Knowledge of evidence-based practices for PTSD among mental health court judges

Author:

Brown Lily A.1ORCID,AlRabiah Reem1,Terasse Melanie23,Aksianiuk Valeryia3,Sisti Dominic13

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

2. Department of Sociology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA

3. Scattergood Program for Applied Ethics in Behavioral Health Care, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Abstract

Mental health courts offer access to community-based care for defendants with psychiatric disorders, including posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, limited information is available on how judges make treatment decisions about evidence-based practices. In this qualitative study, we interviewed mental health court judges to evaluate: (1) perspectives toward the role of PTSD in criminal behavior; (2) knowledge about evidence-based practice for PTSD; (3) treatment decisions for defendants with PTSD; and (4) treatment decisions for defendants at risk for suicide, a common comorbidity with PTSD. We hypothesized that mental health court judges would report low familiarity with evidence-based practices for PTSD despite wide recognition of the impact of trauma on criminal behavior. Methods: Mental health court judges ( N = 11, 60% women, 60% between 50–59 years) were recruited from 7 states in the US and completed a demographics questionnaire and semi-structured qualitative interview that was transcribed and double-coded. Results: Judges in mental health court unanimously agreed that PTSD is highly prevalent among their defendants, but that they had not having received formal education about evidence-based practices for PTSD. They reported relying on their team members to provide recommendations for treatment planning and viewed their role as the enforcer of the treatment teams’ suggestions. Finally, judges also reported that suicide prevention is an important consideration and that there is a need for universal suicide risk assessments. Conclusions: These findings have implications for continuing education among judges in mental health court, and we recommend mandated training to increase awareness of evidence-based practices for PTSD and suicide prevention.

Funder

Quattrone Foundation

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Law,Health Policy,Issues, ethics and legal aspects

Reference59 articles.

1. “Madness” and penal confinement: Some observations on mental illness and prison pain

2. Prevalence of Serious Mental Illness Among Jail Inmates

3. Major Mental Illness as a Risk Factor for Incarceration

4. Eisen L, Austin J, Cullen J, et al. How many americans are unnecessarily incarcerated? | Brennan Center for Justice [Internet]. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-many-americans-are-unnecessarily-incarcerated (2016, cited 6 August 2021).

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3