Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
This study represents the only broad-based, statewide evaluation of mental health courts (MHCs) conducted to date. Data were collected from 2010 to 2013 at each of the nine active MHC programs operating in Illinois at the start of the study. The purpose of the study was to compare and contrast the adjudicatory and supervisory models of each established Illinois MHC program by utilizing a variety of research methodologies. A four-year recidivism analysis of case-level data from three Illinois MHCs was also conducted. Illinois MHCs were largely characterized by the '10 essential elements of an MHC', such as voluntary participation, informed choice and hybrid team approaches to case manage clients. Results of the recidivism analysis suggest that MHCs compare favorably to other types of probation. Overall, findings revealed that Illinois MHCs are delivering services effectively and efficiently in a well-coordinated, client-centered team approach. Differences found among the MHCs are not evidence of significant variance from the model, and instead represent responsiveness to the unique culture of the court, the niche-filling character of the program, the expectations of the program stakeholders and the nature and extent of the local service environment.
Highlights
Fundamental changes in mental health laws and policies have brought criminal justice professionals into contact with the seriously mentally ill at every stage of the criminal justice process
Jail and prison administrators often struggle to treat and protect the mentally ill; judges grapple with limited sentencing alternatives for people with serious mental illnesses (PSMI) who fall outside specific forensic categories; and probation and parole officers scramble to secure scarce community services and treatments for PSMI, often striving to fit the mentally ill into standard correctional programs or to monitor them with traditional case management strategies.[3]
First established in Broward County, Florida, in 1997, mental health courts (MHCs) were developed in response to the apparently escalating numbers of PSMI who were involved in the criminal justice system
Summary
Fundamental changes in mental health laws and policies have brought criminal justice professionals into contact with the seriously mentally ill at every stage of the criminal justice process. Police arrest people with serious mental illnesses (PSMI) because few other options are readily available to address their disruptive public behavior or to obtain muchneeded treatment or housing for them.[2] Jail and prison administrators often struggle to treat and protect the mentally ill; judges grapple with limited sentencing alternatives for PSMI who fall outside specific forensic categories (e.g., guilty but mentally ill); and probation and parole officers scramble to secure scarce community services and treatments for PSMI, often striving to fit the mentally ill into standard correctional programs or to monitor them with traditional case management strategies.[3] When the mentally ill are sentenced to community supervision, their disorders complicate and impede their ability to comply with the conditions of release and compound the difficulties of prisoner reentry.[4]. First established in Broward County, Florida, in 1997, mental health courts (MHCs) were developed in response to the apparently escalating numbers of PSMI who were involved in the criminal justice system. Based on the principle of therapeutic jurisprudence and modeled after drug treatment courts (DTCs), MHCs proliferated throughout the first decade
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
