People with mental illness are over represented at every stage of the criminal justice system. They face unfair treatment and abuse at every turn. Mental Health on Criminal Law Cases.

Many of these interactions with the police are related to nuisance crimes such as loitering or disturbing the peace rather than violence. Unfortunately, police are often unable to provide immediate access to treatment.

1. Mental Illness and the Criminal Justice System

After years of institutionalization, people with mental illnesses find themselves in the criminal justice system as a large fraction of the jail and prison populations. Some argue that this is a result of misconceptions regarding the relationship between psychiatric illness and crime. Mental Health on Criminal Law Cases

However, this argument is flawed because there is no evidence that a person’s mental illness alone will cause them to commit a criminal act. In addition, when persons with psychiatric disorders do commit crimes, it is usually because of other factors like substance abuse, adverse childhood experiences, and environmental circumstances.

Attorneys frequently see their clients who are living with mental illness marginalized and often treated harshly by police officers. These incidents can lead to a sense of injustice among those who are ill, and they can also create more distrust between law enforcement and the community. In order to break this cycle, it is necessary to invest in a sequential intercept model that diverts individuals with behavioral health problems from the criminal justice system to a more effective community-based system of care.

2. Mental Health Courts

Mental health courts seek to stem the flow of mentally ill misdemeanors to jail and prison, where they spend disproportionately longer periods of time awaiting trial or conviction. By diverting defendants from the criminal justice system to treatment, these courts provide a more cost-effective alternative to incarceration and can reduce the likelihood of future arrests.

The selection of clients for mental health court participation can vary widely, depending on the criteria used by different mental health courts to screen potential participants.

For example, some mental health courts screen for eligibility by conducting a round table that includes a public defender, defense attorney, jail mental health screened, and probation officer to determine whether the client’s criminal charges are appropriate for mental health court diversion. The preference of the judge, clinical supervisor, or prosecutor also can be a factor in selecting a client for mental health court.

3. Treatment in Place of Incarceration

Many people who experience a mental health crisis end up in contact with law enforcement officers. Unfortunately, police have little training on how to respond to these situations. In fact, according to the Atlantic, people with mental illnesses make up a huge percentage of those in jails and prisons.

One of the first options most courts have when dealing with a person in a mental health crisis is to refer them to a psychiatric hospital for treatment aimed at restoring their competency. However, these facilities may be full due to the COVID-19 pandemic and it can take weeks or even months for a patient to get into a treatment program.

This can lead to the individual becoming violent and committing more crimes, which can ultimately land them in a prison cell. This can be especially true for individuals with “triple morbidity”–severe mental illness, substance abuse disorder, and antisocial personality disorder.

4. Mental Health Lawyers

Suicide is the leading cause of death in jails and prisons, where it occurs at rates significantly higher than in the general population.

When a lawyer or judge interacts with an individual who is experiencing a mental health crisis, they often lack the knowledge and understanding to recognize the need for a mental health evaluation. This can lead to an overreaction or misinterpretation of a situation and a biased decision-making process that may have a significant impact on the case’s outcome.

In addition, it is important for lawyers and judges to understand that their own emotional responses can skew their perception of the facts of a case. This can lead to a biased decision-making process and a biased result needs read more hear.