Mental Health and Criminal Charges: Variation in Diversion Pathways in Australia. Issue 6 (2nd November 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Davidson, Fiona; Heffernan, Edward; Greenberg, David; Waterworth, Rhondda; Burgess, Philip
• Is Part Of: Psychiatry, psychology, and law. Volume 24:Issue 6(2017)
• Page Start: 888
• Page End: 898
• Publication Date: 2017-11-02
• Subjects: court diversion -- court liaison -- fitness to plead -- mental health defence -- mental health legislation -- problem-solving court; Criminal psychology -- Periodicals; Forensic psychiatry -- Periodicals; Mentally ill offenders -- Periodicals; 345.9404
• DOI: 10.1080/13218719.2017.1327305
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1321-8719

Abstract

Abstract : Mental health and criminal justice legislation must provide the appropriate mechanisms for ensuring the assessment and care of mentally ill individuals. It must also balance the right to justice of these individuals with the rights of the community. In Australia, each jurisdiction has its own legislative provisions related to mental health, criminal legislation and sentencing, with variation in the mental health diversion options that are available. This article uses a national survey of court liaison services and mental health courts in Australia and a review of the relevant legislative frameworks to compare jurisdictional approaches to mental health diversion. Despite calls from the National Mental Health Commission for consistency, the Australian approach to the provision of mental health services to people in the criminal justice system is heterogeneous and piecemeal. Variation in the diversion pathways available to individuals with mental illness exists across Australia. The presence of problem-solving courts in some, but not all, jurisdictions results in differences in access to legal and treatment options.