International literature suggests that forensic care is best organized by independent security levels with appropriate infrastructure, procedures, and therapeutic goals. However, resources are not always sufficient to allow for organizing this way. We describe the functioning of a medium-security unit (MSU) where we not only rehabilitate forensic patients for their transition from prison to community life but also readmit relapsing patients and provide time-outs for patients in crisis. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this cohabitation for patients and personnel. This study is also the first to present figures regarding readmissions of relapsing patients and prison remittal in Belgium from a MSU point of view.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders DSM-IV-TR fourth edition (text revision). American Psychiatric Publishing.
2.
BeckA., & HuntT. (2002). Co-morbidity across levels of hospital security. Addiction Research & Theory, 10(4), 387–398. 10.1080/1606635021000010298
3.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4.
CoidJ.HickeyN.KahtanN.ZhangT., & YangM. (2007). Patients discharged from medium secure forensic psychiatry services: Reconvictions and risk factors. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 190(3), 223–229. 10.1192/bjp.bp.105.018788
5.
CoidJ.YangM.UllrichS.HickeyN.KahtanN., & FreestoneM. (2015). Psychiatric diagnosis and differential risks of offending following discharge. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 38, 68–74. 10.1016/j.ijlp.2015.01.009
6.
De PageL.BoulangerM.de VillersB.DugauquierA.SaloppéX., & ThiryB. (2018a). Perspectives on triage of mentally disordered offenders in Belgium. Acta Psychiatrica Belgica, 118(1), 25–30.
7.
De PageL.BoursoitR., & TitecaP. (2018b). The measurement of substance use in forensic schizophrenia spectrum disorders-initial validation of a new scale. Journal of Forensic Psychology, 3, 144.
8.
De PageL.GodinasS., & TitecaP. (2020). Circumstances leading to and characteristics of Belgian Forensic patients remitted to prison. Manuscript in Preparation.
9.
De PageL.MercenierS., & TitecaP. (2018c). Assessing psychopathy in forensic schizophrenia spectrum disorders: Validating the Comprehensive Assessment of the Psychopathic Personality-Institutional Rating Scale (CAPP-IRS). Psychiatry Research, 265, 303–308. 10.1016/j.psychres.2018.05.019
10.
De PageL.MercenierS., & TitecaP. (2018d). La gravité des faits comme condition à l’internement. Annales Médico-Psychologiques, 177(5), 404–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amp.2018.01.013
11.
De VogelV.De RuiterC.BoumanY., & de Vries RobbéM. (2012). SAPROF. Guidelines for the assessment of protective factors for violence risk. English version. (2nd ed.).Forum Educatief.
12.
de Vries RobbéM.de VogelV., & de SpaE. (2011). Protective factors for violence risk in forensic psychiatric patients: A retrospective validation study of the SAPROF. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 10(3), 178–186. 10.1080/14999013.2011.600232
13.
DouglasK.HartS.WebsterC., & BelfrageH. (2013). HCR-20 version 3: Assessing risk for violence. Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.
14.
DoyleM.DolanM., & McGovernJ. (2002). The validity of North American risk assessment tools in predicting in-patient violent behaviour in England. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 7(2), 141–154. 10.1348/135532502760274756
15.
HareR. D. (1991). The Hare psychopathy checklist-revised: Manual. Multi-Health Systems, Inc.
16.
HoganN.EnnisL., & AssessmentF. (2010). Assessing risk for forensic psychiatric inpatient violence: A meta-analysis. Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology, 2, 137–147.
17.
HuntG. E.BergenJ., & BashirM. (2002). Medication compliance and comorbid substance abuse in schizophrenia: Impact on community survival 4 years after a relapse. Schizophrenia Research, 54(3), 253–264. 10.1016/s0920-9964(01)00261-4
18.
JeandarmeI.HabetsP., & KennedyH. (2019a). Structured versus unstructured judgment: DUNDRUM-1 compared to court decisions. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 64, 205–210. 10.1016/j.ijlp.2019.04.006
19.
JeandarmeI.HabetsP.OeiT. I., & BogaertsS. (2016). Reconviction and revocation rates in Flanders after medium security treatment. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 47, 45–52. 10.1016/j.ijlp.2016.02.033
20.
JeandarmeI.VandenboschL.GroenhuijsenM.OeiT., & BogaertsS. (2019b). Who are the victims of NGRI acquittees? A study of Belgian internees. Violence and Victims, 34(3), 434–451. 10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-16-00197
21.
KayS. R.FiszbeinA., & OplerL. A. (1987). The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 13(2), 261–276. 10.1093/schbul/13.2.261
22.
KennedyH.O’NeillC.FlynnG.GillP., & DavorenM. (2010). The dundrum toolkit. Dangerousness, understanding, recovery and urgency manual (The dundrum quartet) V1. 0.21 (18/03/10). Four structured professional judgment instruments for admission triage, urgency, treatment completion and recovery assessments. Trinity College Dublin.
23.
LeonardS. (2018). Returning to prison from secure psychiatric services: Discharge circumstances and access to aftercare. IAFMHS Conference, Antwerp.
24.
LeonardS.-J.WebbR. T., & ShawJ. J. (2020). Service transitions, interventions and care pathways following remittal to prison from medium secure psychiatric services in England and Wales: National cohort study. BJPsych Open, 6(5). 10.1192/bjo.2020.62
25.
LlorcaP.-M.LançonC.LancrenonS.BayleF.-J.CaciH.RouillonF., & GorwoodP. (2009). The “Functional Remission of General Schizophrenia" (FROGS) scale: Development and validation of a new questionnaire. Schizophrenia Research, 113(2–3), 218–225. 10.1016/j.schres.2009.04.029
26.
Manguno‐MireG. M.CoffmanK. L.DeLandS. M.ThompsonJ. W.Jr.MyersL. (2014). What factors are related to success on conditional release/discharge? Findings from the New Orleans Forensic Aftercare Clinic: 2002–2013. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 32(5), 641–658. 10.1002/bsl.2138
27.
McDermottB. E.ScottC. L.BusseD.AndradeF.ZozayaM., & QuanbeckC. D. (2008). The conditional release of insanity acquittees: Three decades of decision-making. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 36(3), 329–336.
28.
McDermottB. E., & ThompsonJ. W.Jr. (2006). The review panel process: An algorithm for the conditional release of insanity acquittees. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 29(2), 101–111. 10.1016/j.ijlp.2003.12.008
29.
Müller-IsbernerR.WebsterC. D., & GretenkordL. (2007). Measuring progress in hospital order treatment: Relationship between levels of security and C and R scores of the HCR-20. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 6(2), 113–121. 10.1080/14999013.2007.10471256
30.
OgloffJ. R.TalevskiD.LemphersA.WoodM., & SimmonsM. (2015). Co-occurring mental illness, substance use disorders, and antisocial personality disorder among clients of forensic mental health services. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 38(1), 16–23. 10.1037/prj0000088
31.
PenneyS. R.MarshallL., & SimpsonA. I. F. (2018). A prospective study of pathways to hospital readmission in Canadian forensic psychiatric patients. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 29(3), 368–386. 10.1080/14789949.2017.1395061
32.
PillayS. M.OliverB.ButlerL., & KennedyH. G. (2008). Risk stratification and the care pathway. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, 25(4), 123–127. 10.1017/S0790966700011228
33.
QuinseyV. L.HarrisG. T.RiceM. E., & CormierC. A. (2006). Violent offenders: Appraising and managing risk(2nd ed.). American Psychological Association (APA).
34.
TebelakisD.De PageL., & TitecaP. (2019, June). Is life truly better in psychiatry than in prison?.Iafmhs, Montreal, Canada.
35.
van der VeekenF. C.BogaertsS., & LucieerJ. (2017). Patient profiles in Dutch forensic psychiatry based on risk factors, pathology, and offense. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 61(12), 1369–1391. 10.1177/0306624X15619636
36.
WebsterC.DouglasK.EavesD., & HartS. (1997). HCR-20: Assessing risk for violence, version 2. Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.
