Criminogenic Factors Associated with Noncompliance and Rearrest of Mental Health Court Participants

Abstract

There is a considerable overrepresentation of individuals with mental health issues within the U.S. criminal justice system as compared with the general population. Mental health courts (MHCs) arose in response to this concern, with a primary aim of reducing recidivism. Thus far, MHC research has largely neglected the potential utility of criminogenic factors. A retrospective analysis of 163 MHC participants was conducted to examine the association between clinical and criminogenic factors and noncompliance, as well as for recidivism, using a series of Bayesian negative binomial regression models to compare predictors. Criminogenic factors, namely first offending prior to the age of 18, having a substance-related diagnosis, commission of a variety of crimes, historical probation or parole violation, and having less than a high school education were associated with an increased rate of engaging in noncompliant behavior and rearrest. None of the clinical factors were directly associated with noncompliance or rearrest outcomes.

Racial and ethnic differences in behavioral health, criminal legal system involvement, and service needs among mental health court participants: Implications for service delivery.

“…Although MHCs demonstrate promising outcomes, individuals with COD within these treatment courts present with unique and challenging needs (Anestis & Carbonell, 2014; Goodale et al, 2013). Data show MHC participants with COD are at an elevated risk for criminal recidivism (Honegger & Honegger, 2019) and the presence of COD, specifically the severity of an individual’s substance use disorder, predicts program completion (Cosden et al, 2005). In addition, individuals with COD in the MHC are more likely to have pronounced difficulties with employment, housing, family and social relationships, and treatment engagement and compliance (Peters & Hills, 1997).…”

Connecting mental health court participants with services: Process, challenges, and recommendations.

“…Thus, a core aim of mental health courts—to reduce the burden of mental illness within correctional facilities—remains underaddressed through the routine exclusion of individuals with personality disorders. Indeed, though they comprise a majority of incarcerated persons, individuals with personality disorders account for only 2% to 3% of diversion court participants (Bebbington et al, 2017; Blackburn & Coid, 1999; Fazel & Danesh, 2002; Gallagher et al, 2018; Honegger & Honegger, 2019).…”

“…Although the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders no longer categorizes diagnoses according to diagnostic "axes," this practice is still common among mental health court programs(Honegger & Honegger, 2019).…”

Principles and practices of risk assessment in mental health jail diversion programs

“…43 As such, treatment of mental health and criminogenic needs may be necessary to ultimately-and effectivelyreduce risk. Indeed, research demonstrates the importance of criminogenic factors in predicting noncompliance and rearrest among mental health jail diversion participants 44 and suggests that programs targeting general risk factors, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, are more effective in reducing recidivism than is mental health treatment alone. 45…”