Labeling and Treatment of Mental Illness in Jails - A Theoretical Discussion (From Mental Health Services in Local Jails - Report of a Special National Workshop, P 157-173, 1982, Christopher S Dunn and Henry J Steadman, ed. - See NCJ-85919)

• NCJ Number: 85926
• Author(s): W R Gove
• Date Published: 1982
• Length: 17 pages
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Available on microfiche as NCJ-85919

Annotation

This discussion notes that the deinstitutionalization of chronically ill mental patients from hospitals raises their likelihood of criminal involvement and incarceration in jail and assesses the viability of labeling as a theoretical aid for psychologists faced with diagnosing inmates and establishing their professional function in the jail setting.

Abstract

In view of its characteristics and basic focus, labeling theory is difficult to apply to the diagnosis and treatment of the mentally ill among jail inmates. Labeling theory applies to general societal processes, whereas the jail is a comprehensive institutional setting where social interactions occur within a unique microenviroment. Inmates in jail have already gone through some if not all of the processes of being labeled criminals and thus, according to labeling theorists, have already acquired a deviant master status which will make it difficult for them to function later as normal adults. Thus, the issue of diagnosing and treating (i.e., labeling) certain inmates in jail as mentally ill is not a process that fits well into the paradigm developed by labeling theory. The processes do have a number of things in common, and some of them may prove problematic. Psychologists working in jails can expect to encounter points of tension in their interactions with correctional staff as well as with inmates, notably those feigning mental illness for advantages in the criminal justice process. Research is needed on the effects mental illness diagnosis has upon persons already stigmatized as criminal deviants by the labeling process, into psychologists' diagnostic responses to inmates wishing to be labeled mentally ill, and into the potential for psychotherapeutic interventions with inmates for whom the demeaning crisis of incarceration may provide an impetus for lifestyle change. A footnote and 43 references are provided.