Understanding the role of service providers, land use, and resident characteristics on the occurrence of mental health crisis calls to the police

Abstract

Similar to concentrations of crime, mental health calls have been found to concentrate at a small number of places, but few have considered the context of places where mental health calls occur. The current study examines the influence of the physical and social context of street segments, particularly the role of service providers, land use features of the street and nearby area, and characteristics of residents on the likelihood of a mental health crisis call to the police occurring on the street. The findings demonstrate that the social context, such as offending and drug use among residents, levels of social cohesion and community involvement, and drug and violent crime influenced the occurrence of mental health crisis calls. Findings from this study make theoretical and practical contributions to a number of disciplines by improving our understanding of where mental health crisis calls occur and why they are found at specific places.

Communities and the enforcement of lower level offenses

“…The last area of inquiry examines how community resources can modify the use of the criminal justice system. In line with Quinn et al (), results from White, Goldberg, Hibdon, and Weisburd () suggest that social processes of the community (cohesion and trust) can reduce mental health crisis calls. Unexpectedly, however, the physical presence of resources, such as service providers, pharmacies, and bus stops, was not related to the likelihood of mental health crisis calls occurring in a given area.…”

“…White et al () examined the correlates of mental health crisis calls to the police with the presence of certain community resources (e.g., mental health service providers, pharmacies, bus stops), other land‐use features (e.g., bars), criminal‐justice‐related characteristics of residents (e.g., past‐year victimization, offending, and drug use), and community characteristics (e.g., cohesion, community involvement, calls for service). Most notably, they found that proximity to mental health services was not significantly related to the occurrence of a mental health call on a given street segment.…”

Subjective experiences of the first response to mental health crises in the community: a qualitative systematic review

“…It is humiliating, the police were scaring me, neighbours witnessed the disturbance, and local youths came out to shout and jeer from the side lines". 40 Companions reported being interrogated by police, which exacerbated the situation, 41 and that mental illness was ignored 42 : "So the victims have become the criminals'"(carer). 22 In contrast, PMI and companions praised FRs when they used a gentle approach, avoided excessive force by engaging meaningfully with them, using de-escalation and communication techniques.…”

“…18 24 31 32 45 48-51 FRs assumed a non-threatening presence by maintaining eye contact, not standing with arms crossed, altering their tone and taking a low-profile approach to protect PMI privacy, and by not using police uniform or vehicles. 26 30 34 37 40 52 FRs suggested using direct questions to avoid confusion and stress: "the less you say, and the more you listen, the better the call will go… do you actually need to obtain that information, or is it just agitating" (paramedic), 40 and using humour to distract and calm the PMI. 30 32 34 35 40 45 53-55 Accountability, cautiousness and confusion over procedure FRs expressed concerns and confusion about the law, in detaining PMI, which made decision making difficult 26 30 31 36 37 47 54 56 57 : "They don't fully understand how to use the Mental Health Act…I think there's a lot of officers out there who have a lack of knowledge of what we can and can't do" (police officer).…”

“…45 Police described their past reluctance to ask PMI direct questions, thinking they would distress them, and instead asked vague questions that overwhelmed and confused PMI. 40 Carers reported that police were unprofessional and, in some cases, refused to take the PMI to the hospital. 18 24 30 32 37 48 50 54 One officer argued that families do not understand the requirements of detainment, but others described incentives and initiatives to reduce use of S136.…”