![]() |
Missouri Partners in Crisis Advocating Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services |
|
SUBSTANCE ABUSE, MENTAL ILLNESS, CRIME AND INCARCERATION
Since 1993, the Missouri inmate population has nearly doubled. In 1993, the inmate population in Missouri was 15,402. Today, the state’s prisons hold nearly 30,000 offenders and are growing at an average of 3.33 offenders each day. A large influx of persons with substance abuse problems and/or mental illness is fueling a significant portion of this growth due to inadequate treatment resources. It is understood that some offenders with substance abuse or mental health issues do need a period of incarceration. However, most offenders have non-violent offenses and can be safely treated in the community at a much lower cost. Compared to prison commitment, community based intervention such as drug and mental health courts, outpatient counseling, residential treatment, and early release programs supervised by Probation and Parole can generate more successful outcomes, while still providing the “get tough” oversight needed to protect public safety. In addition, offenders who are treated in the community are available to provide mandatory restitution to their victims and/or to participate in community service activities.
While Corrections is absorbing an increasing share of the state budget, funding for treatment services through Missouri’s Department of Mental Health (DMH) is shrinking. Responsibility for dealing with the non-violent offender with substance abuse or mental illness is shifting from the Department of Mental Health to the Department of Corrections. Additional funding for drug/mental health courts (or other community based treatment) with supervision from Probation and Parole promises to reduce very expensive prison costs and provide better outcomes both for the individuals involved and the taxpayer.
Recommendations
1. Improve the level of access to DMH-certified, community-based treatment services for persons with mental illness and substance abuse problems to prevent future admissions to the criminal justice system.
2. Support the creation and/or expansion of drug courts and mental health courts throughout the state in order to prevent such individuals from entering the correctional prison system.
3. Upon conviction, mandate the automatic placement of nonviolent first- and second-time substance abuse/mental health offenders who pose no risk to the community into certified community-based programs.
4. Implement early release programs that place nonviolent inmates with substance abuse problems or mental illness under the supervision of parole with a mandate of DMH-certified, community-based treatment and appropriate transitional care.
Corrections and Substance Abuse
u
About 39% of all Missouri inmates were under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the sentencing offense, and alcohol and/or drugs were involved in nearly half of all offenses that led to incarceration. 1u
In FY 2002, 40.2% of all Missouri inmate admissions were due to alcohol (8.8%) or drug offenses (31.4%). This rate was higher for female admissions (43%). 2u
Nearly one third of all Missouri offenders under supervision by probation or parole have been convicted of a drug offense.3u
The Department of Corrections estimates that 75% of offenders in Missouri need substance abuse services.4u
From 1992 to 2000 the rate of state spending on corrections in Missouri has increased by 129%.5u
In Missouri, 12.5% of all 1998 state spending was directed at the effects of substance abuse. More than half (53%) of this amount went directly to criminal justice related costs. Only 3% of state expenditures for substance abuse went toward prevention and treatment.6u
It is estimated that the Missouri Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse (ADA) reaches only about 14% of persons in need of substance abuse treatment.7Corrections and Mental Illness
u
Fifteen percent of Missouri’s FY 2002 inmate prison admissions were identified as in need of mental health treatment.8u
Over 75% of Missouri inmates with mental illness have a history of contacts with the criminal justice system prior to the current sentence.9u
Persons with mental illness have a 64% greater chance of being arrested than those who are not mentally ill committing the same offense.10u
Inmates with mental illnesses are more likely to be repeat offenders. Forty-nine percent (49%) of federal prisoners with mental illnesses have three or more prior probation/incarceration re-arrests compared to 28% without mental illness. 11u
Nearly half the inmates in prison with a mental illness are incarcerated for committing a nonviolent crime. 12u
Once in the criminal justice system, the mentally ill may deteriorate further due to the circumstances surrounding incarceration.13u
Female offenders are disproportionately victims of sexual or physical abuse and more likely to be addicted to drugs and to have mental illnesses.14 More than 43% of female inmates said they had been physically or sexually abused before their admission to prison.15u
Sixty-five percent (65%) of female prisoners have children under the age of 18 and among them only 25%, (versus 90% for men), said their children were living with the other parent.16u
Total state spending by states for the treatment of the seriously mentally ill is one third less now than in the 1950s.17u
Since 1989, Missouri DMH has seen its portion of state general revenue spending decrease by 25%.18u
It is estimated that Missouri DMH reaches only 22% of the number of persons suffering from severe mental illness.19Treatment Is Cost Effective and Reduces Crime
u
A 1997 RAND study reported that every dollar invested in drug treatment saves as much as $7.46 in crime related and health spending.20u
Treatment for drug and alcohol addiction cuts drug use in half, reduces criminal activity up to 80%, increases employment, decreases homelessness, improves physical and mental health, and reduces domestic violence, child abuse, and lost worker productivity. 21u
Drug court programs have been evaluated as successful in reducing drug use and re-arrests, resulting in substantial savings to taxpayers.22·
Only 8.7% of Missouri’s drug court graduates had a new arrest in the year following completion, versus 32.7% of those terminated from the program.23·
The annual direct cost per participant in Missouri drug courts is an estimated $5,042, versus the cost of $12,998 to incarcerate one inmate.24u
In-prison treatment that is followed by a period of community-based treatment enhances results. Arrest rates and drug usage are cut at least another 50%. 25 26 27u
In FY2002, 93% of babies born to mothers in Comprehensive Substance Treatment and Rehabilitation (CSTAR) programs were born drug free. The cost of raising one child with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome is $281,665. Each baby born alcohol and drug free is estimated to save $121,525 in averted health and related costs.28u
Diversion programs for persons with mental illness are considered the most effective way to break the cycle of repeated entry into the criminal justice system.29u
Mental health courts, while new, are showing promise as an effective strategy to deal with nonviolent persons with mental illness.30Principal Author: Myrna Trickey, Vice President, Family Guidance
Center
Co-Authors: Allyson Ashley, Chief Operating Officer, Pathways Community
Behavioral Healthcare, Inc.
Janet Woodburn, Chief Executive Officer, Bridgeway Counseling Services, Inc.
REFERENCES
1 Senator Harold Caskey report to Missouri Senate: “Arresting the Overflow, Alternatives to Prison Overcrowding and Expansion in Missouri.” (1999)
2
From unpublished report, Missouri Department of Corrections, Planning, Research, and Evaluation Unit: FY02, prisoner admissions.3
Missouri Department of Corrections (May 2001). Monthly Fact Sheet.4
Missouri Department of Corrections (Jan. 2003). http://www.corrections.state.mo.us/5
Missouri Chamber of Commerce, 2001 Study of Missouri State Government Spending6
The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (2001). “Shoveling Up: The Impact of Substance Abuse on State Budgets.” www.casacolumbia.org/7
Missouri Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse, FY99 Annual Report.8
See Note #2.9
Missouri Institute of Mental Health Policy Brief. (Oct. 2002)10
Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, Criminalization Fact Sheet. (Oct. 2000). “Co-Occurring Disorders Among People with Mental Illnesses Who Come in Contact with the Criminal Justice System.” www.bazelon.org/11
Ibid.12
Council of State Governments (June 11, 2002). Criminal Justice/Mental Health Consensus Project. www.consensusproject.org/13
The Sentencing Project (Jan. 2002). Mentally Ill Offenders in the Criminal Justice System: An Analysis and Prescription. www.sentencingproject.org/14
Morash, Merry, Timothy Bynum, and Barbara Koons. National Institute of Justice (August 1998). “Research in Brief: Women Offenders, Programming Needs and Promising Approaches.”15
Ibid.16
Ibid.17
Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law (1999). Position Statement on Involuntary Commitment. www.bazelon.org/18
See Note #9.19
See Note #9.20
Jonathan P. Caulkins, C. Peter Rydell, William L. Schwabe, and James Chiesa. (1997). “Mandatory Minimum Drug Sentences: Throwing Away the Key or the Taxpayers’ Money?” Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation21
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, National Evaluation Data Services (1999). “The Cost and Benefits of Substance Abuse Treatment: Findings from the National Treatment Improvement Evaluation Study.”22
Office of National Drug Control Policy Fact Sheet (March 2001). “Drug Treatment in the Criminal Justice System.”23
University of Missouri-Columbia, School of Social Work (Dec. 2001). Research report to Missouri Office of State Courts Administrator: “Multi-Jurisdictional Enhancement for Missouri Drug Courts.”24
Ibid.25
Field, G. and Karecki, M. (1992). Outcome Study of the Parole Transition Release Project. Oregon Department of Corrections.26
Finigan, M. (1997). “Evaluation of Three Oregon Pre-Release Day Treatment Substance Abuse Programs for Inmates.” Washington, D.C.: SAMSHA, Dept. of Health and Human Services, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment.27
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance (Dec. 1997). “Improving the Nation’s Criminal Justice System: Findings and Results from State and Local Program Evaluations.”28
TOPPS II: Evaluation of Mo. Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse (2002).29
Testimony by Bernard Arons, Director, SAMSHA (Sept. 2000). “Mental Health and Criminal Justice.”30
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance (April 2000). “Emerging Judicial Strategies for the Mentally Ill in the Criminal Caseload: Mental Health Courts.”
Join Us
Links
Talking Points
Contact Us
Legislation/Advocacy
News
Research
Return to Home Page