Mental Health Courts: Current State of the Science
Mental Health Court
Mental Health Courts: Current State of the Science
Although there is promising evidence on recidivism, the lack of national standards and and differences in eligibility criteria makes cross jurisdictional comparisons difficult.
- New mental health courts are being created rapidly around the country. However, the research on these problem-solving courts is advancing at a much slower pace.
- Honegger (2015) conducted a recent research review yielding 20 articles from peer-reviewed journals. The review cites a few key findings:
- Most studies report favorable recidivism outcomes for mental health court participants, although studies rarely evaluate therapeutic outcomes.
- Most studies on mental health courts continue to suffer from methodological limitations, non-representative samples, lack of experimental design, and short assessment timeframes.
- The lack of national standards for mental health courts and differences in eligibility criteria makes cross jurisdictional comparisons difficult.
References:
Honegger, L.N. (2015). Does the evidence support the case for mental health courts? A review of the literature. Law and Human Behavior, 39, 478-488. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000141