Posted: June 23rd, 2022

Relationship between Mental Disorder and Offending

Name:
Date of submission:

Relationship between Mental Disorder and Offending
Abstract
This paper describes what is meant by mental disorder offense, outlines its association with offense or crime. It examines frequency of occurrence of offence as a result of mentally ill persons compared to offense committed by normal people has been discussed. Moreover, the challenges associated with distinction of mental disorders offense and any other offenses are hereby discussed for logical analysis. Finally, measures that should be taken to control the offenses for instance various penalties and rehab among others are also described while some recommended appropriately.
Introduction
Mental disorder offense can be defined as legally, clinically or politically triggered criminality or offense. They include psychotic, personality, mood or affective, schizophrenia, bipolar, drug-induced, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and eating disorder. According to the Department of Health Memorandum to the Mental Health Act 1983, mental illness offense can only be largely confirmed as a matter for clinical decision support in each case. Once a patient’s mental state is confirmed, necessary medical or penal steps are taken as appropriate. In case an offender is confirmed to be mentally ill, recovery options should be considered immediately.
Body
Firstly, the annual national confidential investigation report of England (July 2015) under forensic and clinical past records shows that people who have previously engaged in criminal activities had major mental illness. Singleton (1998) relates this with the significant mental disorders especially in prisons. Statistics in British crime survey referenced from Singleton et al (2000) compared the mental illness issues in the general public compared to those in prison. The findings indicated that 6-13% of Psychosis was prevalent among prisoners compared to 0.4% prevalence in the general public. Similarly, Personality disorder had 50-78% prevalence in prisoners while the same in the public was 3.4-5.4%. Moreover, neurotic, drug dependence and alcohol dependence had higher prevalence in the prisoner compared to the prevalence in the general public.
Secondly, research indicates that mentally ill persons are more vulnerable to be subjects of offence compared to others. Majority of them only commit relatively minor offences which is simply symptomatic of their inherent mental disorder (Watt, et al, 1993:4). However, we note that the mentally ill persons can as well commit serious offences but the occurrences are much minimal. They are indeed, compared to others, more likely to kill themselves (Peay, 1994:223). According to various statistical reports, mentally ill people are 14 times more likely to be victims of lethal crimes and should not be arrested for such offences (Walsh et al, 2003), 22% have been physically assaulted when compared with below 4% in British Crime Survey (Peay, 2011) and finally, 15% adult patients and 71% of patients with mental disorder were reported to have been physically assaulted in 2006-2007 (Healthcare Commission, 2008 in Peay, 2011).
Finally, psychopathy is strongly associated with high risk for violent behaviors and crime. For example, alcohol abusers in the time of intoxication, have higher prevalence to violence cases compared to non-alcohol abusers. Patients diagnosed with psychosis, schizophrenia and affective disorders such as dangerous obsessions may also result to violence. In the same note, homelessness is a social factor that may increase the risk to criminal activities. However, such violent acts are minor, weak and uncommon (Taylor, 1993). According to Szmukler (2000), suicide and harming oneself is the most common. However, being killed by such mentally ill patients is very rare, about 1 in 10 million (Peay, 2011).
The challenge is evident in the disparity between the court’s decision in conveying judgment to the offender who is mentally ill and the psychiatric approach. In the court of order, the verdict is either guilty or not guilty (Pakenham, 1992:5). However, the practitioners must first confirm the mental status of the culprit before deciding whether he or she is fit for imprisonment, rehabilitation or treatment. The court ruling must therefore be reconciled with the psychiatric evidence (Hall, 1980:20). Generally, the mentally ill are driven to commit crimes, mostly ‘nuisance’ offences, by petty issues such as expressed intentions to acquire shelter, food, warmth and so forth which may result to their imprisonments. These petty issues may gesture that they have been struggling to acquire help from the societies but in vain thereby leading them to commit such crimes (Pakenham, 1992:72).
Specific Offences and Mental Disorders
Some of the specific offences that may be committed are often due to socio-economic and socio-demographic factors such as being male, young, and lower economic status. These factors may lead a person into substance abuse which has been categorized as the major violence determinant. Cases of crimes that an individual may commit in case he or she is suffering from either intoxication of substances or mental illness are homicides, property, drug, murder, suicide, sexual offences and domestic violence, among others.
Considering homicide offence, the research conducted in England and Wales showed the slender existence of the relationship between mental illness and homicides. Homicides offences committed by people with mental illness are low. The recent censors in Out of 6,141 homicides in 1997, only about 10% were perpetrated by mental illness and until today the statistic is not increasing. That estimates an average of 57 homicides per year (NCISHMI, 2009). In linking the violence and psychosis, it was found that the majority of crimes were associated with alcohol and drug abuse (Tylor & Gunn, 1999). Substance abusers are often linked with crimes such as assault, burglary, disorderly conduct, driving violation and shoplifting.
Specific mental disorders such as anti-social personality disorder are linked with violence and crime. The disorder is mostly associated with those who are below the age of 15 who often possess behaviors such as disregard for others rights and social norms, aggressiveness, irresponsibility, irritability, impulsivity, disregard for own safety, deceitfulness and lack of regret (APA, 2000). The ASPD condition will eventually lead to an illegal offence developing persons below age 15 and may persist in advanced ages if not controlled. Research that was conducted among the prisoners shows that 50-80% of them were diagnosed with ASPD, encompassing behavioral disorder, clearly indicating that antisocial personality disorder is closely linked with criminology (Hare, 2006). Almost 2/3 of male and 1/3 of female were diagnosed and it was noted they had lifetime history of drugs and other substances abuse (Hare, 2006).
Criminal offence and Affective Disorder can also be related. Most of the people with this disorder suffer from psychotic depression and become convinced that death becomes a blissful escape. Often the individuals are prone to kill themselves as well as other family members in order to free their loved once from suffering (West, 1956: 64-65).
Schizophrenic disorder is linked with a rare, weak and minor cause of offences (Taylor, 1993). It is more common with self-harm (BPS Division of clinical Psychology, 2002). However, dangerous obsessing especially while under the influence of drugs can lead to serious violence. Social factors such as homelessness may also enhance the effects of schizophrenia disorders.
Conclusion and Recommendation
Mentally disordered should be provided with access to therapeutic attention wherever possible and should not be carelessly subjected to penal sanctions or imprisonment. Most mentally ill persons who commit offences should be well taken care of in the hospitals and rehabilitation centers (Sim, 1990). However, such offenders still find themselves in prisons together with normal offenders. This should not be the case. Measures should therefore be taken to ensure the courts of crime obtain psychiatric reports to assist them in deciding the proper course of any offence. The emphasis on the medical practitioner is necessary because it puts emphasis on care and support for patients’ sakes, rather than penalties for the society’s sake.

References
HARE, R.D. (2006) ‘Psychopathy: a clinical and forensic overview’, Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 29:709-724.
J.E. Hall Williams. (1980). Legal Views of Psychiatric Evidence. Medicine, Science and the Law. 20, 276-282.
Pakenham, F. (1991). Punishment and the punished. London, Chapmans.
Peay, J. (2011) Mental health and crime, Abingdon: Routledge.
Sim, J. (1990). Medical power in prisons: the prison medical service in England 1774-1989. Milton Keynes [England], Open University Press.
Singleton, N., Gatward, R., & MEltzer, H. (1998). Psychiatric morbidity among prisoners in England and Wales. London, Stationery Office.
Taylor, P. J., & Gunn, J. (1999). Homicides by people with mental illness: myth and reality. The British Journal of Psychiatry. 174, 9.
Walsh, E., Moran. P., Scott, C., Mckenzie, K., Burns, T., Creed, F., Tyrer, P., Murray, R.M., and Fahy, T. (2003) ‘Prevalence of violent victimisation in severe mental illness’, British Journal of Psychiatry, 183:233-238.
WEST, O. (1956) Severe personality disorders: Psychotherapeutic strategies, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 60-68