Department of Law and Justice Studies, Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ 08028, USA.
Department of Criminal Justice, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Aug 16;16(16):2950. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16162950.
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.
假释决策——即有条件地将被监禁者从监狱中释放的决定——是世界上各个司法系统中最重要的决策之一。这个决定带来了重大的后果：对等待释放的个人（假释犯）的自由；对他们将要返回的社区的安全；以及对整个惩教系统，尤其是其组织能力。本研究试图通过具体分析心理健康因素在解释假释决策方面可能发挥的作用，为假释决策文献增添新的内容。迄今为止，关于精神疾病是否是犯罪行为的风险因素的研究尚无定论；尽管如此，一般来说，有心理健康问题的个人在司法决策中使用的风险评估工具上表现更差。该研究依赖于美国宾夕法尼亚州 1000 多名符合假释条件的个人的代表性样本。为了提高可靠性，分析测试了基于不同来源的（即自我报告的心理健康史；假释委员会使用的风险评估工具；以及惩教署使用的风险评估工具）几种心理健康因素，以增加可信度。为了解决有效性问题，该研究控制了假释决策的其他潜在相关因素。尽管多元模型解释了假释决策中相当大的差异，但纳入心理健康变量对模型拟合的贡献相对较小。研究结果深入探讨了司法决策的一个研究不足的领域，表明尽管在美国宾夕法尼亚州的假释委员会成员中，对犯罪司法群体中的精神疾病存在污名化，但他们似乎遵循官方准则，而不是考虑更主观的观念，即心理健康状况不佳应该否定假释释放。
