Letter to the Editor

Reduction in Recidivism in a Juvenile Mental Health Court: A Pre‐ and Post‐Treatment Outcome Study

“…This is the current status of therapeutic jurisprudence in America, and Santa Clara County is no exception. Mental health courts can serve only a limited number of defendants (Tyuse & Linhorst, 2005; Wolff, 2002). The lack of resources to fund the breadth and depth of services to handle the mentally ill offender population caseload is problematic (Powell, 2003). This is a strong case for disseminating multidisciplinary mental health practice principles and more mental health resources throughout the juvenile justice system. Mental health courts engage in a process known as “creaming” to avoid politically embarrassing violent recidivism (Tyuse & Linhorst, 2005; Wolff, 2002).…”

“…While some subtle influences of authority are doubtlessly at play under this model, no author observed the threat of incarceration to coerce treatment or compliance during this study. Mental health courts criminalize the mentally ill. Some believe the court's involvement in treating mentally ill people stigmatizes them as criminal (Powell, 2003; Tyuse & Linhorst, 2005; Wolff, 2002). In the opinion of the authors, the criminalization of a child with a serious, biologically based mental illness is clinically and legally unconscionable.…”

“…Mental health courts can serve only a limited number of defendants (Tyuse & Linhorst, 2005; Wolff, 2002). The lack of resources to fund the breadth and depth of services to handle the mentally ill offender population caseload is problematic (Powell, 2003). This is a strong case for disseminating multidisciplinary mental health practice principles and more mental health resources throughout the juvenile justice system.…”