This research paper examines two interrelated phenomena within Australian correctional facilities: the prevalence of mental illness among prisoners and the social climate of those institutions. Drawing on a systematic literature review of government reports, peer-reviewed studies, and policy documents, the paper investigates how mental health disorders — including dual diagnoses involving substance abuse — relate to criminal behavior and recidivism. It also assesses how prison environment and procedural justice affect inmate well-being and rehabilitation outcomes. Findings confirm that mental health problems are substantially more common among prisoners than in the general population, that the current prison climate often exacerbates those conditions, and that existing rehabilitation programs lack the evidence base needed to address mental health adequately. The paper concludes with targeted policy recommendations for redirecting mentally ill offenders to appropriate health services and improving standards of prison management in Australia.
The paper demonstrates systematic literature review methodology with explicit inclusion criteria, a multi-stage screening process (title → abstract → full text), and thematic analysis of the surviving sources. This transparency allows readers to evaluate the evidentiary basis for every claim and is a core skill in applied social-science and criminology research.
The paper follows a conventional research-report structure: an introduction that frames the problem with prevalence data, a statement of specific research objectives, a significance section, a literature review covering mental health and prison climate separately, a methodology section explaining the search strategy, a findings section reporting screening outcomes, a discussion integrating themes across sources, and a conclusion paired with three actionable recommendations. This IMRAD-adjacent format is appropriate for a graduate-level policy-oriented study.
The World Health Organization sounded an alarm regarding the state of affairs in prisons. Its report warned that if no collective and holistic action were taken, incarceration centers would quickly turn into asylums for the mentally ill. The report further noted that such a development would be unfortunate because prisons are not suitable environments for the mentally ill — there are no adequate treatment programs or the capacity to handle such illnesses (WHO, 2008). Despite this warning, prison facilities continue to house many people with mental illness, and the rate of serious mental illness is increasing rapidly in some jurisdictions (Young et al., 2019). The prevalence of mental illness in Australia mirrors the ever-rising international trend. Figures indicate that one out of every two people sent to prison in Australia has been informed of some kind of mental illness — a rate representing 49% of all incarcerated individuals (Young et al., 2019).
The mental illness prevalence in Australian prisons over a 12-month period has been estimated at between 43% and 80%, with women more affected than men (Butler et al., 2011; Young et al., 2019). Depression, anxiety, and psychotic disorders account for 25%, 14%, and 10%, respectively, among indigenous Australians in prison over the same period (Heffernan et al., 2012). Prisoners are reported to be 3 to 11 times more likely to develop an affective, psychotic, anxiety, or personality disorder relative to the general Australian population (AIHW, 2019; Young et al., 2019).
The rising incidence of mental health problems in Australia's prisons may be a result of the psychosocial environment and the limited effectiveness of existing rehabilitation programs. The general belief is that prisons are not well placed to rehabilitate inmates. Several studies, both qualitative and quantitative, have suggested that prisons could be acting counter to their rehabilitative purpose, albeit unintentionally (Day et al., 2011). Many concerns have been raised regarding the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs running in Australian prisons, with critics pointing out the gap between rehabilitation policies and their implementation (Day et al., 2011).
This research aims to examine two phenomena occurring among prisoners in Australia: their mental health and the social climate within correctional institutions. The specific objectives are:
(i) To address and bring into perspective the specifics of mental health cases in prisons and how they relate to Anti-Social Personality Disorder among prisoners, and to establish how this relationship connects to criminal tendencies; to assess the social climate of Australian prisons and evaluate the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs.
(ii) To identify the behaviors of offenders with mental health problems and examine how those behaviors are connected to crime.
(iii) To establish how effectively reforms are being implemented and how they affect the quality of life and the behavior of inmates.
(iv) To evaluate the outcomes of rehabilitation programs intended to reduce offending tendencies and to determine the rate of reoffending among individual offenders.
The findings from this study will address rehabilitation developments in the Australian Criminal Justice System by shedding light on the relationship between mental health and crime. Mental health problems can affect how someone thinks, feels, and reacts to situations (AIHW, 2019). The statistics indicate that rehabilitation programs in Australia should be redesigned to accommodate inmates with mental health complications and to reduce the rate of mental health deterioration among incarcerated individuals. The study is significant because it will establish current conditions and recommend improvements to the mental health of prisoners in Australia and to the social environment within correctional centers.
Mental health is a critical component of psychological, social, and emotional well-being, affecting families, individuals, and the community at large. Severe mental health conditions are disproportionately prevalent in prison. For instance, in London, the prison population was reported to experience mental health conditions at a rate exceeding 20 times that of the general population, and over 70% of prisoners were found to have more than one mental health disorder (Bebbington et al., 2017). Mental health conditions, like other chronic conditions, do not necessarily increase with age. Notably, an encounter with the justice system may be the first time an individual has their mental health assessed by a health professional.
A study based on a population of adults aged 20 to 30 years found that 32% of patients with psychiatric illness had been apprehended by police in the ten years preceding the study. It also found that the first arrest of these individuals typically occurred before they had ever encountered a mental health expert or service (Morgan et al., 2013). The prevalence of self-reported mental health conditions in prisons is high and is attended to while incarcerated, but mental health can worsen after release (Cutcher et al., 2014). Prison populations with mental health conditions are also associated with alcohol and drug use complications, poor health outcomes, and post-release criminal activity. A connection has been established between injecting drug use and the incidence of mental health disorders, suicidal behavior, and self-harm after release (Butler et al., 2018; Cossar et al., 2018; Stewart et al., 2018).
The health assessment prisoners receive when first booked in typically involves a screening that includes medical history and a mental health screening tool (Martin et al., 2018). Based on this screening, prisoners can be referred to various specialists for further observation, assessment, or treatment. After assessing new entrants, clinic staff are asked whether the entrant presented signs of risk of self-harm. Where applicable, the participant is referred to a mental health service point for further assessment and observation. Female entrants to prison were more likely to be referred to a mental health expert than their male counterparts. Non-indigenous Australians were referred at a rate of 20%, compared to 14% for indigenous entrants (AIHW, 2019; Martin et al., 2018). These figures are consistent with the rates at which prison entrants self-reported mental health problems.
Mental health medicines, referred to as psychotropic drugs, encompass an array of medications including mood stabilizers, antidepressants, sedatives, and hypnotics. Prisoners are more commonly prescribed psychotropic drugs than the general population (Spittal et al., 2019). One study indicated that 18% of prisoners were placed on psychotropic medications at the time of admission (AIHW, 2019). In England, the rate of psychotropic medication administration was 5.5 to 9 times higher for women in prison than for women of a similar age in the general population (Hassan et al., 2014). Women incarcerated in Australian prisons are more likely to have had a psychotropic prescription than their male counterparts. Approximately half of those discharged from prison in New South Wales were found to have been on prescribed psychotropic medication (Abbott et al., 2016).
Prison climate has been defined as the emotional, social, physical, and organizational attributes of a correctional center, as perceived by staff and inmates (Ross et al., 2008, p. 447). The key aspects that constitute the prison environment include order, meaningful activities, autonomy, contact with the outside world, prisoner–staff relationships, and physical facilities (van Ginneken et al., 2019). Earlier research demonstrates that a positive prison atmosphere leads to improved behavioral outcomes, greater motivation for treatment, better therapeutic outcomes, and higher overall well-being (Gonçalves et al., 2016; van Ginneken et al., 2019).
Incarcerated people can be significantly affected by their prison environment. The physical and organizational characteristics of that environment establish the parameters that shape social life inside prison. Although imprisonment is associated with numerous deprivations, significant variation exists across correctional centers and even across different regimes within the same institution. For instance, the deprivation of autonomy and liberty may be felt less acutely by those who spend their time working outdoors and are permitted to move within the prison facilities during the day (Van der Kaap-Deeder et al., 2017). Prisons designed to house higher-risk prisoners impose stricter regulations, deprivations, and restrictions, and these institutions are unsurprisingly also associated with reduced well-being. From a deprivation perspective, therefore, the rate of adjustment is shaped by the hardships one undergoes while incarcerated.
The emotional and social characteristics of the prison environment — encompassing peer relationships and prisoner–staff relationships — are critical to understanding perceptions of fairness and safety. Fair treatment and safety are regarded as essential elements of a conducive prison climate (Beijersbergen et al., 2014). The power that prison staff hold over prisoners is considerable. This is not solely because staff control prisoners' physical freedom; they also exercise soft power over their subjects by determining what privileges prisoners may access, which activities they may participate in, and what services and goods they may receive. This holds true even for prisoners serving indeterminate sentences (van Ginneken et al., 2019).
Earlier research indicates that when procedural justice is perceived positively by prisoners, there are better mental health outcomes, reduced recidivism, and less misconduct (Beijersbergen et al., 2014). Relationships of trust among peers also affect how incarceration is experienced. Victimization and the fear of victimization in prison are sources of serious concern and compromise prisoner well-being. The existing literature reveals a relative lack of research on mental health and its relationship to crime, and there is currently no data demonstrating how the social climate of Australian correctional centers affects rehabilitation outcomes. This study aims to fill those gaps by addressing the question: What is the relationship between the prison environment and the mental health outcomes of those imprisoned, and how does that relationship affect the effectiveness of rehabilitation initiatives?
Current research demonstrates that mental illness is linked to a higher risk of offending and a greater likelihood of contact with the criminal justice system. This reality calls for preventive measures, including identifying individuals at risk and implementing strategies to reduce that risk. A high proportion of those arrested by law enforcement have disclosed a prior mental health diagnosis. When a prisoner is booked into a correctional facility, their psychiatric history should trigger a comprehensive psychological assessment. The intersection of justice and mental health has not received the attention or resources it deserves, particularly given the well-documented discrimination experienced by people with mental illness and the need to demonstrate effective intervention. This neglect extends from service funding to research, both locally and internationally. Although this review cannot provide a fully systematic account of all relevant literature, it illustrates both the breadth of the field and the significant gaps in the current evidence base. Further challenges stem from the fact that justice system employees, researchers, and policymakers work across multiple systems and disciplines, using different methods and operating with different priorities and frameworks — a situation that also varies across Australian states and jurisdictions.
(i) People with mental health problems should be redirected to mental health systems for appropriate treatment and guidance. Prisons are not the right setting for the treatment of mental illness; the criminal justice system is primarily oriented toward punishment and deterrence. Legislation could help facilitate the smooth transfer of people with mental health needs to dedicated mental health facilities.
(ii) Prisoners should be provided with appropriate care and mental health treatment, including access to assessment and treatment where needed. Referral to mental health services should be integrated into the standard health services provided in prisons. The health services available to inmates should be equivalent in quality to those available in the general community.
(iii) High standards of management in Australian prisons should be actively promoted. Good prison management will support improved mental health outcomes for those imprisoned, and should incorporate attention to human rights. Specific considerations include sanitation, occupational activity, nutrition, non-discrimination, physical activity, the promotion of social networks, and the prevention of violence within prisons.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2019). The health of Australia's prisoners 2018. Canberra: AIHW.
Bebbington, P., Jakobowitz, S., McKenzie, N., Killaspy, H., Iveson, R., Duffield, G., & Kerr, M. (2017). Assessing needs for psychiatric treatment in prisoners: 1. Prevalence of disorder. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 52(2), 221–229.
Beijersbergen, K. A., Dirkzwager, A. J., Eichelsheim, V. I., Van der Laan, P. H., & Nieuwbeerta, P. (2014). Procedural justice and prisoners' mental health problems: A longitudinal study. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 24(2), 100–112.
Butler, A., Young, J. T., Kinner, S. A., & Borschmann, R. (2018). Self-harm and suicidal behavior among incarcerated adults in the Australian Capital Territory. Health & Justice, 6(1), 13.
Butler, T., Indig, D., Allnutt, S., & Mamoon, H. (2011). Co-occurring mental illness and substance use disorder among Australian prisoners. Drug and Alcohol Review, 30(2), 188–194.
Cossar, R., Stoové, M., Kinner, S. A., Dietze, P., Aitken, C., Curtis, M., … & Ogloff, J. R. (2018). The associations of poor psychiatric well-being among incarcerated men with injecting drug use histories in Victoria, Australia. Health & Justice, 6(1), 1.
Cutcher, Z., Degenhardt, L., Alati, R., & Kinner, S. A. (2014). Poor health and social outcomes for ex-prisoners with a history of mental disorder: A longitudinal study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 38(5), 424–429.
Day, A., Casey, S., Vess, J., & Huisy, G. (2011). Assessing the social climate of Australian prisons. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, (427), 1.
Forsythe, L., & Gaffney, A. (2012). Mental disorder prevalence at the gateway to the criminal justice system. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, (438), 1.
Giles, M. (2016). Study in prison reduces recidivism and welfare dependence: A case study from Western Australia 2005–2010. Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 514. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Gonçalves, L. C., Endrass, J., Rossegger, A., & Dirkzwager, A. J. (2016). A longitudinal study of mental health symptoms in young prisoners: Exploring the influence of personal factors and the correctional climate. BMC Psychiatry, 16(1), 91.
Heffernan, E. B., Andersen, K. C., Dev, A., & Kinner, S. (2012). Prevalence of mental illness among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Queensland prisons. Medical Journal of Australia, 197(1), 37–41.
Martin, M. S., Wells, G. A., Crocker, A. G., Potter, B. K., & Colman, I. (2018). Mental health screening, treatment, and institutional incidents: A propensity score matched analysis of long-term outcomes of screening. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 17(2), 133–144.
Morgan, V. A., Morgan, F., Valuri, G., Ferrante, A., Castle, D., & Jablensky, A. (2013). A whole-of-population study of the prevalence and patterns of criminal offending in people with schizophrenia and other mental illness. Psychological Medicine, 43(9), 1869–1880.
Ross, M. W., Diamond, P. M., Liebling, A., & Saylor, W. G. (2008). Measurement of prison social climate: A comparison of an inmate measure in England and the USA. Punishment & Society, 10(4), 447–474.
Spittal, M. J., Forsyth, S., Borschmann, R., Young, J. T., & Kinner, S. A. (2019). Modifiable risk factors for external cause mortality after release from prison: A nested case-control study. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences, 28(2), 224–233.
Stewart, A. C., Cossar, R., Dietze, P., Armstrong, G., Curtis, M., Kinner, S. A., … & Stoové, M. (2018). Lifetime prevalence and correlates of self-harm and suicide attempts among male prisoners with histories of injecting drug use. Health & Justice, 6(1), 19.
Van der Kaap-Deeder, J., Audenaert, E., Vandevelde, S., Soenens, B., Van Mastrigt, S., Mabbe, E., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2017). Choosing when choices are limited: The role of perceived afforded choice and autonomy in prisoners' well-being. Law and Human Behavior, 41(6), 567.
van Ginneken, E. F., Palmen, H., Bosma, A. Q., & Sentse, M. (2019). Bearing the weight of imprisonment: The relationship between prison climate and well-being. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(10), 1385–1404.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2008). Trencin statement on prisons and mental health. Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO Regional Office for Europe.
Young, J., Snow, K., Southalan, L., Borschmann, R., & Kinner, S. (2019). The role of incarceration in addressing inequalities for people with mental illness in Australia. Submission to the Productivity Commission's Issues Paper on The Social and Economic Benefits of Improving Mental Health, [University].
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.