|
|
|||||||||||
Annie Bartlett is a senior lecturer and consultant at St George's Hospital Medical School (Section of Forensic Psychiatry, Department of General Psychiatry, St George's Hospital Medical School, Jenner Wing, Cranmer Terrace, London SW17 0RE, UK). Her research interests include the study of institutions and health services research with reference to gender, sexual orientation and ethnicity.
It is entirely possible that most readers will have been ignorant of community rehabilitation orders with or without requirements of psychiatric treatment until reading the article by Clark et al (2002, this issue). It is valuable as an educational article and is applicable to the work of both general adult and forensic psychiatrists.
Clark et al address a central philosophical problem in psychiatry, that is the relationship of treatment and punishment, but in the less usual context of the community. At times, historically, it has been possible for psychiatry to indulge in an element of self-delusion. Psychiatrists, with their basic medical training, have seen themselves as responsible solely for treatment. The criminal justice system takes responsibility for punishment and its concomitants the prevention of recidivism and surveillance. The supposed clarity of this distinction and the reasons for the development of apparently parallel systems of punishment and treatment within Western Europe and North America have been much discussed (Foucault, 1967, 1979; Jones, 1993). It is pertinent that this ideological critique of practices of detention stresses the importance of the State in the creation and maintenance of systems of classification for those who offend in some way against social mores, with madness or delinquency, or both. Contemporary British psychiatrists of whatever persuasion have been forced of late to engage with the political wish for transparent surveillance and risk management of patients and may now be more easily convinced of the link between political will and psychiatric practice than they were 10 years ago (Department of Health, 1998, 1999).
The transformation, outlined by Clark et al, of probation orders with or without treatment into the new-style community rehabilitation orders with or without psychiatric treatment allows for a review of the area where punishment and treatment explicitly, rather than implicitly, meet. They suggest that these amalgam orders have not been much used and are not effective; they recommend how they might be used in the future.
| Psychopathic disorder and its close friends |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Dual diagnosis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Assessment of motivation for intervention is crucial, otherwise the floodgates might be opened to large numbers of unhelpable individuals. There is no equivalent of in-patient assessment orders using Part III of the Mental Health Act 1983, despite the fact that the community orders can last much longer than in-patient treatment orders. Assessment for treatment may fall to the addiction services, whose historical interest has been confined to those who really want to change. This position looks both luxurious and dated given the changing political imperatives mentioned above. But to put significant numbers of dual diagnosis individuals on joint orders may simply be setting them up to fail.
| Role of future research |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Department of Health (1998) Modernising Mental Health Services: Safe, Sound and Supportive. London: Department of Health.
Department of Health (1999) Reform of the Mental Health Act 1983: Proposals for Consultation. London: HMSO.
Fiander, M. & Bartlett, A. E. A. (1997) Missed "psychiatric" cases? Effectiveness of a court diversion scheme. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 32, 715723.
Foucault, M. (1967) Madness and Civilisation. A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason (trans. R. Howard) London: Tavistock.
Foucault, M. (1979) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of a Prison (trans. A. Sheridan). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Home Office (1999) Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice System. London: Home Office.
Jones, K. (1993) Asylums and After. A Revised History of the Mental Health Services: From the Early Eighteenth Century to the 1990s. London: Athlone.
Lewis, G. & Appleby, L.(1988) Personality disorder: the patients psychiatrists dislike. British Journal of Psychiatry, 153, 4449.
Maden, A., Taylor, C. J. A., Brooke D., et al (1995) Mental Disorder in Remand Prisoners. London: Institute of Psychiatry.
Maden, T., Swinton, M. & Gunn, J. (1994) Psychiatric disorder in women serving a prison sentence. British Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 4454.
Norton, K. (1992) Personality disordered individuals: the Henderson Hospital model of treatment. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 2, 180191.
Robertson, G. & Gunn, J. (1987) A ten-year follow-up of men discharged from Grendon prison. British Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 674678.[Abstract]
Singleton, N., Meltzer, H., Gatward, R., et al (1998) Psychiatric Morbidity among Prisoners in England and Wales. The Report of a Survey carried out in 1997 by the Social Services Division of the Office of National Statistics on behalf of the Department of Health. London: HMSO.
Related articles in APT:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| British Journal of Psychiatry | Psychiatric Bulletin | All RCPsych Journals |