Mental illness in the eyes of the law: examining perceptions of stigma among judges and attorneys

Batastini, Ashley B.; Lester, Michael E.; Thompson, R. Alan

doi:10.1080/1068316x.2017.1406092

Cited by 21 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such stereotyping also sometimes interacts with the stereotyping of other essential characteristics, such as gender and race (Perlin and Cucolo ). Although mental disorders can also positively influence sentencing (e.g., Berryessa ), research has shown that offenders with mental disorders are often perceived as less treatable and more dangerous compared to offenders without diagnoses, leading judges to choose more restrictive sentences based on fears related to dangerousness or lack of rehabilitation (Batastini et al ; Jones and Cauffman ).…”

Section: Judicial Stereotyping Of Essential Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicial Stereotyping Associated with Genetic Essentialist Biases toward Mental Disorders and Potential Negative Effects on Sentencing

Berryessa¹

2019

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research, utilizing qualitative methodology with grounded theory, develops a model that illuminates a process by which judicial stereotyping associated with genetic essentialist biases toward mental disorders may affect judges' views regarding the sentencing and punishment of offenders with mental disorder diagnoses presented or understood to be genetically influenced. Data, collected through interviews with a sample of 59 Pennsylvania State Court judges, suggest that judges exhibit stereotyping behavior by linking the relationships between three particular genetic essentialist biases (immutability, informativeness, uniformity) and three types of stigmatization (pessimism, dangerousness, family stigma) associated with each bias. When judges exhibited this stereotyping behavior without the effects of intervening conditions, they then expressed how knowledge of the genetic influences of an offender's mental disorder would negatively influence views on punishment, specifically related to more restrictive sentences and support for deterrence and incapacitation. Three intervening conditions associated with judges' personal characteristics (personal experiences involving genetics, strength of determinism vs. free will beliefs, having no personal experiences with mental disorders) influenced whether judges' sentencing views were negatively influenced by such knowledge on genetics. Implications related to therapeutic jurisprudence are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Judicial Stereotyping Of Essential Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicial Stereotyping Associated with Genetic Essentialist Biases toward Mental Disorders and Potential Negative Effects on Sentencing

Berryessa¹

2019

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The juridical institution is one of the institutions that has been contributing to this rivalry (Batastini et al, 2018;Simonsson et al, 2020;Blake & Hatzenbuehler, 2019;Werner and Doron 2017). On the one hand, legal discourse on mental illnesses aims to guarantee access to treatment for economically and culturally diverse groups.…”

Section: Theoretical and Methodological Principles For Measuring Judi...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring judiciarization of people with mental illnesses

Mikhaylova

Naumova

2022

Crime Law Soc Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The judiciarization of the psychiatric subject is a two-sided process. It could antidiscriminate people with mental illnesses but, at the same time, it could potentially provoke pathologization of mental illnesses. Current methodologies proposed to measure this important and complicated process for people with mental illnesses do not allow analysis on multiple levels (the macro, meso, and micro). In this article, to fill this gap we propose a methodological strategy that helps to investigate judiciarization of people with mental illnesses on multiple levels at once. This approach is based on critical discourse analysis of legal documents and court decisions that feature people with the poor mental health. Namely, we suggest how to measure the level or degree of judiciarization, its geographical evenness, actors in the legal process, its dimensions (the law branches of its occurrence), and linguistic content. We applied this methodology in examining 1,243 legal documents and 327,311 court decisions that were issued by agents of the Russian law system. The research findings show that judiciarization levels in Russia have been rising over the years, moving away from stigmatizing those with mental illnesses and towards anti-discrimination. Our paper could be of interest to socio-legal researchers and social policy practitioners. Keywords judiciarization • critical discourse analysis • legal discourse on mental health • Russia* Oxana Mikhaylova

show abstract

“…Considering patients as "dangerous" and "people who are not clear what to do" creates prejudices that include the feelings of anger, fear, and helplessness that make people want to move away from individuals with mental illness. Prejudices are an indicator of the belief of society towards mental illness (Batastini et al, 2018). Prejudices, negative attitudes, beliefs and exclusionary behaviors towards individuals with mental illness constitute a tendency to stigmatization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Cine-education Method on Mental Diseases Beliefs and Stigmatization Tendency in Student Nurses

Gökmen

Yıldız

2022

TFSD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This research was carried out to determine the effect of cinema films watched on nursing students on mental illness beliefs and stigmatization tendencies. Method: This research, which was planned in the pretest-posttest, semi-trial pattern without a control group, was conducted between March and May 2020 with student nurses who took psychiatric nursing courses at a university. The impact of screening movies on students' beliefs about mental illness and stigmatization tendencies were evaluated. Personal data form, Beliefs Towards Mental Diseases Scale (BTMDS) and Stigma Scale (SS) were used to collect the data, and the data were analyzed in the SPSS package program. Results: A statistically significant difference was found between the students’ pre-test and post-test SS, BTMDS mean scores and its sub-dimensions. (p

show abstract

Mental illness in the eyes of the law: examining perceptions of stigma among judges and attorneys

Cited by 21 publications

References 32 publications

Judicial Stereotyping Associated with Genetic Essentialist Biases toward Mental Disorders and Potential Negative Effects on Sentencing

Judicial Stereotyping Associated with Genetic Essentialist Biases toward Mental Disorders and Potential Negative Effects on Sentencing

Measuring judiciarization of people with mental illnesses

The Effect of Cine-education Method on Mental Diseases Beliefs and Stigmatization Tendency in Student Nurses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About