Differences between homeless and non-homeless people in a matched sample referred for mental health reasons in police custody

Introduction: Homelessness has risen across high-income countries in the last decade, and in the United Kingdom, there has been a drastic increase in people living on the streets. Due to these increases, policy responses from public services are required to address the needs of this group. The risk factors for homelessness and conditions that this group live in mean they are at elevated risk of both mental health problems and contact with the criminal justice system. Despite this, there is little previous research on the homeless in police custody. Methods: Our study used a matched sample of homeless (n = 77) and non-homeless (n = 77) individuals to examine whether there were different needs across this group and whether the responses of a criminal justice mental health service differ for this group. This study is a secondary data analysis of a more extensive study. Results: Homeless and non-homeless detainees referred to the mental health service were broadly similar. However, differences in some variables show that homeless detainees had higher rates and frequency of substance misuse as well as some suggestion of more acute immediate need. Onward referrals were lower for homeless people, and it is not clear why this is the case. In addition, for those referred contact with services over time was reduced compared to the non-homeless group. Discussion: Our findings indicate that mental health services in police custody may need adaptations to ensure homeless individuals’ higher level of need is addressed and that they receive appropriate care both during and after detention. Further quantitative and qualitative research is needed to confirm why responses differ and to assess what can be done to address this issue

The early identification of people with personality disorder in the criminal justice system

The prevalence of personality disorder is very high among criminal justice (correctional) populations, yet our understanding of this condition as it arises in police custody is presently limited. Although healthcare screening has a well-described role within criminal justice settings, including police custody, specific screening for personality disorders has hardly been considered. Yet such screening is broadly in keeping with the aims of liaison and diversion services and the general healthcare principle of early identification, has the potential to inform future care pathways and ameliorate risk and could in some cases inform future sentencing arrangements including community alternatives. Therefore, there is a need for research to consider the design and implementation of a suitable screening tool for application as early as possible in the criminal justice pathway, either as a stand-alone instrument, or as part of a wider package of healthcare screens. It will be important to consider the feasibility of any such design, given environmental and time limitations within police custody and the high levels of substance misuse, with issues relating to intoxication and withdrawal

Mental Health Act transfers from prison to psychiatric hospital over a six-year period in a region of England

Purpose There are high levels of psychiatric morbidity amongst people in prisons. In England and Wales, prisoners who present with the most acute mental health needs can be transferred to hospital urgently under part III of the Mental Health Act 1983. This project reviewed all such transfers within one region of England, with an emphasis on differences across levels of security. Design/methodology/approach Over a six-year period (2010–2016) within one region of England, 930 psychiatric referrals were received from seven male prisons. From these referrals, 173 (18.5%) secure hospital transfers were required. Diagnostic and basic demographic information were analysed, along with hospital security categorisation (high secure, medium secure, low secure, psychiatric intensive care unit and other) and total time to transfer in days. Findings There were substantial delays to urgent hospital transfer across all levels of hospital security. Prisoners were transferred to the following units: medium security (n = 98, 56.9%); psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs) (n = 34, 19.7%); low secure conditions (n = 20, 11.6%); high secure conditions (n = 12, 6.9%); other (n = 9, 5.2%). Mean transfer times were as follows: high secure = 159.6 days; other = 68.8 days; medium secure = 58.6 days; low secure = 54.8 days; and psychiatric intensive care = 16.1 days. Research limitations/implications In keeping with the wider literature in this area, transfers of prisoners to hospital were very delayed across all levels of secure psychiatric hospital care. Mean transfer times were in breach of the national 14-day timescale, although transfers to PICUs were quicker than to other units. National work, including research and service pilots, is required to understand whether and how these transfer times might be improved. Originality/value This paper extends the available literature on the topic of transferring prisoners with mental illness who require compulsory treatment. There is a small but developing literature in this area, and this paper largely confirms that delays to hospital transfer remain a serious problem in England and Wales. National work, including research and service pilots, is required to understand whether and how these transfer times might be improved. This could include different referral and transfer models as a component of service-based and pathways research or combining referral pathways across units to improve their efficacy