Impacts and Solutions of Mentally Disordered Offenders
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Pikes Peak Community College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1021
Subject
English
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by MinisterTankElk21
Payne 1
Francesca Payne
Dr. Alex Morris
English 1021
10-3-2022
Impacts and Solutions of Mentally Disordered Offenders
It is general knowledge that prisons, especially in the US, are drastically understaffed, underfunded, and often overcrowded. Meaning the criminal justice system is unable to provide fulfilling healthcare. As such, mentally ill prisoners receive inadequate assistance, which can lead to excessive prison violence and increased risk of violent crimes once released (e.g., “sex offenses, robbery, and homicide or aggravated assault” {United States Government Accountability Office 13}). Suggestions for change include mental wellness training for police officers, crisis management officers, and proper treatment for offenders.
American prisons have been overcrowded for years. Sarteschi stating, “California state prisons had operated at 200% capacity for more than a decade” (1). Due to overcrowding, many prisons have not been provided with sufficient funds. The same source reported, "(approximately) 45% of federal offenders, 56% state offenders, and 64% jail inmates (suffer from mental illness)" (qtd. 1). Recently, prisons have been dealing with mentally troubled inmates in a primitive fashion, tending to opt for ‘treatment’ that is decades old and eschewing the use of recommended tactics for care. In most cases, disordered offenders are in solitary confinement. Treating mentally troubled offenders, however, “is most effective when it occurs in the least restrictive environment possible, and preferably, when it is done in the community” (Rice and Harris 132). Showing current treatment is only adulterating the already flawed prison
Payne 2
system. As such the prison system's ability to care for these offenders is critically flawed, even though financially efficient solutions have presented themselves. Allowing prisoners to heal fully
(or partially) before facing their sentence creates an immediate decrease in the risk of recidivism.
Therefore, lessening overcrowding and leading to a more ergonomic prison system. An in-depth analysis of the treatment of disordered prisoners reveals an extremity of issues; maltreatment, excessive wait times, forced isolation, and violent or dangerous conditions. Sarteschi stated, “Seriously mentally ill prisoners were neglected” (qtd. 6). This apathy is the quintessential picture of the prison system care for nontraditional offenders; uninformed, negligent, and critical of people who have specialized needs. When treatments are provided, they
can take up to 12 months to start and are only attended once a week (Sarteschi 6). As they await treatment, many prisoners receive little to no support from prison staff. However, treatment does not always mean better quality of life. In fact, “Recent prison reports show that inmates with serious mental illnesses are prone to unjustified segregation, solitary confinement (50% of inmates in solitary), self-mutilation, rage, violence, and suicide attempts (and completions), and are easy targets for abuse” by staff and cellmates (qtd. Sarteschi 6). This quality of care, lack of empathy, and time management is an essential flaw in the prison system.
Solutions to inefficient and ineffective mental health services in the prison system are quite simple; incorporate more mental health professionals in the legal system and enforce treatment as part of sentencing. Ideally, the objectives of treatment would be “symptom reduction, reduced length of stay and readmission to the hospital, and increased quality of life” (Rice and Harris 130). Additionally, these changes could also help resolve preexisting issues within the system. In the case of overcrowding Sarteschi states “If (officers are) better trained about the nature of mental illnesses and how to intervene in crisis situations, fewer individuals
Payne 3
with mental illnesses may be arrested” (8). In this way immediate prison populations would be decreased significantly. Deescalating the situation before police intervene mental health professionals have proven to relax the perpetrator before the police try more drastic measures (i.e., medical sedation and restraining efforts). Which would keep prisons safer and create more consistent treatment for all perpetrators. Lurigio and Swartz state “Serious restrictions have been placed on the procedures and criteria for involuntary commitment, limiting psychiatric hospitalizations for PSMIs (persons with serious mental illness) and increasing the likelihood that they will be processed through the criminal justice system” (56). Due to these strict requirements for involuntary psychiatric placement, a mental health professional could easily be used as a reference for police to determine quickly whether hospitalization is necessary. Not only
could risk factors be determined at the scene, but also reference for immediate or later treatment, which could decrease the load of work expected to be done inside a prison. Should the person be subject to a trial, more innocent people could plead insanity with paperwork from the response team. Ideally “law enforcement and social service agencies… (would) share responsibilities for PSMIs who come to the attention of the police for public disturbances or more serious criminal acts” (Lurigio and Swartz 65). Regulations for protocol could be determined by either the crime being committed, or the risk of violence presented. Both would provide an individualized experience for the person at risk. Once a person is deemed mentally acceptable for all conditions presented in prison they should attend and serve their sentence. However, if a person is not deemed acceptable, they could go to high security group therapy and rehab centers (which have shown to be effective in other countries) in exchange for a shorter sentence or increased ability for probation. When deemed appropriate probation and parole should be heavily monitored. Due to the risk of relapse
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Payne 4
and homelessness, probation officers should supervise convicts for a minimum of 6 months. However, “Probation officers are unable to handle the problems of these offenders (PSMIs) successfully” (Lurigio and Swartz 75). Therefore, officers specialized in mental health should deal with convicts accordingly. This supervision could last for months or years depending on each individual case. Sarteschi states “Mentally ill inmates are more likely and in some cases twice as likely ... to be homeless when compared with nonmentally ill inmates” (4). Specialized officers should monitor convicts until consistent housing and work has been acquired.
In this way, law enforcement and health services would be fulfilling their role as an institution. Which would create a healthier and more independent prison system. The importance
of implementing laws and funding to protect those who are not at their own jurisdiction should be at the forefront of government planning to ensure that their 8
th
amendment is being protected. Helping is part of human nature. So remember to seek help for those in danger of themselves or others, because you may reach them before their compulsions do.
Payne 5
Works Cited
Rice, Marnie E., and Grant T. Harris. "The treatment of mentally disordered offenders." Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 3.1 (1997): 126.
Sarteschi, Christine M. "Mentally ill offenders involved with the US criminal justice system: A synthesis." Sage open 3.3 (2013): 2158244013497029.
Lurigio, Arthur J., and James A. Swartz. "Changing the contours of the criminal justice system to
meet the needs of persons with serious mental illness." Criminal justice 3.45 (2000): 108.