Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:53 pm
Time: 10:53 pm
Results for mentally ill offenders (australia)
5 results foundAuthor: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Title: The Health of Australia's Prisoners 2009 Summary: This report is the culmination of several years' development of national indicators in relation to prisoner health inAustralia. The report presents information on the health of prisoners at the time of entry to prisons, their use of health services while in prison as well as some information on the prison environment. Details: Canberra: AIHW, 2010. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 118577 Keywords: Health Care, PrisonersMedical CareMental Health, InmatesMentally Ill Offenders (Australia)Prisoners (Australia) |
Author: Forsythe, Lubica Title: Mental Disorder Prevalence at the Gateway to the Criminal Justice System Summary: Many criminal justice practitioners have observed that offenders experience poor mental health. While international studies have found mental health to be poorer among prisoners than in the general population, less information is available either about offenders who are not imprisoned or alleged offenders detained by police. The mental health of offenders is of key policy interest from both health service and crime prevention perspectives. This is the first Australian study to measure the prevalence of mental disorder among offenders nationally, using information provided by 690 police detainees who participated in the Australian Institute of Criminology’s Drug Use Monitoring in Australia (DUMA) program. Around half reported having been diagnosed with a mental disorder in the past. The study was also the first to use the Corrections Mental Health Screen (CMHS), an instrument validated for gender-specific screening, on an Australian offender population. Results suggest that almost half of detainees may have a diagnosable mental disorder at the time of arrest, including 42 percent of women and 28 percent of men with no previous diagnosis. In the routine screening of police detainees as they enter the criminal justice system, the CMHS could be used to identify for the first time those who would benefit from psychological assessment and appropriate intervention. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2012. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice No. 438: Accessed July 11, 2012 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/8/6/8/%7B868E2162-6E92-4028-BF27-50A8D4FB1B04%7Dtandi438_001.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/8/6/8/%7B868E2162-6E92-4028-BF27-50A8D4FB1B04%7Dtandi438_001.pdf Shelf Number: 125544 Keywords: Mental Health ServicesMentally Ill Offenders (Australia) |
Author: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Title: The Mental Health of Prison Entrants in Australia, 2010 Summary: This bulletin presents results from the 2010 National Prisoner Health Census, and focuses on the associations between mental health and a range of characteristics and behaviours reported by prison entrants. Generally, prison entrants with mental health issues have relatively poor socioeconomic and health characteristics and are more likely to engage in risky health behaviours. They also are more likely to use prison health services and use them more frequently. Mental health issues are common among prison entrants - In 2010, 31% of prison entrants reported that they had been told by a doctor, psychiatrist, psychologist or nurse that they had a mental health disorder (including drug and alcohol abuse) in their lifetime. This is about 2.5 times higher than the general population (ABS 2010). Sixteen per cent of prison entrants were currently on medication for a mental health disorder and 14% reported experiencing very high levels of distress. Prison entrants with a mental health disorder have relatively poor socioeconomic and health characteristics - Compared with entrants without a history of a mental health disorder and the general population, prison entrants with a history of a mental health disorder have poorer socioeconomic and health characteristics. Two out of five prison entrants in Australia with a mental health disorder did not complete Year 10 at school and 2 out of 3 were either unemployed or unable to work due to disability, age or condition. Further, this group had extensive criminal histories, with about 1 in 3 having been incarcerated 5 or more times in an adult prison. Also, half of this group had received a head injury that resulted in a loss of consciousness or blacking out. Prison entrants with a mental health disorder are more likely to report risky health behaviours - Many prison entrants in Australia report engaging in risky health behaviours such as illicit drug use, drinking alcohol at extreme levels and smoking tobacco. Some of these behaviours are even more extensive in prison entrants currently taking medication for a mental health disorder than those not taking medication. Three in 4 prison entrants currently taking medication for a mental health disorder have used illicit drugs in the last 12 months, more than half consumed alcohol at risky levels and nearly 90% smoked. A high proportion of prison entrants with mental health issues accessed mental health services at the prison clinic - More than half of prison entrants who experienced very high psychological distress in the past 4 weeks were referred to a prison mental health clinic. Further, about a third of prison entrants taking medication for a mental health disorder visited the clinic for a mental health issue and nearly half (48%) of this group visited the clinic 3 or more times during the 2-week National Prisoner Health Census. Details: Sydney: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2012. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Bulletin 104: Accessed July 17, 2012 at: http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=10737422201 Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=10737422201 Shelf Number: 125634 Keywords: Mental Health ServicesMentally Ill Offenders (Australia)Mentally Ill Prisoners |
Author: New South Wales Law Reform Commission Title: People with Cognitive and Mental Health Impairments in the Criminal Justice System. Diversion Summary: There is evidence of over-representation of people with cognitive and mental health impairments at all stages of the criminal system justice system. For example: A 2002 survey of police officers in Sydney found that police reported spending an average of 10% of their time with “mentally disturbed people”. Some reported spending up to 60% of their time. A 2007 BOCSAR study at two NSW local courts found that 55% of defendants surveyed suffered from one or more psychiatric disorders. There was apparent over-representation in all categories of mental health impairment, when compared with the general rate in NSW. A 2009 study of 60 defendants appearing before four local courts in Greater Sydney found that people with cognitive impairments were over-represented in those courts. A 2003 study of NSW prisoners found that 74% of inmates experienced at least one psychiatric disorder in the 12 months prior to being interviewed. For example, 9% of prisoners were identified as having psychosis, whereas the representation in the general population is 0.42%. Arrest or imprisonment of people with impairments without providing access to services that address needs related to offending behaviour may not provide the best outcome for that person or the community, and is unlikely to be effective in reducing future offending. Yet the rate of impairments in prison is high, and use of Local Court diversionary provisions is very low – only amounting to about 1.5% of finalisations. Why are people with cognitive and mental health impairment over-represented in the criminal justice system? The reasons for over-representation of people with cognitive and mental health impairments in the criminal justice system are complex and multi-factored. A person may have complex needs and face multiple sources of disadvantage, thereby increasing their likelihood of coming into contact with the criminal justice system. For example, a 2010 BOCSAR study suggested that rates of reoffending are “substantially elevated” among those with a mental health impairment only where it occurs alongside a substance disorder. Yet, factors such as mental health impairment and substance abuse issues may be amenable to treatment or other intervention. Addressing an impairment or other need could help reduce future offending. How can diversion help? Diversion provides opportunities for police and courts to respond more effectively to people with cognitive and mental health impairments. For example, instead of charging a person, it may be better for police or the courts to refer someone who has committed a trivial offence and has an impairment to services that address offending behaviour. Studies have shown: Reductions in reoffending associated with diversionary programs that identify people with mental health impairments and refer them to treatment or other support. Reductions in reoffending, cost savings and mental health improvements associated with diversionary approaches that case manage and support people with complex needs. Reductions in the nature and extent of reoffending for participants in specialist lists or court programs for people with mental health impairments. We have drawn from the characteristics of such programs, and the legislative mechanisms that support them, in developing a response that best addresses the concerns of the community and the needs of the individuals. The benefits of diversion have been identified in NSW 2021 – A plan to make NSW number one, which includes goals such as preventing and reducing reoffending, and keeping people healthy. These goals are accompanied by targets such as increasing completion rates for key treatment and intervention programs, and diverting people with mental health impairments out of the criminal justice system and into services. Why is diversion not being used more extensively now? Unless people with cognitive and mental health impairments are first identified and assessed, the criminal justice system cannot respond appropriately to them. Yet, the burden of identification and management of people with cognitive and mental health impairments in the criminal justice system often falls on people who do not have the required skills or expertise. The existing Statewide Community and Court Liaison Service, which assists in identifying and assessing people with mental health impairments and referring them to mental health services, is only available in 20 of the 148 Local Court locations in NSW, and there is no equivalent service for cognitive impairment. Even where particular impairments are identified, those who work in the criminal justice system are not likely to be expert in linking them to the complex service systems in the community that may break the cycle of offending. So while courts have power to divert under s 32, those powers may not be used, or may not be effective, because the right services have not been identified. A pilot program, Court Referral of Eligible Defendants into Treatment (CREDIT), is addressing these issues, but it only operates in two NSW Local Courts. Similarly, community service providers may not be familiar with criminal justice system processes and the expectations of courts. The current system for reporting non-compliance with court ordered treatment plans or orders under s 32 is ineffective. An important factor in successful diversion appears to lie in the provision of a “bridge” between the criminal justice system and the service sectors. “Bridges” are often provided by specialist case workers attached to courts, who can translate the needs of the criminal justice system to the service sector and the needs of the service sector to the court. In summary, there is a need to improve our identification of people with impairments, link them with the right services that will focus on dealing with their offending behaviour, and provide a framework to keep them engaged with those services. Details: Sydney: New South Wales Law Reform Commission, 2012. 426p. Source: Internet Resource: Report 135: Accessed February 21, 2013 at: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/lrc/ll_lrc.nsf/pages/LRC_cref120 Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/lrc/ll_lrc.nsf/pages/LRC_cref120 Shelf Number: 127683 Keywords: Cognitive ImpairmentsDiversionMental Health ServicesMentally Ill Offenders (Australia) |
Author: Baker, David Title: Unlocking Care: Continuing mental health care for prisoners and their families Summary: There were 30,775 prisoners in Australia at the end of June 2013 - an increase of five per cent on the 2012 census conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). Almost six out of ten (58 per cent) prisoners had previously served a sentence as an adult. The cost of housing a prisoner in 2012-13 was $297 per day. In comparison, annual expenditure on mental health-related services in 2011‑12 was $322 per person - less than a dollar a day. State and territories provided 61 per cent of this funding. The prison population has higher rates of mental illness than the wider population. While treatment in prison can improve a person's mental health, it appears that, for some, mental health deteriorates after release. Mental health support is, therefore, an important service for people returning to the community. If people are re-offending and returning to the prison system in part due to a failure to provide adequate mental health services following release, improvements make sense. The difference in cost for community mental health services and imprisonment provides a budget window for increased spending to improve mental health services. This paper outlines the case for a new model of continued mental health care from prison out into the community. Among the general population one in ten Australians (11 per cent) registers a high or very high level of psychological distress, suggesting they may have moderate or severe mental health issues. In comparison the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) has reported that almost a third (31 per cent) of prison entrants in 2012 had a high or very high level of psychological distress. Almost one in four (38 per cent) people entering prison in 2012 had previously been told they had a mental health disorder. The rate of referrals to prison mental health services, however, was only 26 per cent in 2012. This referral rate did not differ for men and women, despite women prisoners having a higher rate of mental illness. At the point of leaving prison, twice as many women (31 per cent) as men (16 per cent) had a high or very high level of psychological distress. In 2012 the level of psychological distress among Indigenous prisoners was 22 per cent of prison entrants and 18 per cent prior to release. The data confirms previous research, both in Australia and internationally, that has shown the incidence of mental illness is higher among prisoner populations. This paper reports that the average level of distress increases after release from prison, reversing evident improvements achieved during imprisonment. More than four in ten people who had been in prison within the previous year had high or very high levels of distress. This rate is higher than that reported by the AIHW for people entering prison and among those preparing to leave. For some people negative mental health outcomes present following release which were not evident in the lead-up to leaving prison. For people suffering a mental illness, the move back into the community can worsen psychiatric symptoms - contributing to greater difficulties adjusting to the change. The mental wellbeing of those leaving prison is better than that of people entering prison, reflecting the ability of prison health services to deliver targeted, appropriate mental health care. The AIHW data shows that prior to release fewer than two in ten (18 per cent) people are likely to continue to have a moderate or severe mental health issue. A majority (91 per cent) of people being discharged from prison in 2012 reported that their mental health and wellbeing had improved. This positive outcome does not appear to apply to women. A UK study found that while the mental health of men improved in the first three months of imprisonment, there was no real change among women. Improvements achieved in prison, however, may not be maintained after release. Analysis of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey provides a third measurement of the psychological distress of people who had been in prison in the past year. The transition from prison to the community can be a stressful and anxious period for many people. The AIHW has reported that impending release from prison was cited as a reason for psychological distress by almost half (45 per cent) the prisoners assessed as distressed prior to release. Australian research has found that for many people leaving prison there is a continuation of the problems, including mental health issues, faced prior to incarceration. If mental health care provided in prison is not continued after a person's release, their mental health may worsen, undoing any health benefits that may have been achieved while in prison. Details: Canberra City, AUS: Australia Institute, 2014. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 15, 2015 at: http://www.tai.org.au/content/unlocking-care-continuing-mental-health-care-prisoners-and-their-families Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: http://www.tai.org.au/content/unlocking-care-continuing-mental-health-care-prisoners-and-their-families Shelf Number: 134316 Keywords: Mental Health ServicesMentally Ill Offenders (Australia)Prisoners |