Liraglutide 3.0 mg once daily for the treatment of overweight and obesity in patients hospitalised at a forensic psychiatric department: A 26-week open-label feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Overweight and obesity constitute a major concern among patients treated at forensic psychiatric departments. The present clinical feasibility study aimed at investigating the extent to which glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) treatment with once-daily liraglutide 3.0 mg could be a feasible pharmacological treatment of these conditions in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders hospitalised in forensic psychiatry. METHODS: The 26-week, open-label feasibility study included participants aged 18-65 years diagnosed with a severe mental illness and hospitalised at a forensic psychiatric department. At the time of inclusion, all participants fulfilled the indication for using liraglutide as a treatment for overweight and obesity. Participants' baseline examinations were followed by a 26-week treatment period with liraglutide injection once daily according to a fixed uptitration schedule of liraglutide, with a target dose of 3.0 mg. Each participant attended seven visits to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events. The primary endpoint was the number of "completers", with adherence defined as >80% injections obtained in the period, weeks 12-26. Determining whether liraglutide is a feasible treatment was pre-defined to a minimum of 75% completers. RESULTS: Twenty-four participants were included in the study. Sex, male = 19 (79.2%). Mean age: 42.3 [25th and 75th percentiles: 39.1; 48.4] years; body mass index (BMI): 35.7 [31.7; 37.5] kg/m2; glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c): 37 [35; 39] mmol/mol. Eleven out of 24 participants (46%) completed the study. For the completers, the median net body weight loss after 26 weeks of participation was -11.4 kg [-15.4; -5.9]. The net difference in HbA1C and BMI was -2.0 mmol/mol [-4; -1] and -3.6 kg/m2 [-4.7; -1.8], respectively. The weight change and reduction in HbA1c and BMI were all statistically significant from baseline. CONCLUSION: The study did not confirm our hypothesis that liraglutide is a feasible treatment for a minimum of 75% of the patients initiating treatment with liraglutide while hospitalised in a forensic psychiatric department. The high dropout rate may be due to the non-naturalistic setting of the clinical trial. For the proportion of patients compliant with the medication, liraglutide 3.0 mg was an efficient treatment for overweight.

Risk and protective factors in risk assessment: Predicting inpatient aggression in adult males detained in a forensic mental health setting.

Structured clinical risk assessments represent a preferred means of assessing levels of aggression risk at different times and in different individuals. Increasing attention has been given to capturing protective factors, with sound risk assessment critical to high-secure forensic mental health care. The aim was to assess the predictive value of the HCR-20v3 for aggression risk and the long-term care pilot version of the SAPROF (the SAPROF-LC-pilot) in a high-secure forensic mental health inpatient population and to determine the incremental value of protective over risk factors. Participants were adult males detained in a high secure forensic mental health service, with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia and/or personality disorder. The focus was on examining hospital based aggression (self- and other-directed) at two time points; up to 6 months (T1) and between 7 and 12 months (T2). The HCR-20V3 and SAPROF-LC-pilot demonstrated good predictive validity but with variability across subscales and aggression types/periods. Historical factors of the HCR-20V3 and External factors of the SAPROF-LC-pilot failed to predict, aside from a medium effect at T1 for verbal aggression and self-harm, for Historical factors. There was evidence for protective factors adding to prediction over risk factors alone, with the integration of protective and risk factors into a risk judgement particularly helpful in improving prediction accuracy. Protective factors contributed to risk estimates and particularly if integrated with risk factors. Combining risk and protective factors has clear predictive advantages, ensuring that protective factors are not supplementary but important to the aggression assessment process.

Introduction to special issue on social media for forensic mental evaluations.

This special issue of Behavioral Sciences & the Law presents six articles that focus on various issues related to social media in forensic mental health evaluations. These eclectic articles provide updated information about social media's use and navigating difficult ethical concerns. Ranging from violence risk assessment to disability evaluations, the up-to-date information in this special issue allows the forensic evaluator to be more prepared when they inevitably encounter information from social media. As social media continues to grow, both in terms of overall use and the number of available platforms, forensic clinicians will need to remain cognizant of the ways these data can be appropriately utilized as collateral data.

Widening the net: Use of social media data in personal injury and disability evaluations.

A central tenet of forensic mental health assessment is the use of multiple sources of data. Traditionally, these sources have included clinical interviews with and observations of the examinee, written records review, psychological test data, and interviews with collateral sources. Data from social media and social networking sites (SNS) is now widely used in civil litigation. However, existing professional practice standards and guidelines do not specifically address the use of SNS data. This leaves forensic mental health evaluators with little guidance as to why, when and how to incorporate SNS data into their evaluations. We review the extant literature on the use of SNS and other social media data in personal injury and disability cases, including legal, ethical, and practical considerations, with the goal of providing forensic mental health practitioners with a framework for making decisions about when and how to incorporate these data into their evaluations and opinions. We advocate caution in conducting independent searches of social media and the Internet, and in making inferences about internal states based on SNS postings. To illustrate these points, we include a case study.

How online data informs forensic mental health evaluations of sexual behavior: An overview.

The Internet plays a pervasive role in modern life including the expression of human sexuality and sexual offending. A range of online sexual activities may be of interest in forensic mental health evaluations (FMHE), including those which are clearly illegal or those which are legal but functionally problematic. Online sexual offenses will clearly prompt forensic evaluators to consider the role of the Internet in these offending behaviors. The Internet may also be relevant in forensic evaluations of contact sexual offending including informing on history of mixed or cross-over offending, and Internet-facilitated contact offenses. A review of Internet-data may span several online domains, many of which provide the user with substantial anonymity and would likely not be available to the evaluator unless provided through the process of discovery. Early guidelines for the review of Internet-data in FMHEs have been proposed and support the Internet as a useful source of collateral data in the conduct of forensic evaluations of sexual behavior.

Forensic neuropsychological assessment.

With its firm establishment as a neuropsychology subspecialty, forensic neuropsychological assessment is integral to many criminal and civil forensic evaluations. In addition to evaluating cognitive deficits, forensic neuropsychologists can provide reliable information regarding symptom magnification, malingering, and other neurocognitive and psychological issues that may impact the outcome of a particular legal case. This article is an overview and introduction to neuropsychological assessment in the forensic mental health context. Major issues impacting the current practice of forensic neuropsychology are summarized, and several examples from case law are highlighted.

[Professionals' Views On Forensic-Psychiatric Patients With Intellectual Disability: Impact Of Structural, Systemic And Diagnosis-Related Aspects On Treatment And Release]. / Forensisch-psychiatrische Patient*innen mit Intelligenzminderung aus Sicht der Behandler*innen ­ Wie strukturelle, systemische und diagnosebezogene Besonderheiten Behandlung und Entlassung erschweren.

In forensic psychiatric clinics, patients who have committed a criminal offense on the basis of intellectual disability are also treated in according to Sect. 63 of the German Criminal Code. This group of patients has above-average lengths of stay and specific difficulties in treatment and in transition to aftercare systems are reported from practice. The present study is based on a content-analytical evaluation of ten structured interviews with practitioners of different professions who are familiar with the treatment of this patient group in forensic psychiatry. The aim was to identify treatment experiences and challenges of inpatient forensic care for this group as well as needs for change and suggestions for improvement. Respondents confirmed the specific treatment needs and person- and diagnosis-related challenges known from other studies, which were considered to be causally related to prolonged hospital stay and problems at discharge. Numerous structural and systemic barriers were also identified that impede the shortest possible forensic inpatient care and seamless transition to the non-forensic aftercare system. At the structural level, these included the need for human resources (both quantitative and qualitative) and adapted treatment concepts. Professional aftercare was considered very important for this group of patients. In this regard, the non-availability of suitable institutions, long waiting lists and reservations on the part of these institutions towards former forensic patients were identified as problems. The fact that patients with intellectual disability were less able to make their needs known than other patients and thus often received less attention from the treatment providers can be described as a systemic obstacle. This also applies to the rather high demands that the forensic system, with its goal of "improvement" through treatment, also places on people with intellectual disability. The findings of this study can contribute to improvement of the forensic inpatient care of people with intellectual disability at systemic and structural levels.

Staff experiences with videoconferences during the COVID-19 pandemic in forensic psychiatry outpatients.

AIM: To describe staff experiences with the use of videoconferences with forensic psychiatric outpatients during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with staff at forensic community services in the Region of Southern Denmark. RESULTS: Nine semi-structured staff interviews were conducted. Two main themes were identified through thematic analysis: Challenges due to technical uncertainty and the Use of videoconferences as support in clinical assessment and treatment. The second main theme also included a number of subthemes: Lack of opportunity for observation of a patient's overall situation; Compromise of nurses' professionalism; Limitation of disturbing stimuli means more focus on the conversation; Telephone contact vs. video contact-pros and cons; Expectations reflect attitudes; and Will professionalism be changed based on organizational and political perspectives? CONCLUSION: Staff opinions on use of videoconferences in psychiatric patients differed. The nurses in particular were concerned about whether professionalism could be maintained. Others experienced patients focusing more on the conversation when it took place via video because there were fewer disturbing elements. In general, expectations seem to influence attitudes toward using videoconferences.

I'm Great! I'm no good .: A case illustration of drama therapeutic work with a male offender of domestic violence in a forensic outpatient setting.

Treating perpetrators of aggressive behavior, like verbal aggression, intimidation, and bullying behavior resulting in aggressive incidents with others, is difficult. This group is often diagnosed with personality disorders and when legal measures applied, they are more often treated in a forensic setting for their problems. This article presents the case of a 54-year-old man, diagnosed with Borderline personality disorder, narcissistic and antisocial traits, mild depressive symptoms, and loss and grief, who has voluntarily had treatment in a forensic outpatient center to reduce aggression and change destructive patterns in relationships. Hating, judging, and self-defeating were the main reasons why the patient found himself ending up in the same situation repeatedly. The client received individual drama therapy sessions. The drama therapeutic approach included schema therapeutic elements, such as schema mode work with cards, as well as roleplay, imagery (with rescripting), improvisation, and psycho drama elements. As a result of drama therapy, the client reported less (active) aggression, less aggression in his relationships (partners/children/friends), but also an increased level of loneliness, and mild depressive symptoms. The client was more in touch with his vulnerability and was able to behave in a more adequate healthy way in relationships. Although self-esteem was still building up, there was a decrease of aggression and less conflict-seeking behavior as a result. Risk assessment tools (FARE-2 & HONOS) and Schema therapy scales (YSQ and SMI) were used pre- and posttreatment confirming the improvements. This case promotes the use of dramatherapy in forensic outpatient care to be valuable in lowering risk recidivism and changing deeply rooted behavioral patterns.

Application of Facial Expression Analysis Technology in Violence Risk Assessment of Individuals with Mental Disorders in Supervised Settings.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the association between violent behaviors and emotions in individuals with mental disorders, to evaluate the application value of facial expression analysis technology in violence risk assessment of individuals with mental disorders in supervised settings, and to provide a reference for violence risk assessment. METHODS: Thirty-nine male individuals with mental disorders in supervised settings were selected, the participant risk of violence, cognitive function, psychiatric symptoms and severity were assessed using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS), the Historical, Clinical, Risk Management-Chinese version(HCR-CV), the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). An emotional arousal was performed on the participants and the intensity of their emotions and facial expression action units was recorded before, during and after the arousal. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the differences in the intensity of emotions and facial expression action units before, during and after the arousal. Pearson correlation analysis was used to calculate the correlations between the intensity of the seven basic emotional facial expressions and the scores of the assessment scales. RESULTS: The intensity difference of sadness, surprise and fear in different time periods was statistically significant (P<0.05). The intensity of the left medial eyebrow lift action unit was found significantly different before and after the emotional arousal (P<0.05). The intensity of anger was positively correlated with the Modified Overt Aggression Scale score throughout the experiment (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Eye action units such as eyebrow lifting, eyelid tightening and upper eyelid lifting can be used as effective action units to identify sadness, anger and other negative emotions associated with violent behaviors. Facial expression analysis technology can be used as an auxiliary tool to assess the potential risk of violence in individuals with mental disorders in supervised settings.

Is mental health staff training in de-escalation techniques effective in reducing violent incidents in forensic psychiatric settings? - A systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Inpatient violence is a relevant issue in forensic psychiatric settings. Relevant guidelines recommend that restrictive measures are to be used exclusively if de-escalation and other preventive strategies have failed and there is a risk of harm to patients or staff if no action is taken. However, restrictive measures are untherapeutic and can be harmful. In order to enable staff to intervene before inpatient violence or other serious incidents occur and thus to avoid restrictive measures, mental health staff training programs including de-escalation components are being adopted in general as well as forensic mental health settings. There is growing evidence for the efficacy of mental health staff training in de-escalation techniques in the field of general psychiatry. However, there are no reviews evaluating the effectiveness of these interventions in reducing violent incidents in forensic psychiatric settings. Here we present the first literature review on the effectiveness staff training in de-escalation techniques in the field of forensic psychiatry. METHOD: We searched relevant databases for original research on the effectiveness of reducing violence in forensic psychiatric settings. Studies were included if they investigated staff training programs with de-escalation techniques in forensic mental health settings. RESULTS: A total of 5 relevant studies were identified. None of the studies was a randomized controlled trial. Four studies were before and after comparisons without control group. A one group post-test-only design was used in one study. Methodological quality was low. The maximum sample size was 112 participants. Results indicated no relevant impact of mental health staff training in de-escalation techniques on the rate of violent incidents in forensic psychiatric wards. However, staff seemed to feel safer following the training. Results have to be interpreted cautiously due to several methodological and content-related limitations. DISCUSSION: Evidence for the effectiveness of staff training in de-escalation techniques on reducing verbal and physical aggression in forensic settings remains very limited. The existing definitions of terms like de-escalation, de-escalation training and de-escalation techniques in the healthcare context appear rather vague. Although some positive changes are reported across a variety of outcome measures it remains unclear to what extent staff training in de-esclation techniques contributes to a reduction in aggressive incidents and restrictive measures in forensic psychiatry. The clinical implications of this review are therefore limited. Yet, an important implication for future research is that a more comprehensive approach might prove worthwhile. Conducting a further review integrating a wide range of complex interventions aimed at the reduction of inpatient violence rather than focusing on de-escalation only, might be a worthwhile approach.

Determinants of clinical outcome and length of stay in acute care forensic psychiatry units.

Criminological and sociodemographic variables, such as previous criminal convictions, increased risk of violence, early onset of mental disorder, antisocial personality, psychosis and low social support, have all been related to longer length of stay (LoS) and poorer outcome in long stay forensic services. The factors impacting on LoS and clinical response in acute care specialized units are poorly documented. To address this issue, we examined the psychiatric records of all cases admitted between January 1st and December 31th 2020 in the sole acute ward for detained persons located in the central prison of the Geneva County, Switzerland. Information on judicial status included pre-trial versus sentence execution, previous incarcerations, and age of the first incarceration. Sociodemographic data included age, gender, marital status, and education attainment. Previous inpatient stays prior to incarceration were recorded. All of the ICD-10 clinical diagnoses were made by two independent, board-certified psychiatrists blind to the scope of the study. The standardized assessment was based on the HoNOS (Health of Nation Outcome Scales) at admission and discharge, HONOS-secure at admission, HCR-20 (Historical Clinical Risk 20) version 2, PCL-R (Psychopathy Checklist Revised), and SAPROF (Structured Assessment of Protective Factors). Stepwise forward multiple linear regression models predicting the LoS and delta HONOS respectively were built with the above mentioned parameters. The selected variables were then used in univariate and multivariable regression models. Higher HCR-scores (mainly on clinical items), and longer LoS were related to higher delta HONOS scores. In contrast, cases in pre-trial detention showed a worst clinical outcome. In multivariable models, all three variables remained independent predictors of the clinical outcome and explained 30.7% of its variance. Only education and diagnosis of borderline personality were related to the LoS and explained 12.6% of its variance in multivariable models. Our results suggest that the use of acute wards specialized in forensic psychiatry are mainly useful for patients with prior inpatient care experience, and higher violence risk during sentence execution. In contrast, they seem to be less performant for persons in pre-trial detention that could benefit from less restrictive clinical settings.

What happens after forensic psychiatric care? A latent class analysis of dimensions of welfare for former forensic psychiatric patients.

BACKGROUND: Mentally disordered offenders are a heterogenous group regarding psychopathology as well as background factors, which makes it likely that more than one stereotypical life situation will apply to all forensic psychiatric patients following discharge. Knowledge about typical life situations would be valuable for optimising support for improving the overall life situation of these individuals. This paper investigates life situations from the perspective of level of living research and resources in terms of different welfare dimensions. METHODS: Included were all all individuals (n = 1146) who had been discharged from forensic psychiatric care in Sweden during 2009-2018 and were included in the Swedish National Forensic Psychiatric Register. Follow-up time varied from 4 to 3644 days, (m = 1697, Md = 1685). Register data from several different registers was combined. Data was analysed using latent class analysis, and multinominal logistic regression analysis investigated what background factors were associated with class membership. RESULTS: The results show that there are four subgroups of post-discharge life situations: the high support group, the general psychiatric needs group, the working group, and the family group. The high support group was the largest, representing 54% of the entire sample. There are background factors associated with group membership, including both age at discharge, length of stay in forensic psychiatric care and pre-index crime historical factors. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to the understanding of the post-discharge lives of former forensic psychiatric patients and shows that for several subgroups, negative outcomes are rare. Knowledge about these subgroups could be drawn upon to make informed decisions about in- and outpatient forensic psychiatric care, discharge from forensic psychiatric services, and what support is offered to former forensic psychiatric patients.

Do we know the mind of others? Suspicion of malingering in emergency psychiatry.

INTRODUCTION: Malingering can be divided into simulation and exaggeration of symptoms. Malingering has traditionally been considered rare in general psychiatry. In contrast to earlier estimates, more recent studies report that doctors suspect malingering frequently in psychiatric emergency departments. The aim of this study is to survey how often doctors in psychiatric emergency units in a public, free-of-charge, mental health service suspect that patients are malingering, and which diagnoses, symptom complaints and suspected reasons for malingering doctors ascribe to their patients. METHODS: Questionnaires were distributed in three psychiatric emergency departments in Denmark. Suspected simulation and exaggeration were rated with a 5-point scale. Doctors were encouraged to write down the symptoms and perceived causes for suspected malingering. RESULTS: 362 questionnaires were filled in. 25% of all patients were suspected of simulating to some degree. 8% of patients were highly suspected or definitely believed to be simulating. Patients complaining of suicidal ideation were most frequently suspected of malingering. 'Attention seeking' was the most common suspected reason for malingering. Patients with diagnoses of substance use and personality disorder were the most suspected of malingering. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to investigate doctors' suspicions of psychiatric malingering in a European setting. Patients with established personality and substance use disorder are at higher risk of being suspected of malingering, which potentially affects the course of treatment significantly. The rise in suspected malingering is conspicuous and requires further investigation. Doctors are encouraged to act conservatively upon suspicion of malingering in emergency psychiatry.

Legal Admissibility of the Competence Assessment for Standing Trial for Defendants with Mental Retardation (CAST-MR).

The Competence Assessment for Standing Trial for Defendants with Mental Retardation (CAST-MR) was developed to assess competence to stand trial in defendants with Intellectual Disability. Although it remains the only validated instrument for this population, previous research has suggested it is rarely used by forensic examiners, a finding our survey of legal cases confirms. Initial validation studies provided some support for the instrument's reliability and validity. However, in both these and subsequent studies, there were significant limitations with respect to the size and representativeness of study samples, and therefore the associated interpretation of scores, such that questions remain as to whether the tool adequately assesses competence to stand trial in this population. In this paper, we review the research on the CAST-MR, discuss the strengths and limitations of the instrument, and debate its legal admissibility.

Domestic Mass Shooters: The Association With Unmedicated and Untreated Psychiatric Illness.

BACKGROUND: Given the relative lack of psychiatric information and data on the perpetrators of US mass shootings, the aim of our study was to understand who these "mass shooters" were and whether they had a psychiatric illness. If so, were they competently diagnosed, and if so, were they treated with appropriate medication for their diagnoses before the violence? METHODS: Because a prospective study of diagnosis and treatment could not, for obvious reasons, be carried out, we designed a retrospective, observational study of mass shooters, defined as those who killed 4 or more people with firearms between 1982 and 2012 or who killed 3 or more people with firearms between 2013 and 2019 in the United States. We used the Mother Jones database-a database of 115 persons identified as committing a mass shooting in the United States between January 1982 and September 2019. In the vast majority of the incidents identified in the database, the perpetrator died either during or shortly after the crime, leaving little reliable information about their history-especially psychiatric history. We focused on the 35 mass shooters who survived and for which legal proceedings were instituted because these cases presented the most reliable psychiatric information. For each of these 35 mass shootings, we interviewed forensic psychiatrists and forensic psychologists who examined the perpetrator after the crime and/or collected the testimony and reports by psychiatrist(s) at trial or in the postconviction proceedings contained in the court record. In addition, we reviewed available information from the court proceedings, public records, a videotaped interview of assailant by law enforcement, social media postings of the assailant, and writings of the assailant. After collecting the clinical information from multiple sources on each case to make a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, diagnosis, we also completed a Sheehan Diagnostic Scale. After this, 20 additional cases where the assailant died at the crime were randomly selected form the remaining 80, to determine whether there were differences in psychiatric diagnoses and treatment between such assailants and those who survived. RESULTS: Twenty-eight of 35 cases in which the assailant survived had a psychiatric diagnosis-18 with schizophrenia, 3 with bipolar I disorders, 2 with delusional disorders, persecutory type, 2 with personality disorders (1 paranoid and 1 borderline), 2 with substance-related disorders without other psychiatric diagnoses, and 1 with posttraumatic stress disorder. Four had no psychiatric diagnosis, and in 3, we did not have enough information to make a diagnosis.Of 15 of 20 cases in which the assailant died, 8 had schizophrenia. None of those diagnosed with psychiatric illnesses were treated with medication. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of mass shooters experienced unmedicated and untreated psychiatric disorder.

Decriminalizing severe mental illness by reducing risk of contact with the criminal justice system, including for forensic patients.

Risk of contact with the criminal justice system (CJS) is greater among those with mental illness, including severe mental illness-an observation that many argue reflects a process of "criminalizing" mental illness. Forensic patients represent a subgroup at one end of a spectrum of such criminalization, typically with histories of serious violence and psychotic illness. Strategies for decriminalizing mental illness in this context should consider a range of approaches, including intervening to prevent CJS contact in those with severe mental illness, particularly in the early or emerging stages of psychosis. However, it may be that even gold standard mental healthcare applied universally is insufficient to address CJS contact risks. While there is now an extensive literature documenting the relatively low rates of repeat CJS contact for forensic patients released from secure care, appropriate comparison groups are lacking and the key ingredients of any benefits of treatment are unknown. The CJS may well have something to learn from forensic mental health systems and services given the abject failure to stem rates of prison-release reoffending internationally. Understanding how to best identify risk and effectively intervene to prevent CJS contact in those with mental illness, whether early in the course of psychosis or following release from secure care, remains a priority for those seeking to address the criminalization of mentally illness in our communities.

Fixated Threat Assessment Centers: preventing harm and facilitating care in public figure threat cases and those thought to be at risk of lone-actor grievance-fueled violence.

The rediscovery of the importance of mental illness in the risk assessment and management of those who threaten, approach, and harm public figures has led to a new way of dealing with those that threaten public figures. This approach emphasises the role of "fixation" which may be defined as an intense preoccupation pursued to an abnormally intense degree. It integrates a threat assessment paradigm with the literature on stalking. The need for such an approach was highlighted in research on the prevalence of harassment of public figures. Psychiatry has a key role in this approach which sees mental health clinicians and Police work together in Fixated Threat Assessment Centres (FTACs). An FTAC functions by assessing the level of concern and sharing information to facilitate interventions that are often mental health based. The purpose is not the hopeless task of identifying those who will go on to perpetrate serious violence, rather to intervene in the group they emerge from, to prevent harm. As well as decreasing risk to the persons fixated upon, this approach improves care to the mentally disordered people who harass and threaten them and, in doing so, decreases the likelihood of their criminalization while enhancing their quality of life. As expertise in the area has grown, policing and security agencies in several countries have expanded the FTAC model to cover individuals thought at risk of lone-actor grievance-fueled violence, a term that captures both different forms of mass killing and lone actor terrorism.

Tipping the scales of justice: the role of forensic evaluations in the criminalization of mental illness.

An unprecedented number of individuals with mental illness are represented in the criminal justice system. The unending growth of mentally ill populations in the justice system has led to jails and court dockets being increasingly overwhelmed with cases involving mental illness, state hospitals devoting far more beds and resources to forensic cases, and people without a criminal commitment left waiting for mental health services as forensic cases are prioritized. Although a forensic mental health evaluation is only one component of this larger system, common problems with forensic mental health evaluations can exacerbate the criminalization of persons with mental illness in many ways. This article reviews the current literature regarding issues of quality, reliability, and validity of forensic mental health evaluations, discusses the broader impact of these issues, and offers potential solutions for the field.

Jail diversion: the Miami model.

The Eleventh Judicial Circuit Criminal Mental Health Project (CMHP), located in Miami-Dade County, FL, was established in 2000 to divert individuals with serious mental illnesses (SMI; eg, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depression) or co-occurring SMI and substance use disorders away from the criminal justice system and into comprehensive community-based treatment and support services. The program operates two primary components: prebooking jail diversion consisting of Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) training for law enforcement officers and postbooking jail diversion serving individuals booked into the county jail and awaiting adjudication. In addition, the CMHP offers a variety of overlay services intended to: streamline screening and identification of program participants; develop evidence-based community reentry plans to ensure appropriate linkages to community-based treatment and support services; improve outcomes among individuals with histories of noncompliance with treatment; and expedite access to federal and state entitlement benefits. The CMHP provides an effective, cost-efficient solution to a community problem and works by eliminating gaps in services, and by forging productive and innovative relationships among all stakeholders who have an interest in the welfare and safety of one of our community's most vulnerable populations.