From therapeutic jurisprudence...to jurisprudent therapy.

Abstract

For nearly a decade, "therapeutic jurisprudence" (TJ) has provided a theoretical framework within which legal rules, legal procedure, and legal roles are analyzed in terms of their therapeutic, neutral, or antitherapeutic effects. This article proposed "jurisprudent therapy" (JT), an extension of the TJ model, as a context for analyzing mental health science, mental health practice, and mental health roles in terms of their "jurisprudent," neutral, or "antijurisprudent" effects. The JT perspective neither supplants nor supersedes TJ; rather, it mirrors and augments an established process for interdisciplinary contrast, comparison, and integration. Just as an empathic and evolving legal system provides psychological benefits, so does a legally informed and juridically compatible progression of social science promote principles of justice and human freedom. Consideration of these two complementary models in tandem yields an array of brainstorming devices, to synergistic effect, with heuristic implications for teaching, research, and service delivery.