@article{ref1,
title="Judicial perspectives on mental health courts: the role of psychiatric disorder and violence risk",
journal="International journal of law and psychiatry",
year="2020",
author="Simonsson, Peter and Farwell, Megan M. and Solomon, Phyllis L.",
volume="70",
number="",
pages="e101562-e101562",
abstract="OBJECTIVE: The extent to which psychiatric diagnosis, treatment compliance, and violence risk influenced judges perceived benefits of Mental Health Court (&quot;MHC&quot;) for defendants with psychiatric disorders was examined.   METHOD: 81 judges completed one vignette in which psychiatric diagnosis (Schizophrenia, Major Depressive Disorder, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder), treatment compliance (yes/no), and violence risk (high/low) were randomized. The online survey was distributed via email and following the vignette, judges answered a question about the appropriateness of MHC.   RESULTS: Judges assessed defendants with severe psychiatric disorders (Schizophrenia and Major Depressive Disorder) - compared to defendants with PTSD - as more likely to benefit from MHCs. If deemed at low treatment compliance and/or high violence risk, judges were unlikely to appraise MHCs as beneficial, regardless of psychiatric diagnosis.   IMPLICATIONS: Judges appear to consider relevant factors when determining whether MHC will benefit defendants with psychiatric disorders; however, future research should include more variables (e.g., addictions, history of violence) to examine the combined influence on judges' perception of MHC suitability.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0160-2527",
doi="10.1016/j.ijlp.2020.101562",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2020.101562"
}