Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230070-23
Krista Ulisse, Aliana M. Abascal
{"title":"Defining the Term Mental Disorder in Nebraska’s Statute","authors":"Krista Ulisse, Aliana M. Abascal","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230070-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230070-23","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"457 - 458"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48943139","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01Epub Date: 2023-06-30DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230024-23
Haseeb Haroon, Nicole Wolfe, Sara Feizi, Peter Barboriak
Over the past two decades, an increasing proportion of North Carolina state psychiatric hospital beds have been used to house forensic patients. Insanity acquittees occupy almost all forensic-designated beds in the state. Despite the effect insanity acquittees have on state hospital use in North Carolina, outcomes for acquittees after they are released from the state hospital are unknown because of a lack of previous research. This study evaluates postrelease outcomes for insanity acquittees discharged from the North Carolina Forensic Treatment Program between 1996 and 2020. The study also describes the association between the demographic, psychiatric, and criminological characteristics of insanity acquittees and outcomes of recidivism or rehospitalization. The results show that insanity acquittees in North Carolina have higher rates of criminal recidivism than acquittees in other states. There is also evidence of systemic bias against minority race acquittees in the insanity commitment and release process in North Carolina. Outcomes for insanity acquittees released from the state Forensic Treatment Program could be improved through the introduction of evidence-based practices widely used in other states.
{"title":"Assessing Two Decades of Insanity Acquittee Release from the North Carolina Forensic Program.","authors":"Haseeb Haroon, Nicole Wolfe, Sara Feizi, Peter Barboriak","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230024-23","DOIUrl":"10.29158/JAAPL.230024-23","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Over the past two decades, an increasing proportion of North Carolina state psychiatric hospital beds have been used to house forensic patients. Insanity acquittees occupy almost all forensic-designated beds in the state. Despite the effect insanity acquittees have on state hospital use in North Carolina, outcomes for acquittees after they are released from the state hospital are unknown because of a lack of previous research. This study evaluates postrelease outcomes for insanity acquittees discharged from the North Carolina Forensic Treatment Program between 1996 and 2020. The study also describes the association between the demographic, psychiatric, and criminological characteristics of insanity acquittees and outcomes of recidivism or rehospitalization. The results show that insanity acquittees in North Carolina have higher rates of criminal recidivism than acquittees in other states. There is also evidence of systemic bias against minority race acquittees in the insanity commitment and release process in North Carolina. Outcomes for insanity acquittees released from the state Forensic Treatment Program could be improved through the introduction of evidence-based practices widely used in other states.</p>","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 3","pages":"342-352"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10191906","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230063-23
Erik Roskes
{"title":"","authors":"Erik Roskes","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230063-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230063-23","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 3","pages":"464"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10211100","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230054-23
Kenneth J Weiss
Let’s say I was asked to assist the defense in the criminal trial. How would I approach it? You’ve got to be kidding, I thought. But everyone is entitled to a defense, so keep an open mind. “Junior” said he didn’t intend for his father to die. He wasn’t himself. There was no mental illness before this (unless you count daddy problems and a soupçon of entitlement), no intoxication, and no mental status changes now. It was a one-off faux pas. There was the narcissistic injury of disinheritance followed by feeling indignant rage, grabbing a dagger, and stabbing the old man. He said he didn’t know what he was doing until the stabbing. Hmm. . . Was he cognitively (M’Naughten) insane, losing a sense of wrongfulness in the moment? No, calling anger a mental disease wouldn’t fly. But he said two other things: he was maddened, and he saw red. Maybe he’s saying he couldn’t help himself. Is that a thing, psychiatrically or legally? As it turns out, loss of self-control is on the books in many jurisdictions, a form of short-lived volitional insanity. It’s in the Model Penal Code (MPC) standard; two bites of the apple (cognitive or volitional). Still, was it a mental disease? Or maybe he can say he was provoked by extreme and unexpected cruelty, not insanity but mitigation. No, a dagger in the heart was not a reasonable response. Maybe there’s another option: extreme emotional distress (EED), a kind of mitigation without a standard provocation. I can’t get “mad” and “seeing red” out of my head, I ruminated as I pondered how to respond to the request for service. Can anger excuse or mitigate homicide? Or is it a square peg searching for a round (loop)hole? Three options swirled in my consciousness: insanity, the heat of passion, and EED. What, if anything, could I say that would not readily be apparent to jurors? I continued to reflect on madness, anger, mental disease, reasonableness, excuses, and mitigating factors. The reverie took me to ancient Rome, British and American law, fiction, tabloid journalism, and feminist legal analysis. Dr. Weiss is Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Address correspondence to: Kenneth J. Weiss, MD. E-mail: kenweiss@upenn.edu.
{"title":"Red Mist and the Irresistible Defense of \"Losing It\".","authors":"Kenneth J Weiss","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230054-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230054-23","url":null,"abstract":"Let’s say I was asked to assist the defense in the criminal trial. How would I approach it? You’ve got to be kidding, I thought. But everyone is entitled to a defense, so keep an open mind. “Junior” said he didn’t intend for his father to die. He wasn’t himself. There was no mental illness before this (unless you count daddy problems and a soupçon of entitlement), no intoxication, and no mental status changes now. It was a one-off faux pas. There was the narcissistic injury of disinheritance followed by feeling indignant rage, grabbing a dagger, and stabbing the old man. He said he didn’t know what he was doing until the stabbing. Hmm. . . Was he cognitively (M’Naughten) insane, losing a sense of wrongfulness in the moment? No, calling anger a mental disease wouldn’t fly. But he said two other things: he was maddened, and he saw red. Maybe he’s saying he couldn’t help himself. Is that a thing, psychiatrically or legally? As it turns out, loss of self-control is on the books in many jurisdictions, a form of short-lived volitional insanity. It’s in the Model Penal Code (MPC) standard; two bites of the apple (cognitive or volitional). Still, was it a mental disease? Or maybe he can say he was provoked by extreme and unexpected cruelty, not insanity but mitigation. No, a dagger in the heart was not a reasonable response. Maybe there’s another option: extreme emotional distress (EED), a kind of mitigation without a standard provocation. I can’t get “mad” and “seeing red” out of my head, I ruminated as I pondered how to respond to the request for service. Can anger excuse or mitigate homicide? Or is it a square peg searching for a round (loop)hole? Three options swirled in my consciousness: insanity, the heat of passion, and EED. What, if anything, could I say that would not readily be apparent to jurors? I continued to reflect on madness, anger, mental disease, reasonableness, excuses, and mitigating factors. The reverie took me to ancient Rome, British and American law, fiction, tabloid journalism, and feminist legal analysis. Dr. Weiss is Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Address correspondence to: Kenneth J. Weiss, MD. E-mail: kenweiss@upenn.edu.","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 3","pages":"431-435"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10153683","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230067-23
MD Shelby Montgomery Buckley, MD Myrline Rose Belzince, MD D. Clay Kelly
In Boivin v. Somatex, Inc., 279 A.3d 393 (Me. 2022), the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine ruled that the plaintiff’s employer was entitled to summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case that her claim for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) satisfied the state’s physical injury requirement for negligence. The lower court also found that the plaintiff could not recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) because she was not a direct victim of the company’s negligence.
{"title":"Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Negligence Claims","authors":"MD Shelby Montgomery Buckley, MD Myrline Rose Belzince, MD D. Clay Kelly","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230067-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230067-23","url":null,"abstract":"In Boivin v. Somatex, Inc., 279 A.3d 393 (Me. 2022), the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine ruled that the plaintiff’s employer was entitled to summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case that her claim for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) satisfied the state’s physical injury requirement for negligence. The lower court also found that the plaintiff could not recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) because she was not a direct victim of the company’s negligence.","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"447 - 448"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42489124","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230067L2-23
Cecilia Webb, D. C. Kelly
was a compensable occupational disease when it arose in the course of employment, and that the employee had the burden to prove the elements of a workers’ compensation claim, including that the employee had an occupational disease. The court noted that the PTSD presumption was invoked when one is employed in one of the enumerated occupations, has been diagnosed with PTSD by a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist, and does not have a previous diagnosis of PTSD. The county had also argued that other presumptions in Minn. Stat. § 176.011 (15) required employees to prove that they experienced a designated disease before the presumption would apply. But the supreme court noted that this section of the statute only mentioned medical diseases and did not use the word “diagnosis.” The court said that different meanings are presumed when the legislature uses different words, here “diagnosis” versus “disease.” Accordingly, the court ruled that the employee only needed to present a diagnosis for the presumption to apply, and that the statute did not require “such a diagnosis to be more credible or persuasive than” a competing diagnosis offered by the employer (Juntunen, p 740). The court upheld the WCCA’s finding that the factors to satisfy the presumption were met. The court also addressed the WCCA’s finding that to rebut the presumption, the employer must present significant proof to the contrary. The employer argued that Dr. Arbisi’s report was adequate to rebut the presumption, but the WCCA had held that because Dr. Arbisi’s report did not specifically address whether the employee had a diagnosis of PTSD in September 2019, it failed to rebut the presumption. The supreme court agreed with this analysis and noted that Dr. Arbisi did not evaluate Mr. Juntunen until 10 months after Mr. Juntunen notified the county of the diagnosis. The court upheld the WCCA’s opinion, and the case was remanded to the compensation judge for benefit determination.
{"title":"Prolonged Solitary Confinement","authors":"Cecilia Webb, D. C. Kelly","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230067L2-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230067L2-23","url":null,"abstract":"was a compensable occupational disease when it arose in the course of employment, and that the employee had the burden to prove the elements of a workers’ compensation claim, including that the employee had an occupational disease. The court noted that the PTSD presumption was invoked when one is employed in one of the enumerated occupations, has been diagnosed with PTSD by a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist, and does not have a previous diagnosis of PTSD. The county had also argued that other presumptions in Minn. Stat. § 176.011 (15) required employees to prove that they experienced a designated disease before the presumption would apply. But the supreme court noted that this section of the statute only mentioned medical diseases and did not use the word “diagnosis.” The court said that different meanings are presumed when the legislature uses different words, here “diagnosis” versus “disease.” Accordingly, the court ruled that the employee only needed to present a diagnosis for the presumption to apply, and that the statute did not require “such a diagnosis to be more credible or persuasive than” a competing diagnosis offered by the employer (Juntunen, p 740). The court upheld the WCCA’s finding that the factors to satisfy the presumption were met. The court also addressed the WCCA’s finding that to rebut the presumption, the employer must present significant proof to the contrary. The employer argued that Dr. Arbisi’s report was adequate to rebut the presumption, but the WCCA had held that because Dr. Arbisi’s report did not specifically address whether the employee had a diagnosis of PTSD in September 2019, it failed to rebut the presumption. The supreme court agreed with this analysis and noted that Dr. Arbisi did not evaluate Mr. Juntunen until 10 months after Mr. Juntunen notified the county of the diagnosis. The court upheld the WCCA’s opinion, and the case was remanded to the compensation judge for benefit determination.","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"450 - 452"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45529112","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230065L1-23
Karina R. Espana, Karl E. Mobbs
forensic evaluators to be aware of how such factors may influence the court. A final interesting question raised by this case is who will fund the in-depth mental health evaluations considered essential in death penalty cases. The original $2,000 allotted to Mr. Jones’s trial attorney would presumably have only covered a small fraction of a forensic psychiatrist’s 130hours of billing time. It would seem unfair if the ability of a capital defendant to receive a just sentence were predicated in part on having sufficient money to hire forensic evaluators to do extensive work, but this scenario is a possible implication of the ruling in this case.
{"title":"Qualified Immunity of Public Officials","authors":"Karina R. Espana, Karl E. Mobbs","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230065L1-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230065L1-23","url":null,"abstract":"forensic evaluators to be aware of how such factors may influence the court. A final interesting question raised by this case is who will fund the in-depth mental health evaluations considered essential in death penalty cases. The original $2,000 allotted to Mr. Jones’s trial attorney would presumably have only covered a small fraction of a forensic psychiatrist’s 130hours of billing time. It would seem unfair if the ability of a capital defendant to receive a just sentence were predicated in part on having sufficient money to hire forensic evaluators to do extensive work, but this scenario is a possible implication of the ruling in this case.","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"438 - 440"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42683618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230071-23
Sherif Soliman, Steve Buie
We’ve all taken an inquisitive pause when we encountered someone with the same name as us, but for Drs. Benjamin and Vince Gilmer (no relation), what would ordinarily be a coincidence was the start of a life-changing journey. The Other Dr. Gilmer tells the story of Dr. Benjamin Gilmer’s fight for justice for his namesake, Dr. Vince Gilmer. Dr. Benjamin Gilmer was a family physician fresh out of residency when he began work at Cane Creek, a rural primary care clinic, in the mountains of western North Carolina. He was aware that the founder of the clinic, Dr. Vincent Gilmer, was serving a life sentence for the June 28, 2004 murder of his elderly father, Dalton Gilmer. At first, Dr. Benjamin Gilmer thought he would quickly explain the coincidence to his patients and move on. Gradually, Benjamin Gilmer started hearing stories from his patients and staff about Vince Gilmer. The stories painted a picture of a gentle, kind man, who often refused payment for his services and sponsored the local kids’ baseball team even though he had no children of his own. Despite this perspective, in the book Dr. Benjamin Gilmer does not shy away from the details of the murder. He recounts almost moment for moment how Vince Gilmer strangled his father, dumped his body, and cut off his fingers to prevent the body from being identified. He reflects on the contradiction between the crime and the gentle, caring family physician described by patients and colleagues. The book discusses Dr. Vince Gilmer’s report of severe physical and sexual abuse, recent head injury, and recent SSRI discontinuation. Proceeding pro se, Dr. Vince Gilmer discussed his history of physical and sexual abuse at the hands of his father and alleged that his father reminded him of the abuse and attempted to assault him sexually on the night of the killing. At first, Benjamin Gilmer was afraid of Vince Gilmer, but he was driven to learn more about the case. Working with NPR reporter Sarah Koenig, on an episode of This American Life, Benjamin Gilmer began to investigate the case and met Dr. Vince Gilmer. Dr. Vince Gilmer exhibited gait abnormalities, a movement disorder, word-finding difficulty, and hallucinations, among other symptoms. He then visited Dr. Vince Gilmer again with Dr. Steve Buie, a psychiatrist and the residency training director at the Mountain Area Health Education Center’s psychiatry residency program. Dr. Buie suggested the possibility that Dr. Vince Gilmer could be experiencing Huntington’s Disease, a diagnosis subsequently confirmed by genetic testing. Yet when the medical mystery was solved, the fight for justice was only beginning as Dr. Benjamin Gilmer realized that a man was in prison with a degenerative neuropsychiatric condition. The first thing to know as a reader about this book’s organization and pacing is that it moves. It’s as compelling as any mystery novel I’ve read. The book begins with Dr. Benjamin Gilmer’s story of starting to practice at Cane Creek and gradually int
{"title":"The Other Dr. Gilmer: Two Men, a Murder, and an Unlikely Fight for Justice","authors":"Sherif Soliman, Steve Buie","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230071-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230071-23","url":null,"abstract":"We’ve all taken an inquisitive pause when we encountered someone with the same name as us, but for Drs. Benjamin and Vince Gilmer (no relation), what would ordinarily be a coincidence was the start of a life-changing journey. The Other Dr. Gilmer tells the story of Dr. Benjamin Gilmer’s fight for justice for his namesake, Dr. Vince Gilmer. Dr. Benjamin Gilmer was a family physician fresh out of residency when he began work at Cane Creek, a rural primary care clinic, in the mountains of western North Carolina. He was aware that the founder of the clinic, Dr. Vincent Gilmer, was serving a life sentence for the June 28, 2004 murder of his elderly father, Dalton Gilmer. At first, Dr. Benjamin Gilmer thought he would quickly explain the coincidence to his patients and move on. Gradually, Benjamin Gilmer started hearing stories from his patients and staff about Vince Gilmer. The stories painted a picture of a gentle, kind man, who often refused payment for his services and sponsored the local kids’ baseball team even though he had no children of his own. Despite this perspective, in the book Dr. Benjamin Gilmer does not shy away from the details of the murder. He recounts almost moment for moment how Vince Gilmer strangled his father, dumped his body, and cut off his fingers to prevent the body from being identified. He reflects on the contradiction between the crime and the gentle, caring family physician described by patients and colleagues. The book discusses Dr. Vince Gilmer’s report of severe physical and sexual abuse, recent head injury, and recent SSRI discontinuation. Proceeding pro se, Dr. Vince Gilmer discussed his history of physical and sexual abuse at the hands of his father and alleged that his father reminded him of the abuse and attempted to assault him sexually on the night of the killing. At first, Benjamin Gilmer was afraid of Vince Gilmer, but he was driven to learn more about the case. Working with NPR reporter Sarah Koenig, on an episode of This American Life, Benjamin Gilmer began to investigate the case and met Dr. Vince Gilmer. Dr. Vince Gilmer exhibited gait abnormalities, a movement disorder, word-finding difficulty, and hallucinations, among other symptoms. He then visited Dr. Vince Gilmer again with Dr. Steve Buie, a psychiatrist and the residency training director at the Mountain Area Health Education Center’s psychiatry residency program. Dr. Buie suggested the possibility that Dr. Vince Gilmer could be experiencing Huntington’s Disease, a diagnosis subsequently confirmed by genetic testing. Yet when the medical mystery was solved, the fight for justice was only beginning as Dr. Benjamin Gilmer realized that a man was in prison with a degenerative neuropsychiatric condition. The first thing to know as a reader about this book’s organization and pacing is that it moves. It’s as compelling as any mystery novel I’ve read. The book begins with Dr. Benjamin Gilmer’s story of starting to practice at Cane Creek and gradually int","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"459 - 460"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44666808","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01Epub Date: 2023-08-07DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230056-23
Thomas E Hansen, Amela Blekic, Joseph D Bloom
COVID-19 strongly affected referral of individuals from Oregon's courts and the ability of Oregon State Hospital (OSH) to accept patients. Despite acceleration in the decline in civil commitment, competency to stand trial (CST) admissions increased, causing a bed crisis at OSH, which in turn affected community hospitals and jails. In 1993, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals mandated admission of jail detainees to OSH within seven days after a judicial order for CST evaluation or restoration. During COVID, as the number of such patients increased to crisis proportions, average jail detention times exceeded seven days. An inevitable judicial process intensified in the U.S. District Court of Oregon after OSH requested a COVID-related modification of the seven-day limit. This commentary demonstrates more clearly than in the past that there is a negative correlation between civil commitment and competency restoration as components of an interrelated system. After updating the situation in Oregon, this article ends with suggested interventions to improve Oregon's civil and criminal commitment processes, hoping for better care of patients and improved administration of justice.
{"title":"COVID-19, <i>Mink-Bowman</i>, and Court-Ordered Psychiatric Services in Oregon.","authors":"Thomas E Hansen, Amela Blekic, Joseph D Bloom","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230056-23","DOIUrl":"10.29158/JAAPL.230056-23","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>COVID-19 strongly affected referral of individuals from Oregon's courts and the ability of Oregon State Hospital (OSH) to accept patients. Despite acceleration in the decline in civil commitment, competency to stand trial (CST) admissions increased, causing a bed crisis at OSH, which in turn affected community hospitals and jails. In 1993, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals mandated admission of jail detainees to OSH within seven days after a judicial order for CST evaluation or restoration. During COVID, as the number of such patients increased to crisis proportions, average jail detention times exceeded seven days. An inevitable judicial process intensified in the U.S. District Court of Oregon after OSH requested a COVID-related modification of the seven-day limit. This commentary demonstrates more clearly than in the past that there is a negative correlation between civil commitment and competency restoration as components of an interrelated system. After updating the situation in Oregon, this article ends with suggested interventions to improve Oregon's civil and criminal commitment processes, hoping for better care of patients and improved administration of justice.</p>","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 3","pages":"411-420"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10152596","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230061-23
Merrill Rotter, Zoe Feingold
Ashekun and colleagues' study of the association between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and arrests in persons with serious mental illness (SMI) provides more evidence for the importance of addressing the broader needs (beyond narrowly defined symptoms of mental illness) of clients with SMI and criminal legal contact. Furthermore, the article supports the need to appreciate fully the intersection of behavioral health and criminal justice and the intersectionality of mental health and race (i.e., the additive adversities experienced by individuals with SMI who also face race-based inequities). In this commentary, we apply this public health framing of criminal legal involvement among individuals with SMI, expanding on the social adversities, including ACEs, that contribute to adverse health and legal outcomes. We support the relevance of prevention approaches and note areas for further inquiry. In so doing, we aim to reinforce a role for forensic practitioners in addressing these challenges.
{"title":"ACEs and the Possibility of Preventing the Past.","authors":"Merrill Rotter, Zoe Feingold","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230061-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230061-23","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ashekun and colleagues' study of the association between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and arrests in persons with serious mental illness (SMI) provides more evidence for the importance of addressing the broader needs (beyond narrowly defined symptoms of mental illness) of clients with SMI and criminal legal contact. Furthermore, the article supports the need to appreciate fully the intersection of behavioral health and criminal justice and the intersectionality of mental health and race (i.e., the additive adversities experienced by individuals with SMI who also face race-based inequities). In this commentary, we apply this public health framing of criminal legal involvement among individuals with SMI, expanding on the social adversities, including ACEs, that contribute to adverse health and legal outcomes. We support the relevance of prevention approaches and note areas for further inquiry. In so doing, we aim to reinforce a role for forensic practitioners in addressing these challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 3","pages":"337-341"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10205582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号