A literature review about the prevalence and identification of people with an intellectual disability within court Liaison and Diversion services

Karina Marshall-Tate,Jane Mccarthy,Annmarie Grealish,Eddie Chaplin

doi:10.1108/jidob-10-2019-0023

Abstract

PurposeExpert consensus is that people with an intellectual disability are over represented across the criminal justice setting (CJS). Primary research studies have been conducted in police stations and prisons, but little is known about the prevalence of this population in the court setting. The purpose of this paper is to conduct a literature review to find out more about the prevalence of defendants with an intellectual disability in court.Design/methodology/approachA literature review was conducted using standard systematic review methodology (Julian et al., 2011) and the PRISMA reporting guidelines (Moher et al., 2009).FindingsTwo papers met the inclusion criteria and were critically appraised. The papers reported prevalence findings ranging from 10%–20%.Research limitations/implicationsDifferences in study design, sampling, recruitment and diagnostic criteria affect the ability to make comparisons or synthesise findings.Practical implicationsIt is important that future primary and secondary research studies standardise operational terms to enable true comparison between studies, systematic reviews and evidence syntheses.Social implicationsDefendants with an intellectual disability need to be identified to enable criminal justice professionals to make reasonable adjustments to proceedings and consider diversion and alternative disposal options. This will likely improve outcomes for this population and reduce recidivism.Originality/valueThis literature review contributes to the growing evidence base about meeting the criminal justice needs of people with a learning disability and recognition of the increased prevalence across the CJS and specifically within the court setting.

Highlights

People with an intellectual disability have a unique set of needs relating to their disability
The Australian paper carried out primary research amongst defendants in a al Magistrates Court and recruited participants to undergo psychometric and functional skills testing to identify people with an intellectual disability
The variations in prevalence can be explained by differences in study design and methods, sampling and recruitment, and choice of diagnostic criteria

Summary

Introduction

It is imperative that this population is identified so that they can be given the nd opportunity to fully access health and justice services during all stages of the criminal justice process. People with an intellectual disability have a unique set of needs relating to their disability These can include difficulties in understanding information, acquiescence, suggestibility and poor decision bil making during the CJS process (Murphy & Mason 2014) in some cases leading to false confessions (Gudjonsson & McKeith 1994). People with an intellectual disability are more likely to itie experience multiple mental and physical health comorbidities across the life span (Cooper et al.2015) which can deteriorate or be more likely to present in criminal justice environments.

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion