Abstract
Mental health courts are relatively new to the scenes of therapeutic jurisprudence and problem-solving courts. Research is necessary to determine how to evaluate this unique subset of courts and their clients. This research uses a mixed methodology to develop grounded theories explaining the differences found in more successful courts whose jurisdiction saw a statistically significant decrease in crime rate after the mental health court was established and less successful courts that did not. Eleven Oklahoma-based mental health courts were researched. More successful courts prioritized intensive monitoring methods, multiple specially tailored treatment options, and additional program supports. More successful courts also used a diverse court team, emphasized proper program assessment, visibly divided compliant and noncompliant participants in court, and gave “tangible symbolic incentives.” The found successful theories were compared with the published Essential Elements of a Mental Health Court and Cesare Beccaria’s Essay on Crimes and Punishment for possible future validation efforts.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 227-246 |
| Number of pages | 20 |
| Journal | Criminal Justice Policy Review |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1 Apr 2016 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- drug courts
- mental health courts
- problem-solving courts
- specialty courts
- tangible symbolic incentives
- therapeutic jurisprudence
Cite this
}
Evaluating Mental Health Court by Impact on Jurisdictional Crime Rates. / Bullard, Chelsea Elizabeth; Thrasher, Ronald.
In: Criminal Justice Policy Review, Vol. 27, No. 3, 01.04.2016, p. 227-246.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating Mental Health Court by Impact on Jurisdictional Crime Rates
AU - Bullard, Chelsea Elizabeth
AU - Thrasher, Ronald
PY - 2016/4/1
Y1 - 2016/4/1
N2 - Mental health courts are relatively new to the scenes of therapeutic jurisprudence and problem-solving courts. Research is necessary to determine how to evaluate this unique subset of courts and their clients. This research uses a mixed methodology to develop grounded theories explaining the differences found in more successful courts whose jurisdiction saw a statistically significant decrease in crime rate after the mental health court was established and less successful courts that did not. Eleven Oklahoma-based mental health courts were researched. More successful courts prioritized intensive monitoring methods, multiple specially tailored treatment options, and additional program supports. More successful courts also used a diverse court team, emphasized proper program assessment, visibly divided compliant and noncompliant participants in court, and gave “tangible symbolic incentives.” The found successful theories were compared with the published Essential Elements of a Mental Health Court and Cesare Beccaria’s Essay on Crimes and Punishment for possible future validation efforts.
AB - Mental health courts are relatively new to the scenes of therapeutic jurisprudence and problem-solving courts. Research is necessary to determine how to evaluate this unique subset of courts and their clients. This research uses a mixed methodology to develop grounded theories explaining the differences found in more successful courts whose jurisdiction saw a statistically significant decrease in crime rate after the mental health court was established and less successful courts that did not. Eleven Oklahoma-based mental health courts were researched. More successful courts prioritized intensive monitoring methods, multiple specially tailored treatment options, and additional program supports. More successful courts also used a diverse court team, emphasized proper program assessment, visibly divided compliant and noncompliant participants in court, and gave “tangible symbolic incentives.” The found successful theories were compared with the published Essential Elements of a Mental Health Court and Cesare Beccaria’s Essay on Crimes and Punishment for possible future validation efforts.
KW - drug courts
KW - mental health courts
KW - problem-solving courts
KW - specialty courts
KW - tangible symbolic incentives
KW - therapeutic jurisprudence
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84960431857&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0887403414562420
DO - 10.1177/0887403414562420
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84960431857
VL - 27
SP - 227
EP - 246
JO - Criminal Justice Policy Review
JF - Criminal Justice Policy Review
SN - 0887-4034
IS - 3
ER -