A comparison of civil patients and incompetent defendants: pre and post deinstitutionalization.
نویسنده
چکیده
There has been a great deal of speculation that deinstitutionalization has resulted in the criminalization of the mentally ill. Using two samples of defendants found incompetent to stand trial (IST) and two samples of civil patients randomly selected from five states, pre and post deinstitutionalization, this research compares changes in their mental health and arrest histories. After deinstitutionalization, fewer and less dramatic differences in the arrest and mental health histories were evident between ISTs and civil patients. Both patient samples displayed significant increases in prior hospitalization and arrest histories. Among the civil patients there was a significant increase in the frequency and seriousness of criminal activity. There was no evidence that IST commitments are being expanded to hospitalize the nondangerous mentally ill no longer subject to civil commitment.
منابع مشابه
The differential impact of deinstitutionalization on white and nonwhite defendants found incompetent to stand trial.
Previous studies have reported that state mental hospital deinstitutionalization has resulted in the processing of the mentally ill through the criminal justice system. Using pre- and postdeinstitutionalization samples of defendants found incompetent to stand trial (IST) selected from three states, this study examines changes in the mental health and arrest histories of white and nonwhite ISTs....
متن کاملFinding a right in state constitutions for community treatment of the mentally ill.
INTRODUCTION .................................. 741 I. INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION: HISTORY AND POLICY ....................... 748 A. Civil Commitment Procedures .................... 748 B. Pre-1980s ............................... 749 C. 1980s and 1990s .......................... 752 II. COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT AND THE POLICY ARGUMENTS FAVORING IT .................... 759...
متن کاملWhen Restoration Fails: One State's Answer to the Dilemma of Permanent Incompetence.
The landmark 1972 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Jackson v. Indiana prohibited the indefinite commitment of criminal defendants on grounds of incompetence to stand trial if there was no substantial probability of restoration to competency in the foreseeable future. Such defendants are still subject to ordinary civil commitment; however, not all will meet civil commitment criteria, given that th...
متن کاملCommentary: civil commitment statutes--40 years of circumvention.
There is a longstanding body of literature that describes how states' civil commitment statutes have been stretched or circumvented to accommodate institutional and systemic needs. The paper by Levitt and colleagues provides yet another example of this phenomenon: Arizona's use of its civil commitment statutes to detain unrestorable, incompetent criminal defendants for whom other provisions hav...
متن کاملCivil commitment outcomes of incompetent defendants.
In Maricopa County, Arizona, most defendants who are found not competent and not restorable (NCNR) are admitted involuntarily to an acute-care inpatient hospital. Many of these patients would most likely not have met the State's usual admission criteria for acute inpatient care had they not been evaluated in relation to a criminal offense. Is this group treated differently from their peers who ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- The Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
دوره 18 4 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 1990