IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i16p2950-d258226.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released

Author

Listed:
  • Kimberly A. Houser

    (Department of Law and Justice Studies, Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ 08028, USA)

  • E. Rely Vîlcică

    (Department of Criminal Justice, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA)

  • Christine A. Saum

    (Department of Law and Justice Studies, Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ 08028, USA)

  • Matthew L. Hiller

    (Department of Criminal Justice, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA)

Abstract

Parole decision—the decision to release an incarcerated individual from prison conditionally—is one of the most critical decisions across justice systems around the world. The decision carries with it significant consequences: for the freedom of the individual awaiting release (the parolee); for the safety of the community in which they will return; and for the correctional system overall, especially its organizational capacity. The current study attempts to add to the parole decision-making literature by specifically analyzing the role that mental health factors may play in explaining parole decisions. Research to date is inconclusive on whether or not mental illness is a risk factor for criminal behavior; despite this, individuals with mental health problems generally fare worse on risk assessment tools employed in justice decisions. The study relies on a 1000+ representative sample of parole-eligible individuals in Pennsylvania, United States. To increase reliability, the analyses test for several mental health factors based on information from different sources (i.e., self-reported mental health history; risk assessment tool employed by the Parole Board; and risk assessment tool employed by the Department of Corrections). To address validity concerns, the study controls for other potential correlates of parole decisions. Although the multivariate models explained a considerable amount of variance in parole decisions, the inclusion of mental health variables added relatively little to model fit. The results provide insights into an understudied area of justice decision making, suggesting that despite the stigmatization of mental illness among criminal justice populations, parole board members in Pennsylvania, United States, appear to follow official guidelines rather than to consider more subjective notions that poor mental health should negate parole release.

Suggested Citation

  • Kimberly A. Houser & E. Rely Vîlcică & Christine A. Saum & Matthew L. Hiller, 2019. "Mental Health Risk Factors and Parole Decisions: Does Inmate Mental Health Status Affect Who Gets Released," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-20, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:16:p:2950-:d:258226
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/16/2950/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/16/2950/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pogrebin, Mark R. & Poole, Eric D. & Regoli, Robert M., 1986. "Parole decision making in Colorado," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 147-155.
    2. Torrey, E.F., 1995. "Jails and prisons--America's new mental hospitals," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(12), pages 1611-1613.
    3. Caplan, Joel M., 2010. "Parole release decisions: Impact of victim input on a representative sample of inmates," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 291-300, May.
    4. Turpin-Petrosino, Carolyn, 1999. "Are limiting enactments effective? an experimental test of decision making in a presumptive parole state," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 321-332, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stuart Gilmour & Phuong Le Mai & Phuong Nguyen & Bibha Dhungel & Maki Tomizawa & Huy Nguyen, 2020. "Progress towards Health for All: Time to End Discrimination and Marginalization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-5, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stéphane Mechoulan & Nicolas Sahuguet, 2015. "Assessing Racial Disparities in Parole Release," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(1), pages 39-74.
    2. Morgan, Kathryn D. & Smith, Brent, 2005. "Parole release decisions revisited: An analysis of parole release decisions for violent inmates in a southeastern state," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 277-287.
    3. repec:clg:wpaper:2009-06 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Rely Vîlcică, E., 2015. "The influence of inmate visitation on the decision to grant parole: An exploratory study," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 498-509.
    5. Caplan, Joel M., 2010. "Parole release decisions: Impact of victim input on a representative sample of inmates," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 291-300, May.
    6. DeLisi, Matt & Berg, Mark T., 2006. "Exploring theoretical linkages between self-control theory and criminal justice system processing," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 153-163.
    7. Turpin-Petrosino, Carolyn, 1999. "Are limiting enactments effective? an experimental test of decision making in a presumptive parole state," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 321-332, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:16:p:2950-:d:258226. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.