The Mental Health Courts

Problem-Solving Courts

Though it comes to the court, there are many different types of people who have to confront the arm of the law even when they are not competent to do so, which leads to problem-solving courts. Performance metrics exist to provide recommendations for researchers and law enforcers regarding program evaluation and the advancement of the individual who is subject to the law. Each problem-solving court, however, has multiple categories with varied assessment measures that are unique and particular to the class of persons being treated. The drug court’s performance metrics include screening for the medication of choice and the seriousness of the criminal violation committed by the defendant.The frequency of required drug tests and the percent of people achieving drug-free milestones measure the progress.

Mental Health Courts

Mental health courts are just as rehabilitation-oriented as drug courts although for their intake, they insist on the behavioral progress as a continuum, focusing on improved social function ability as opposed to complete rehabilitation (Porter, Rempel & Mansky, 2010). Mental health courts should measure indicators of participants’ stability regarding health care and housing. Also, the agreement to the management considers the prescribed medication and the avoidance of hospitalization while under treatment. Just like the drug court, participants in the mental health courts have to reach a certain level of mental health need and the severity of their criminal offense has to be measured beforehand. The outcome of mental health, however, is measured differently as the participant has to have appropriate aftercare upon completion while maintaining a stable health care and reduced need for hospitalization. A stable home and financial support also matter since the stakeholders of the court are trained to ensure that they are conversant with mental health court specific clinical issues. Unlike the drug courts, mental health courts are more in detail when it comes to the rehabilitation of a participant with a broader perspective on the effects of the illness and the complexity of recovery. Drug courts can perform complete rehabilitation of its participants, but mental health courts focus on a continuous process ensuring mental stability and maintenance, complete rehabilitation is unrealistic for participants or their caregivers. Porter, Rempel & Mansky,(2010) have well identified universal performance indicators for problem-solving courts as well as experiments that will assist the court no matter how limited in scope. The urgent need to integrate traditional court performance with ones that are natural problem-solving. Maintenance of treatment after rehabilitation is usually better said than done as discipline is required.

The Seven Common Components of Mental Health Courts

The seven common components of mental health courts according to include, planning and administration which is done by the court (Thompson, Osher, & Tomasini-Joshi, 2007). Planning and administration ensure they have a broad group of stakeholders representing the criminal justice, mental health substance abuse treatment, and other related cases with the guidance of the community. Next, eligibility criteria or rather target population help in determining the offender’s crime to the level of their mental illness so as to ensure proper facilitation of defendant. Identification of referring and accepting of participants into mental health courts is quickly linked to the community-based services (Blair, Sullivan, Latessa, & Sullivan, 2015). Terms of participation are made clear, public safety and facilitation of defendant’s engagement in treatment are unique to the level of risk the defendant poses to the community, with solutions for a positive aftermath. The defendants are completely equipped with all the information regarding their treatment to make an informed choice. Confidentiality is insisted on for the protection of the defendant, and also the sustainability is periodically reviewed to ensure maximum results for the participants.

Screening and Assessment Process

Screening and assessment process have been recommended by the NCMHJJ to be designed for the assessing and addressing of existence in co-occurring disorders with court-involved youth (Cocozza, Hills & Shufelt, 2009). If well used, in the researched-based structured interview mental health and substance use disorders will be evaluated at an early stage. Consequently, mental health courts are essential in any healthcare community to help people with psychological problems.

References

Blair, L., Sullivan, C., Latessa, E., & Sullivan, J. C. (2015). Juvenile drug courts: A process,

outcome, and impact evaluation. Retrieved February 17, 2017, from

https://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/248406.pdf

Hills, H., Shufelt, L. J., & Cocozza, J. J. (2009). Evidence-based practice recommendations for

juvenile drug courts. Retrieved February 18, 2017, from

https://www.google.com/search?q=Evidence-Based+Practice+Recommendations+for++%09Juvenile+Drug+Courts&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b

Porter, R., Rempel, M., & Mansky, A. (2010). What makes a court problem-solving? universal

performance indicators for problem-solving justice. Retrieved February 17, 2017, from

http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/What_Makes_A_Court_P_S.pdf

Thompson, M., Osher, F., & Tomasini-Joshi, D. (2007). Improving responses to people with

mental illnesses: The essential elements of a mental health court. Retrieved February 18, 2017, from

https://www.bja.gov/publications/mhc_essential_elements.pdf