Community treatment for the seriously mentally ill: Is this community psychology?

Conclusions

Community treatment for seriously mentally ill individuals fits well into the philosophy of community psychology. Community psychologists have skills and experiences with other populations that represent assets in improving the ACT service model and producing richer and more useful research results for the future. Maybe we should ask ourselves why community psychologists have obviously avoided this intervention area and the population of seriously mentally ill individuals. Does this represent an adolescent reaction to the parent discipline — clinical psychology? Is the label “mentally ill” as stigmatizing to community psychologists as it is to the general population? Are these individuals written off as not worthy of or capable of benefiting from preventive interventions? Advocates for the seriously mentally ill are mounting a backlash against prevention services. We would be well advised at this time to become involved in community treatment and demonstrate that community psychology is forall vulnerable and at-risk population groups. If the truth of the matter is that “community psychology is not doing much of a job of empowering people” (Berkowitz, 1990), maybe the truth of the matter is also that we need to reach out to more disenfranchised populations with research to show that community psychologycan do the job of empowering some.