Brittany J. Hood

Bio: Brittany J. Hood is an academic researcher from Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis. The author has contributed to research in topics: Recidivism & Mental health court. The author has an hindex of 2, co-authored 2 publications receiving 11 citations.

What Happens to Mental Health Court Noncompleters

Abstract: Mental health court (MHC) research consistently finds that defendants who successfully complete and graduate from the court are less likely to recidivate than those who do not. However, research has not assessed what happens to these noncompleters once they are sent back to traditional court. Using follow-up data on six years of noncompleters from pre-adjudication MHC, we examine what happens to these defendants in traditional court. Findings suggest that 63.7% of defendants' charges were dismissed, 21.0% received probation, and 15.3% were sentenced to incarceration. We examine the time to disposition and differences in defendant characteristics and disposition outcome as well as the relationship between disposition and subsequent recidivism. Results suggest that more severe punishments in traditional court are associated with recidivism. Logistic regression analysis shows that defendants whose charges were dismissed in traditional court were less likely to recidivate than those who were sentenced to probation or incarceration. Our findings highlight the need for future MHC evaluations to consider traditional court outcomes and support trends towards post-adjudication courts. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

What Happens to Mental Health Court Noncompleters

Abstract: Mental health court (MHC) research consistently finds that defendants who successfully complete and graduate from the court are less likely to recidivate than those who do not. However, research has not assessed what happens to these noncompleters once they are sent back to traditional court. Using follow-up data on six years of noncompleters from pre-adjudication MHC, we examine what happens to these defendants in traditional court. Findings suggest that 63.7% of defendants' charges were dismissed, 21.0% received probation, and 15.3% were sentenced to incarceration. We examine the time to disposition and differences in defendant characteristics and disposition outcome as well as the relationship between disposition and subsequent recidivism. Results suggest that more severe punishments in traditional court are associated with recidivism. Logistic regression analysis shows that defendants whose charges were dismissed in traditional court were less likely to recidivate than those who were sentenced to probation or incarceration. Our findings highlight the need for future MHC evaluations to consider traditional court outcomes and support trends towards post-adjudication courts. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Examining Mental Health Court Completion: A Focal Concerns Perspective

Abstract: Sociologists have long-raised concern about disparate treatment in the justice system. Focal concerns have become the dominant perspective in explaining these disparities in legal processing decisions. Despite the growth of problem-solving courts, little research has examined how this perspective operates in nontraditional court settings. This article used a mixed-method approach to examine focal concerns in a mental health court (MHC). Observational findings indicate that gender and length of time in court influence the court's contextualization of noncompliance. While discussions of race were absent in observational data, competing-risk survival analysis finds that gender and race interact to predict MHC termination.

Bridging mental health and criminal justice systems: a systematic review of the impact of mental health courts on individuals and communities

Abstract: Existing reviews of mental health courts summarize the effectiveness of these programs without consideration of the component parts of the mental health court and who the court serves. This systematic review addresses this gap by using specific criteria for what constitutes a mental health court and presents results based on the charge type for the target population. Only experimental or quasi-experimental research designs are included in this review. Studies included involved mental health courts containing essential elements and included measures of recidivism or other mental health and quality of life-related outcomes. Twenty-nine articles were reviewed. Research on mental health courts primarily originated in the Unites States, covering 14 states. Findings are synthesized by whether the courts served people with felony, misdemeanor, or combination charges. These findings inform the need for national or international standards or clear guidelines for what components or elements define a mental health court. State-level policy is also needed to encourage the systematic collection of data on mental health courts to inform who mental health courts work for in specific communities. These data can also be used to inform local mental health court policy decisions.

Beyond the “Revolving Door?”: Incentives and Criminal Recidivism in a Mental Health Court:

Abstract: Specialized mental health courts (MHCs) address the growing problem of defendants with mental illness cycling through the criminal justice system. Employing a mixed-methods approach, this article explores if MHCs can slow the “revolving door” of criminal justice involvement. We use quantitative data to evaluate the effectiveness of one MHC on different measures of criminal recidivism with logistic regression, event history analysis, and negative binomial regression. Modeling strategies report that graduates of MHC, defendants offered a dismissal of criminal charges, and defendants who maintained the same noncrisis mental health treatment while in court as they had prior to court had lower odds of new criminal charges, a longer time to a new criminal charge, and fewer new criminal charges. Qualitative data—court observations and interviews—suggest that providing incentives for program compliance, connecting defendants to planned mental health treatment services, and court completion are central to reducing...

Predictors of mental health court completion

Abstract: While Mental Health Courts have been found to be effective in reducing recidivism, this is only if participants successfully complete the program. This study aimed to identify specific pred...

The Role of Mental Health Courts in Mitigating Family Violence.

Abstract: Mental health courts are one potential means to mitigate violence against family members by people with mental illness. This study identified the rate at which cases of family violence come before ...