Reflecting on Therapeutic Jurisprudence in the Criminalization of Mental Illness and Addiction

Problem-solving courts were created as a means of therapeutic jurisprudence. They arose in the context of the post-deinstitutionalization influx of defendants with behavioral and social problems entering the criminal court system. Seeing that typical judicial practices were poor solutions for individuals primarily facing problems such as homelessness, substance use disorders, and mental illness, courts developed specialized dockets as a solution to the problem of not being able to restrict the flow of these individuals into courtrooms. Although highly regarde, mental health courts (MHCs) and drug courts (DCs) can harm people with mental illness and addiction and contribute to the oppression of disenfranchised populations, including racial and ethnic minorities. By tying access to needed treatment to criminal justice system involvement, MHCs and DCs can increase criminalization of mental illness, subject individuals to long-term collateral consequences, and interfere with social policy reforms that would dismantle the prison-industrial complex (PIC). As forensic mental health professionals, we must reflect on our practices and consider the impact that our professional decisions have on the patients that we serve, and on society as a whole, and advocate for criminal justice and healthcare system reforms that truly free individuals in need of mental health or substance use treatment from the grasp of the PIC.