Skip to main content
Log in

Patterns of Practice in Mental Health Courts: A National Survey

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Law and Human Behavior

Abstract

Mental health courts (MHCs) represent an important new development at the interface of the criminal justice and mental health systems. MHCs are criminal courts for persons with mental illness that were in part created to divert this population from jail/prison into community treatment. MHCs are proliferating rapidly despite limited knowledge regarding their characteristics or their efficacy. We surveyed the entire population of adult MHCs in the United States, n=90. In the past 8 years, MHCs have been created in 34 states, with an aggregate current caseload of 7,560 clients in MHCs nationally. Most courts (92%) reported using jail as a sanction for noncompliance, if only rarely. Further, jail sanction use was significantly predicted by increased judicial supervision and number of felons in the court. Implications for MHCs and social monitoring are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Judicial supervision (lower scores indicate more frequent supervision) and community supervision (higher scores indicate more forms of supervision) were significantly correlated, r=−.23, p=.03. Thus, it is possible, in the regression predicting jail sanction use, the two forms of supervision did not provide unique variance.

References

  • Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law (2003). Criminalization of people with mental illnesses: The role of mental courts in system reform. Jail Suicide/Mental Health Update, 12, 1–8, 10–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boothroyd, R., Calkins Mercado, C., Poythress, N. P., Christy, A., & Petrila, J. (2005). After mental health court: Do diverted defendants experience improved clinical outcomes. Psychiatric Services, 56, 829–834.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Casey, T. (2005). When good intentions are not good enough: Problem-solving courts and the impending crisis of legitimacy. SMU Law Review, 57, 1459–1519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. E., Ricketts, S. K., & McHugo, G. J. (1999). Legal system involvement and costs for persons in treatment for severe mental illness and substance use disorders. Psychiatric Services, 50, 641–647.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • CMHS. (1995). Double jeopardy: Persons with mental illnesses in the criminal justice system. A report to Congress. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Mental Health Services.

  • Cosden, M., Ellens, J., Schnell, J., Yasmeen, Y., & Wolfe, M. (2003). Evaluation of a mental health treatment court with assertive community treatment. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 21, 427–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of State Governments. (2002). Criminal justice/mental health consensus project. Retrieved October 10, 2002, from http://www.consensusproject.org.

  • Draine, J., & Solomon, P. (1999). Describing and evaluating jail diversion services for persons with serious mental illness. Psychiatric Services, 50, 56–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • GAINS Center for People with Co-Occurring Disorders in the Justice System. (2005). Survey of mental health courts. Delmar, NY. Available online at http://www.mentalhealthcourtsurvey.com/

  • Goldkamp, J. D., & Irons-Guynn, C. (2000). Emerging judicial strategies for the mentally ill in the criminal caseload: Mental health courts in Fort Lauderdale, Seattle, San Bernardino, and Anchorage. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance Monograph, pub. no. NCJ 182504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson, M. R., Mitchell-Herzfeld, S. D., & Flanagan, T. J. (1982). Another look at the effectiveness of parole supervision. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 19, 277–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, P., Steadman, H. J., & Petrila, J. (2002). The use of criminal charges and sanctions in mental health courts. Psychiatric Services, 53, 1285–1289.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herinckx, H. A., Swart, S. C., Ama, S. M., Dolezal, C. D., & King, S. (2005). Rearrest and linkage to mental health services among clients of the Clark County mental health court program. Psychiatric Services, 56, 853–857.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Naples, M., & Steadman, H. J. (2003). Can persons with co-occurring disorders and violent charges be successfully diverted? International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 2, 137–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Drug Court Institute. (June 2000). The critical need for jail as a sanction in the drug court model. Drug Court Practitioner Fact Sheet, 2. Alexandria, VA. Available online at http://www.nadcp.org/publications/

  • Peters, R. H., & Hills, H. A. (1993). Inmates with co-occurring substance abuse and mental health disorders. In H. Steadman & J. Cocozza (Eds.), Mental illness in America’s prisons. Seattle, WA: National Coalition for the Mentally Ill in the Criminal Justice System.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrila, J. (2003). An introduction to special jurisdiction courts. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 3–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Public Law 106-515, America’s Law Enforcement and Mental Health Project (Nov. 13, 2000; 114 Stat. 2399).

  • Redlich, A. D. (2005). Voluntary, but knowing and intelligent? Comprehension in mental health courts. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 605–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redlich, A. D., Steadman, H. J., Monahan, J., Petrila, J., & Griffin, P. (2005). Thesecond generation of mental health courts. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 527–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seltzer, T. (2005). Mental health courts: A misguided attempt to address the criminal justice system’s unfair treatment of people with mental illnesses. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 570–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, P., & Draine, J. (1995). One-year outcomes of a randomized trial of case management with seriously mentally ill clients leaving jail. Evaluation Review, 19, 256–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, P., Draine, J., & Marcus, S. C. (2002). Predicting incarceration of clients of a psychiatric probation and parole service. Psychiatric Services, 53, 50–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, P., Draine, J., & Meyerson, A. (1994). Jail recidivism and receipt of community mental health services. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 45, 793–797.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steadman, H., Davidson, S., and Brown, C. (2001). Mental health courts: Their promise and unanswered questions. Psychiatric Services, 52, 457–458.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steadman, H. J., Fabisiak, S., Dvoskin, J., & Holohean, E. J. (1987). A survey of mental disability among state prison inmates. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 38, 1086–1090.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steadman, H. J., Morris, S. M., & Dennis, D. L. (1995). The diversion of mentally ill persons from jails to community-based services: A profile of programs. American Journal of Public Health, 85, 1630–1635.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steadman, H. J., Redlich, A. D., Griffin, P., Petrila, J., & Monahan, J. (2005). From referral to disposition: Case processing in seven mental health courts. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tonry, M. (1990). Stated and latent functions of ISP. Crime and Delinquency, 36, 174–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torrey, E. F., Stieber, J., Ezekiel, J., Wolfe, S. M., Sharfstein, J., Noble, J. H., et al. (1992). Criminalizing the mentally ill: The abuse of jails as mental hospitals. Washington, DC: Public citizen’s health research group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trupin, E., & Richards, H. (2003). Seattle’s mental health courts: Early indicators of effectiveness. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 33–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winick, B. J., & Wexler, D. B. (2003). Judging in a therapeutic key: Therapeutic jurisprudence and the courts. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by the National Institute of Justice (Grant #2003-DD-BX-1012) and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. We are grateful to Aubrey Spaulding and Margaret Eck-Raider for their help with data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Allison D. Redlich.

Appendix

Appendix

figure a

About this article

Cite this article

Redlich, A.D., Steadman, H.J., Monahan, J. et al. Patterns of Practice in Mental Health Courts: A National Survey. Law Hum Behav 30, 347–362 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-006-9036-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-006-9036-x

Keywords

Navigation