Mental Health Courts
You are a state judge in your respective state. You have been approached by law enforcement, correctional facilities, and attorneys who are very concerned about the crime committed by mentally ill offenders. You invited all of them to a conference to discuss mental health courts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uSGrGt815M&t=1s Based on your weekly readings and the above video, answer and discuss the following questions: ● Why do you believe it is necessary for mental health courts to utilize a team problem-solving strategy in lieu of a traditional court process? ● Provide your analysis of the concerns inherent in the supervision and treatment of mentally ill offenders. ● In your opinion, how can mental health courts promptly and efficiently evaluate the public safety risks posed by mentally ill offenders? ● What is your argument against the perception that mental health courses stigmatize mentally ill defendants?
Mental Health Courts
Name
Institution
Course
Instructor
Date
Mental Health Courts
The obligation of mental health courts
Mental health courts (MHC) are collaborative inventiveness intended to bridge agencies and systems. The traditional court procedures uphold justice and punish lawbreakers without considering underlying problems such as mental illness (Brooker et al., 2020). MHCs cannot function like conventional courts because; MHCs' judicature identifies if an offender has a mental illness and if the wrongdoing relates to the individual’s state of mind. Moreover, judges and lawyers require several referral foundations and measures for identifying, screening, and referring criminals (Collins, 2020). As a result, the court acknowledges whether the wrongdoer’s presence in court risks the lives of other participants.
Partakers in MHCs associate with a wide selection of appropriate, tailored, and adequate treatment. Therefore, courts must collaborate with the service providers to guarantee the offender receives effective service throughout their participation(Wallace & Wang, 2020). Moreover, court staffs and community amenity workers continually change treatment strategies because the needs of the participants transform with time. The work involved in a mental health court requires the participation of many people, unlike traditional courts. Generally, MHCs can achieve their goal through a team problem-solving strategy where society-based amenity providers, lawyers, and court workers regularly share information about the offenders.
Concerns in the treatment and supervision of mentally ill offenders
Mental health courts strive to help mentally ill offenders get well and the community secure. However, mental illnesses differ, and there is a concern about whether mental health courts identify mental disorders that are less vulnerable (Collins, 2020). Moreover, there is a worry about how the MHCs handle individuals who are immune to treatment and with a co-occurring mental illness. Another concern is whether there are mental ailments that treatment does not affect re-offense. A single astonishing tale about a participant executing a crime may have the effect of plummeting the whole mental health court program. As a result, mental health courts need to balance community safety and figure out conducts to make use of prevailing problem-solving courts while framing novel rejoinders to issues exceptional to mental health discipline.
Many experts in mental health court wonder if it is proper to use confinement as consent for an offender who fails to participate in treatment or take medications. In a drug court, there is a clear connection between violation and imprisonment, so it makes sense to send a criminal to jail for having dirty urine. However, when a mentally ill offender refuses to take medications, he only violates the laws of the court but not national regulations. According to Wallace & Wang (2020), mental health cou...