Imprisonment for public protection: an example of ‘reverse diversion’

Abstract

This paper summarises the findings of a recent report on the mental health implications of imprisonment for public protection (IPP), and explores the hypothesis that IPP is an instance of ‘reverse diversion’ – that people with mental health problems who offend are, as a result of criminal justice legislation, more likely to receive a prison sentence than be diverted to mental health services. This is particularly a reflection of the ‘rise of risk’, and an indication that sentencers are more inclined to diagnose ‘dangerousness’ rather than mental illness.