Reports reveal an increase in the number of individuals with serious mental illness in jails, prisons and forensic hospitals. Despite the wide-ranging and devastating consequences of this 'criminalization' of mental illness, there remains a lack of information on the subject as well as on the provision of care for these patients. This important new book fills a gap in the literature by examining topics such as: the history and policy factors related to criminalization; original research on forensic populations; pharmacological and psychological treatment strategies; and principles and guidelines for diversion out of the criminal justice system. Contributions from leading experts in the field further our understanding of this important subject, offering advice on how to provide humane care for patients. A must have for all mental health clinicians including psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, rehabilitation therapists, and mental health nurses. A useful tool for mental health administrators and policy makers.
Chapter 4 A Social History of Psychotic Illness
Brendan Daugherty , Katherine Warburton , and Stephen M. Stahl
Have you ever walked down the street and seen someone with mental illness, agitated and yelling, or lying on the sidewalk, and wondered why? Have you ever wondered why, despite myriad reforms from bold thinkers and progressive governments over centuries, does this still occur? Why, despite miraculous technology, comfort, and opportunity for the majority of the Western population, do people living with serious mental illness continue to miss out on a good life? Or even a humane one?
Take the case of a recently arrested man later admitted to a state hospital. In a condition of homelessness and untreated symptoms, he was standing in a fast-food restaurant in an agitated state, yelling at what he perceived to be a manifestation of the devil. The police were called, and when they arrived, they noted that this individual was missing an eye, which he reported to them he’d removed himself as he provided an unintelligible explanation related to a conflict with the devil. The police, understandably, felt the individual was in need of mental health care, and put hands on him to take him into custody, at which point the terrified man took out an imaginary phone to call the “police,” and reported into this delusional device that he was being attacked by an agent of the devil. He proceeded to fight for his life, and in the process lashed out physically leading the officers to charge him with two felonies and book him into custody. He was found incompetent to stand trial (did not have the cognitive capacity to participate in the court process), sent to a hospital for restoration to competency and in the process received mental health services. The devil disappeared after a month on antipsychotic medication, the patient was sent back to court, sentenced to a short term in prison, and then discharged back into homelessness. Treatment soon ceased. He returned to the very conditions that led to his arrest. Only now he had one additional burden; as a convicted felon he was denied the already scant social and mental health services in the community.
The historian Grob stated about the failed state of institutional care, “to attribute bad results to evil people or to condemn an entire society may prove psychologically and intellectually satisfying.”1 It would be easy to blame the failure of institutionalization on immoral superintendents, for instance. Or the failure of deinstitutionalization on disorganized governance. It is not so simple. Why then does “good” policy repeatedly fail those with psychotic illness? Why, despite well-intentioned reforms, policies, and treatments, does care for the seriously mentally unwell have a recurrent tendency towards maltreatment?