A Comparison of Participants in Two Community-Based Programs: Assisted Outpatient Treatment and a Mental Health Court.
Creator
Bonfine Natalie; Ritter Christian; Teller Jennifer L S; Munetz Mark R
Publisher
Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)
Date
2018
2018-09
Description
OBJECTIVE: Mental health courts and assisted outpatient treatment (AOT) are tools to help people with serious mental illness engage in treatment and avoid or reduce institutionalization. As both programs become increasingly prevalent, questions remain about whether people with severe mental illness who receive AOT have the same characteristics, histories, and service needs as those who participate in mental health courts. If there are differences, each program may require assessments and interventions tailored to the specific characteristics and needs of participants. METHODS: This study examined administrative criminal justice and mental health services data for 261 people with serious mental illness who participated in AOT, a mental health court, or both over seven years. RESULTS: Three percent of the sample participated in both programs. Compared with participants in mental health court, participants in AOT were older, less likely to have an alcohol use disorder, and more likely to have a schizophrenia spectrum disorder than a bipolar disorder. The participants' histories of crisis mental health service utilization, hospitalization, and incarceration prior to program entry varied significantly by program. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that there are differences among individuals with serious mental illness who are served by AOT and mental health court programs. AOT participants had greater engagement with mental health services, and a significant portion of AOT participants also had a prior criminal history that placed them at risk of future justice involvement. Program administrators need to recognize and address the clinical and criminogenic needs that place individuals at risk of becoming hospitalized and incarcerated.
Subject
Assisted Outpatient Treatment; mental health courts; Outpatient commitment
Elements of an Ideal Statutory Scheme for Mental Health Civil Commitment
Creator
Stettin B; Lamb R; Frese F
Publisher
Psychiatric Annals
Date
2014
2014-02
Description
Watching a loved one fall into the grip of severe mental illness can be painful and terrifying in equal measure. And yet sometimes, to the chagrin and astonishment of those who want to help the ill person find a way back to the life he once had, pleas to seek treatment are met with emphatic insistence that everything is fine. At some point, when things become unbearable for the concerned observer, a call will be made to police or a local mental health facility. It is at this moment that the situation becomes not merely a health emergency, but also a legal matter. This leads to a critical question: what exactly are the societal imperatives activated by a psychiatric crisis? This is a major question that states have had to grapple with in crafting their laws on involuntary treatment. Laws must also address the circumstances that typically follow a diagnosis of severe mental illness, such as how long and under what criteria the person should be held by a court of law for continued inpatient treatment against his wishes, whether the state should require him to adhere to a prescribed treatment plan, and how far into relapse a person must fall before he is involuntarily re-hospitalized.