The Emergence of Mental Heath Courts
Location
Hager-Lubbers Exhibition Hall
Description
The emergence of mental health courts in the 1990s is due to the high prevalence of mentally ill persons within the criminal justice system. PURPOSE: This paper conducts a review of literature about mental health courts (MHC), the history and current societal reactions of mental illness, and other founding problem-solving courts which paved the way for the demand and emergence of MHCs. METHODS: The intentions and shortcomings of the deinstitutionalization of persons with a mental illness (PMI) will be discussed to better understand one of the contributing factors to the high prevalence of PMI in the United States’ criminal justice system. RESULTS: Therapeutic jurisprudence, accountability, and community justice are the three paradigms of problem-solving courts and they will be discussed in relation to three problem-solving courts, as well as mental health courts. Problem-solving courts that follow one or all three paradigms create an opportunity to address the underlying issues and social problems that are causing a strain on the criminal justice system. CONCLUSIONS: Using the three paradigms in mental health courts opens the doors for the criminal justice system to work with the mental health system to reduce recidivism and increase the quality of life of PMI while providing safety for the involved communities.
The Emergence of Mental Heath Courts
Hager-Lubbers Exhibition Hall
The emergence of mental health courts in the 1990s is due to the high prevalence of mentally ill persons within the criminal justice system. PURPOSE: This paper conducts a review of literature about mental health courts (MHC), the history and current societal reactions of mental illness, and other founding problem-solving courts which paved the way for the demand and emergence of MHCs. METHODS: The intentions and shortcomings of the deinstitutionalization of persons with a mental illness (PMI) will be discussed to better understand one of the contributing factors to the high prevalence of PMI in the United States’ criminal justice system. RESULTS: Therapeutic jurisprudence, accountability, and community justice are the three paradigms of problem-solving courts and they will be discussed in relation to three problem-solving courts, as well as mental health courts. Problem-solving courts that follow one or all three paradigms create an opportunity to address the underlying issues and social problems that are causing a strain on the criminal justice system. CONCLUSIONS: Using the three paradigms in mental health courts opens the doors for the criminal justice system to work with the mental health system to reduce recidivism and increase the quality of life of PMI while providing safety for the involved communities.