014. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.
  16. 16.
    van Marle H. The Dutch Entrustment Act (TBS): its principles and innovations. Int J Forensic Mental Health. 2002;1:83–92. Scholar
  17. 17.
    Council for the Administration of Criminal Justice and Protection of Juveniles. Proper Treatment. Council for the Administration of Criminal Justice and Protection of Juveniles: The Hague. 2012. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.
  18. 18.
    European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT). Report to the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands on the visit to the Netherlands carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT). Council of Europe: Strasbourg; 2012. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.
  19. 19.
    Pham T, Taylor P. The roles of forensic psychiatrists and psychologists: professional experts, service providers, therapists, or all things for all people? In: Goethals K, editor. Forensic psychiatry and psychology in Europe: a cross-border study guide. Cham: Springer; this volume.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dienst Justitiële Inrichtingen. Masterplan DJI 2013-2018. [Masterplan Custodial Institutions Agency 2013-2018], Ministry of Security and Justice; 2013.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mental Health Act. (as amended) Mental Health Act 2007. London: The Stationary Office; 1983.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Criminal Justice Act. London: The Stationary Office; 2003.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Independent Mental Health Taskforce to the NHS in England. Mental Health Five Year Forward View. London: The Mental Health Taskforce to the NHS: London, England; 2016. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.
  24. 24.
    van den Anker L, Dalhuisen L, Stokkel M. Fitness to stand trial: a general principle of European Criminal Law? Utrecht Law Rev. 2011;7:120–36. Accessed 31 Jan 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yakeley J, Taylor R, Cameron A. MAPPA and mental health—10 years of controversy. Psychiatrist. 2012;36:201–4. Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jamieson L, Taylor PJ, Gibson B. From pathological dependence to healthy independent living: an emergent grounded theory of facilitating independent living. Grounded Theory Rev. 2006;6:79–107.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taylor PJ, Graf M, Schanda H, Völlm B. The treating psychiatrist as expert in the courts: is it necessary or possible to separate the roles of physician and expert? Crim Behav Ment Health. 2012;22:271–92. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bradley Hillier
    • 1
    • 2
  • Christopher Lambourne
    • 3
  • Pamela Taylor
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.South West London Forensic ServiceLondonUK
  2. 2.Heathrow Immigration and Removal Centres, Central and North West London NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
  3. 3.Central London Community Healthcare NHS TrustLondonUK
  4. 4.Division of Psychological Medicine and Clinical NeurosciencesCardiff University School of MedicineCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations