PSY 622 SNHU Forensic Mental Health Screening Interview Journal http://www.forensiccounselor.org/ Instructions The following exercise is for educational

PSY 622 SNHU Forensic Mental Health Screening Interview Journal http://www.forensiccounselor.org/

Instructions

The following exercise is for educational purposes only. Students must review and adhere to the APA ethics code in the application, storage, and disclosure of confidential information during this exercise. For more information, students may contact the instructor via email.

Role-play and interview a classmate as an offender client (e.g., Client 2). Use only initials to identify or discuss the offender client in the journal. Afterwards, administer (or interview) the offender client with the Mental Health Screening Form III (MHSF-III). Based on hypothetical score results (between 11 and 18 points), write a reflective summary of the symptoms along with the background information gathered during the interview. The summary should include ethically appropriate treatment and evaluation recommendations for an offender who is court ordered for jail diversion treatment.

For additional details, please refer to the Module Ten Interview Journal Guidelines and Rubric document.

In Module Ten, students will conduct a mock offender interview utilizing a standardized screening measure for forensic mental health symptoms. In this situation, it is essential to conceptualize offender treatment recommendations in relation to the interview and assessment collected data. Often, the best criminal and correctional psychological examiners are those who can integrate their data findings into prevention and treatment programs. Based on Chandler, Canter, and Youngs’s (2014) findings, assessment and typology data can be interpreted into a preventive approach to offender treatment. In theory, there are three levels of conceptualizing offenders. On the tertiary level, the focus is on treating offenders with severe to moderate criminal histories. During screenings, offenders are likely to have high to severe forensic mental health symptoms. This level often involves treating the life narrative or cognitive distortions of criminals with complete or semi-psychopathic selfperceptions. The psychopathic or perceived criminal orientation of the criminal’s life story is also characteristic of the professional narrative. The professional narrative is characteristic of offenders who perceive themselves as professional criminals or masterminds. This narrative along with high dystonic functioning (e.g., drug use, low threat control, low emotional insight) are the precipitating factors in criminal recidivism. On the tertiary level, the parental risk typology is most likely consistent with Deltas (Type 4), meaning that there is strong likelihood for therapeutic noncompliance and resistance to criminal narrative revisions without long-term psychiatric, psychological, and legal interventions (Chandler, 2013).

On the secondary level, the focus is on offenders with moderate criminal histories. On this level, there is a tendency to have fewer criminally destructive relationships and patterns than on the tertiary level (Chandler, Canter, & Youngs, 2014). The forensic mental health screenings may contain moderate data risk findings. There are also two criminal narratives in the secondary level. The victim theme focuses on psychopathic patterns as a result of perceived or existing life experiences of physical and/or emotional harm (Chandler, 2014). In turn, the revenge narrative theme is a result of seeking criminological revenge for perceived or past acts of harm, offense, or denigration. The parental risk typologies on the secondary level are likely characterized as either Beta (Type 2) or Gamma (Type 3). Betas are more compliant in psychiatric and therapeutic treatment than Gammas. On this level, successful long-term criminal narrative revisions are likely to result in criminal desistance, therapeutic visitations, and family reunification (Chandler, 2013).

On the primary level, offender treatment involves mild to moderate risk factors and minor criminal offense histories. The primary level cases are typically associated with non-intentional acts, accidental harm, drug abuse, relational problems, or temporary diminished parental capacities (Chandler, Canter, & Youngs, 2014). At this level, offenders may have only mild psychopathic characteristics, but in extreme circumstances may engage in the tragic hero themes. This narrative theme focuses on perceived injustice, which may also be referred to as “injustice collectors.” The parental risk typology on this level is characterized primarily by Alphas (Type 1), which is the lowest risk typology. They are also likely diagnosed with mild psychiatric or psychological conditions, such as adjustment disorder or other non-clinical diagnoses. Among these cases, courts may mandate the offender to attend forensic counseling services within a specified timeframe to monitor progress, visitation, and willingness to change. Successful criminal narrative revisions are also likely to reduce criminal recidivism. As students complete this module, they should consider the connections between forensic psychological assessments and offender treatment.

References

Chandler, D. (2013). Firearm-related child abuse and the development therapeutic risk: Typologies for at-risk parents. The Forensic Therapist.

Chandler, D., Canter, D., & Youngs, D. (2014). Investigative narrative analysis: A method for treating parental criminality. Accepted for publication. The Forensic Therapist. The National Association of Forensic Counselors. PSY 622 Module Ten Interview Journal Rubric: Forensic Mental Health Screening III
The journals in this course will focus on the assessment tools used in forensic case work. Role-play and interview a classmate as an offender client (e.g., Client 2).
Use only initials to identify or discuss the offender client in the journal. Afterwards, administer (or interview) the offender client with the MHSF-III. Based on
hypothetical score results (between 11 and 18 points), write a reflective summary of the symptoms along with the background information gathered during the
interview. The summary should include ethically appropriate treatment and evaluation recommendations for an offender who is court-ordered for jail diversion
treatment. The journal assignments provide an opportunity to connect the readings and professional practices and to experience conducting an interview. Each
journal activity is graded individually.
Guidelines for Submission: Submit assignment as a Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. Journal
assignments should be one to two pages in length. All citations should be completed using APA format.
Critical Elements
Symptoms
Treatment
Recommendations
Articulation of
Response
Exemplary (100%)
Meets “Proficient” criteria
and uses examples to illustrate
the symptoms
Meets “Proficient” criteria
and uses clear and relevant
examples from scholarly
resources
Meets “Proficient” criteria
and examples are based on
scholarly research to support
recommendations
Submission is free of errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, and
organization and is presented
in a professional and easy to
read format
Proficient (90%)
Accurately summarizes
symptoms using specific
details
Accurately presents ethically
appropriate treatment and
uses specific details
Presents evaluation
recommendations that are
valid and uses specific details
Submission has no major
errors related to citations,
grammar, spelling, syntax, or
organization
Needs Improvement (70%)
Summarizes symptoms, but
summary may be inaccurate
and/or lacks specific details
Presents ethically appropriate
treatment, but treatment is
inaccurate and/or lacks
specific details
Presents evaluation
recommendations, but
recommendations are invalid
and/or lack specific details
Submission has major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or
organization that negatively
impact readability and
articulation of main ideas
Not Evident (0%)
Does not summarize
symptoms
Value
30
Does not present ethically
appropriate treatment
30
Does not present evaluation
recommendations
30
Submission has critical errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or
organization that prevent
understanding of ideas
10
Earned Total
100%
Mental Health Screening Form–III (MHSF–III)
Page 1 of 2
Instructions: In this program, we help people with all their problems, not just their addictions. This
commitment includes helping people with emotional problems. Our staff is ready to help you to deal with
any emotional problems you may have, but we can do this only if we are aware of the problems. Any
information you provide to us on this form will be kept in strict confidence. It will not be released to any
outside person or agency without your permission. If you do not know how to answer these questions,
ask the staff member giving you this form for guidance. Please note, each item refers to your entire life
history, not just your current situation. This is why each question begins, “Have you ever . . . ”
Please circle “yes” or “no” for each question.
1. Have you ever talked to a psychiatrist, psychologist, therapist, social worker, or counselor
about an emotional problem? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
2. Have you ever felt you needed help with your emotional problems, or have you had people
tell you that you should get help for your emotional problems? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
3. Have you ever been advised to take medication for anxiety, depression, hearing voices,
or for any other emotional problem? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
4. Have you ever been seen in a psychiatric emergency room or been hospitalized for
psychiatric reasons? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
5. Have you ever heard voices no one else could hear or seen objects or things which others
could not see? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
7. Have you ever had nightmares or flashbacks as a result of being involved in some
traumatic/terrible event? For example, warfare, gang fights, fire, domestic violence, rape,
incest, car accident, being shot or stabbed?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
8. Have you ever experienced any strong fears? For example, of heights, insects, animals,
dirt, attending social events, being in a crowd, being alone, being in places where it may be
hard to escape or get help? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
9. Have you ever given in to an aggressive urge or impulse, on more than one occasion, that
resulted in serious harm to others or led to the destruction of property? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
10. Have you ever felt that people had something against you, without them necessarily saying
so, or that someone or some group may be trying to influence your thoughts or behavior? . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
11. Have you ever experienced any emotional problems associated with your sexual interests,
your sexual activities, or your choice of sexual partner? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
12. Was there ever a period in your life when you spent a lot of time thinking and worrying about
gaining weight, becoming fat, or controlling your eating? For example, by repeatedly dieting
or fasting, engaging in much exercise to compensate for binge eating, taking enemas, or
forcing yourself to throw up? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
6. (a) Have you ever been depressed for weeks at a time, lost interest or pleasure in most
activities, had trouble concentrating and making decisions, or thought about killing yourself? . . . . . .
(b) Did you ever attempt to kill yourself? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
continued on other side
CO-OCCURRING DISORDERS PROGRAM: SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT
Document is in the public domain. Duplicating this material for personal or group use is permissible.
7
Mental Health Screening Form–III (MHSF–III)
Page 2 of 2
13. Have you ever had a period of time when you were so full of energy and your ideas came
very rapidly, when you talked nearly nonstop, when you moved quickly from one activity to
another, when you needed little sleep, and when you believed you could do almost anything?
….
Yes
No
14. Have you ever had spells or attacks when you suddenly felt anxious, frightened, or uneasy to
the extent that you began sweating, your heart began to beat rapidly, you were shaking or
trembling, your stomach was upset, or you felt dizzy or unsteady, as if you would faint? . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
15. Have you ever had a persistent, lasting thought or impulse to do something over and over
that caused you considerable distress and interfered with normal routines, work, or social
relations? Examples would include repeatedly counting things, checking and rechecking
on things you had done, washing and rewashing your hands, praying, or maintaining a very
rigid schedule of daily activities from which you could not deviate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
16. Have you ever lost considerable sums of money through gambling or had problems at work,
in school, or with your family and friends as a result of your gambling? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
17. Have you ever been told by teachers, guidance counselors, or others that you have a
special learning problem? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
No
Print client’s name: ____________________________________________________________________________________
Program to which client will be assigned: _________________________________________________________________
Name of admissions counselor: ______________________________________________________
Date: _________________
Reviewer’s comments: _________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CO-OCCURRING DISORDERS PROGRAM: SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT
8
Document is in the public domain. Duplicating this material for personal or group use is permissible.
Improving Responses to
People with Mental Illnesses
The Essential Elements of a
Mental Health Court
Improving Responses to
People with Mental Illnesses
The Essential Elements of a
Mental Health Court
A report prepared by the
Council of State Governments Justice Center
Criminal Justice/Mental Health Consensus Project
for the
Bureau of Justice Assistance
Office of Justice Programs
U.S. Department of Justice
Michael Thompson
Dr. Fred Osher
Denise Tomasini-Joshi
This report was prepared by the Council of State Governments Justice Center, which coordinates the Criminal Justice/Mental
Health Consensus Project. It was completed under cooperative agreement 2006-MO-BX-K348 awarded by the Bureau of Justice
Assistance (BJA), Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions and findings in this document do not
necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice or the members of the Council of State
Governments. While every effort was made to reach consensus and represent advisory group members’ and other reviewers’
recommendations, individual opinions may differ from the statements made in the document.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance reserves the right to reproduce, publish, translate, or otherwise use and to authorize others to
publish and use all or any part of the copyrighted material contained in this publication.
Council of State Governments Justice Center, New York 10005
© 2008 by the Council of State Governments Justice Center
All rights reserved. Published 2008.
Cover design by Nancy Kapp & Company. Interior design by David Williams.
Contents
Acknowledgments
Introduction
v
vii
Ten Essential Elements
1 | Planning and Administration
1
2 | Target Population
2
3 | Timely Participant Identification and
Linkage to Services
3
4 | Terms of Participation
4
5 | Informed Choice
5
6 | Treatment Supports and Services
6
7 | Confidentiality
7
8 | Court Team
8
9 | Monitoring Adherence to Court
Requirements
9
10 | Sustainability
10
Conclusion
11
Acknowledgments
Many thanks are due to all those at the Bureau of
Justice Assistance (BJA), a component of the Office
of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice,
who supported the development of this publication,
particularly Domingo S. Herraiz, Director; A. Elizabeth Griffith, Deputy Director for Planning; Robert
Hendricks, former Acting Senior Policy Advisor for
Mental Health; Michael Guerriere, former Senior
Policy Advisor for Substance Abuse and Mental
Health; Ruby Qazilbash, Senior Policy Advisor for
Substance Abuse and Mental Health; and Rebecca
Rose, Policy Advisor for Substance Abuse and Mental Health.
Special thanks must also be given to the
National Drug Court Institute (NDCI), particularly
Karen Freeman-Wilson, West Huddleston, and Carson Fox, for their guidance on how this publication
could benefit from, and integrate, their experiences
developing the seminal publication Defining Drug
Courts: The Key Components.
Representatives of the sites awarded grants
under BJA’s Mental Health Court Grant Program
spent considerable time at a national conference
in Cincinnati in 2004 providing valuable feedback to
a draft of Essential Elements. The Council of State
Governments Justice Center thanks them, as well as
a group of leading mental health court experts who
spent a full day at BJA’s conference Mental Health
Courts and Beyond in 2005 in Los Angeles to provide
extensive comments on a subsequent draft of the
document. In addition, representatives of BJA’s Mental Health Court Learning Sites added important
information throughout the review process.
A number of current and former Justice
Center staff members were key contributors to
the document, including director of communications Martha Plotkin, research associate Lauren
Almquist, and project coordinator Daniel
Souweine. The project also benefited greatly from
the advice of Justice Center consultants Barry Mahoney, President Emeritus of the Justice Management Institute, D. Alan Henry, Director Emeritus of
the Pretrial Justice Institute, and Timothy Murray,
Executive Director of the Pretrial Justice Institute.
Finally, Justice Center staff express their gratitude to the hundreds of contributors who reviewed
online drafts. Through a web forum, these respondents provided valuable comments and offered
insights and suggestions that made Essential Elements a stronger, more practical resource.
The Essential Elements of a Mental Health Cour t
v
Introduction
Mental health courts are a recent and rapidly
expanding phenomenon. In the late 1990s only a
few such courts were accepting cases. Since then,
more than 150 others have been established, and
dozens more are being planned. Although early
commentary on these courts emphasized their differences—and their diversity is undeniable—
the similarities across mental health courts are
becoming increasingly apparent. In fact, the vast
majority of mental health courts share the following
characteristics:
• A specialized court docket, which employs a
problem-solving approach to court processing in
lieu of more traditional court procedures for certain defendants with mental illnesses
• Judicially supervised, community-based treatment plans for each defendant participating in
the court, which a team of court staff and mental
health professionals design and implement
• Regular status hearings at which treatment
plans and other conditions are periodically
reviewed for appropriateness, incentives are
offered to reward adherence to court conditions,
and sanctions are imposed on participants who
do not adhere to the conditions of participation
• Criteria defining a participant’s completion of
(sometimes called graduation from) the program
The reasons communities give for establishing
mental health courts are also remarkably consistent: to increase public safety, facilitate participation
in effective mental health and substance abuse
treatment, improve the quality of life for people
1. Essential Elements was developed as part of a technical assistance
program provided by the Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center through the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Mental
Health Courts Program. The BJA Mental Health Courts Program,
which was authorized by America’s Law Enforcement and Mental
Health Project (Public Law 106-515), provided grants to support the
with mental illnesses charged with crimes, and
make more effective use of limited criminal justice
and mental health resources.
As the commonalities among mental health
courts begin to emerge, practitioners, policymakers,
researchers, and others have become interested in
developing consensus not only on what a mental
health court is, but on what a mental health court
should be. The purpose of this document is to articulate
such consensus in the form of 10 essential elements.
About the Elements
This publication identifies 10 essential elements of
mental health court design and implementation.1
Each element contains a short statement describing
criteria mental health courts should meet, followed
by several paragraphs explaining why the element is
important and how courts can adhere to it. Ultimately, benchmarks will be added, enabling courts
to better assess their fidelity to each element.
Although both adult and juvenile mental
health courts have emerged in recent years, this
publication pertains only to adult mental health
courts. There are two primary reasons for this
focus. First, as of this writing, there are only a handful of mental health courts targeting juveniles. Second, the significant differences between the
provision of mental health and criminal justice
services for juveniles and that for adults makes it
difficult to develop a document that encompasses
both populations.
Just as the success of local drug courts
prompted the development of many mental health
development of mental health courts in 23 jurisdictions in FY 2002
and 14 jurisdictions in FY 2003. The Justice Center currently provides technical assistance to the grantees of BJA’s Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program, the successor to the Mental
Health Courts Program.
The Essential Elements of a Mental Health Cour t
vii
courts, Defining Drug Courts: The Key Components, a
1997 publication of the U.S. Department of Justice,
inspired this document. Although there are significant differences between drug courts and mental
health courts, the Key Components document provided the foundation in format and content for
Essential Elements.
Two key principles underlie the 10 essential
elements. First, at the heart of each element is collaboration among the criminal justice, mental
health, substance abuse treatment, and related systems. True cross-system collaboration is necessary
to realize any of these elements and, for that matter,
to successfully operate a mental health court. It is
generally accepted that achieving this type of collaboration is difficult, particularly in regard to breaking
down institutional barriers and eschewing the
adversarial process. Second, the elements make
clear, both explicitly and implicitly, that mental
health courts are not a panacea. Reversing the overrepresentation of people with mental illnesses in
the criminal justice system requires a comprehensive strategy of which mental health courts should
be just one piece.
Though these elements are drawn in large part
from the experience of existing courts, they are not
research-based. Only a few studies have been completed, though more are underway, to better understand the operation and impact of me…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment