week 8

Analyzing The Problem

Travis Mccalman

Columbia College

Professor Ziegle

MSCJ 524 – CJ Policy Development and Evaluation

3/9/26

Introduction and Thesis

There is a growing role of criminal justice in addressing a mental health crisis, where police

officers have no specific training to respond to an act of behavioral intervention (BH). Therefore,

when individuals are undergoing a mental health crisis, they are typically criminalized and not

treated. The necessary reform must be implemented at the level of the whole system that reveals the

main causes of these results, analyzing the previous intervention, including the collaboration of

stakeholders. A Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) model is a better, more humane,

and evidence-based approach to better crisis outcomes and unnecessary arrests.

Documenting the Need for Change

One of the primary problems in the criminal justice system is that the cases that require

addressing by the police officers are increasing due to mental health-related cases. Instead, law

enforcement has assumed the innate role of the first responder during an emergency involving

someone with mental health issues, despite the officers being generally trained on the concept of

community safety as opposed to clinical intervention (Welsh & Harris, 2016).

Such a mismatch tends to have adverse consequences doing things like arresting people

who are not supposed to be arrested, use of force, and putting people in jail who need medical or

psychological assistance. The high rate of incarceration of mentally ill people is indicative of an

institutional failure. In a situation where people in crisis are subjected to criminal justice systems

rather than being treated, the root causes of the crises are not changed, and this will lead to the

recurrence of such crises.

The necessity of the change can be seen in the pressure on the law enforcement agencies,

prisons, and communal resources. And unless it is reformed, the system will still give short-term

control over long-term recovery, resulting in cycles of crisis and criminalization.

History of the Problem

In the past, mentally ill people used to be treated in healthcare institutions. Nevertheless, it

began to change over time, especially after the evolution of the tough-on-crime era, which

introduced punitive strategies in the criminal justice system. With the mental health institutions

enduring a decline in accessibility and less funding on community-based services, the burden of

handling people in crisis was left on the law enforcement agencies.

The changing trend led to an increased number of mentally disturbed people in jails and

prisons. The issue has been exacerbated over the years, with the mental health services not keeping

up with the demand, continuing to entrench the primary role of the criminal justice system as a

multi-purpose mental health crisis responder.

Potential Causes of the Problem

The problem is a result of a complex of factors. This is largely because mental health

services in most communities are inaccessible and not readily available. Timely intervention is not

usually given to people, and their conditions develop into a crisis, which may necessitate police

intervention.

The problem is also caused by socioeconomic factors such as poverty, homelessness, and

substance use disorders. The conditions are factors that put these individuals at risk of both mental

health crises and police contact. It is more than just policing that is required in addressing the issue,

but the mental health infrastructure must be strengthened.

Previous Interventions

Historically, the criminal justice system has been characterized by punitive methods such

as arrest and imprisonment to control the situation with people who tend to encounter mental health

crises (Welsh and Harris, 2016). Although these strategies were focused on ensuring that people

were safe, they did not mitigate underlying clinical requirements and led to population congestion

in prisons.

Later reforms have tried to show better results. Crisis Intervention Team (CIT)-training

programs are also added to equip officers with a better perception and reaction to mental health

crises. In other jurisdictions, a briefer treatment program has also been introduced through

diversion programs and mental health courts to help divert them rather than incarcerate them.

Stakeholders

Mental health practitioners are very important stakeholders. They believe in treatable

solutions but might be constrained by funding, staffing, and access issues. Mentally ill persons are

not the least vulnerable to this because they can fall under the criminalization and not get proper

treatment. Their families are also affected and thus are found to be struggling to receive adequate

support and resources.

Policymakers are also very important when it comes to creating legislation and funding

choices, whereas community organizations and advocacy groups strive to reform and improve

services. There are varying impacts on each of the groups and competing priorities can impact the

way solutions are prepared and executed.

Barriers to Change

Although it has been acknowledged that the problem exists, there are several problems that

are impeding any significant reform. The issue of finances restricts the development of mental

health care and the adoption of models of collaborative responses. Old-fashioned law enforcement

and other agencies may also result in resistance to the adoption of new approaches.

One more issue that makes implementation challenging is logistical issues, including the

need to coordinate various agencies and promote efficient communication. Also, the stigmatization

of society may diminish the willingness of people to support reforms. These are the obstacles that

must be overcome to introduce extensive solutions such as the MHCRT model.

Systems Analysis

An analysis of the system shows that this is not an issue of law enforcement, but many other

systems are involved in this process, such as the system of healthcare, community service, courts,

and correctional institutions. These systems fail to coordinate effectively, and this normally results

in derailment in care. Supposedly, in such a case, persons in crisis can be arrested because mental

health professionals cannot be available. They can be transferred through courts and jails without

proper treatment once they get to the system, and as such, they end up getting back to the

community and repeating crises.

This disintegration shows inefficiencies in communications and the allocation of resources.

There is a need to have a more integrated situation where law enforcement works with mental

health providers. Such an approach can be provided by the MHCRT model since its

implementation implies the formation of interdisciplinary teams, which will enhance immediate

response to crises and long-term outcomes (Jr., 2019).

Conclusion

Analysis Stage 1 points to the necessity of the systemwide change in addressing mental

health crises in the criminal justice system. The existing situation, under which law enforcement

becomes the main responding organization without proper training and assistance, is ineffective

and causes only negative results. Balancing the baseline issues, probing of the previous

intervention, and analysis of inefficiencies throughout the system, one can realize that a more

unified strategy is required. The Mental Health Crisis Response Team (MHCRT) model is a

different development in tackling these challenges, forcing a unified response that incorporates

both the enforcement of law and mental health expertise.

References

Welsh, W. N., & Harris, P. W. (2016). Criminal justice policy and planning (5th ed.). Taylor &

Francis.

Jr., F.P.R. B. (2019). Flawed Criminal Justice Policies: At the Intersection of the Media, Public

Fear and Legislative Response (2nd ed.). Carolina Academic Press.

https://ccis.vitalsource.com/books/9781531011376