Mental Illness and Incarceration: Causes and Solutions
This paper examines the growing crisis of mentally ill individuals being incarcerated in U.S. jails and prisons rather than receiving appropriate psychiatric care. It traces the problem to deinstitutionalization policies initiated in the 1950s, which closed state psychiatric hospitals without establishing adequate community treatment alternatives. Drawing on national prevalence data, the paper documents the high proportion of inmates with serious mental disorders, then details the consequences: elevated recidivism, higher taxpayer costs, management difficulties, and increased rates of suicide and abuse. The paper concludes by proposing a range of policy reforms — including expanded use of assisted outpatient treatment, mental health courts, staff training, Medicaid funding reform, and revised treatment laws — aimed at shifting the system's focus from punishment toward treatment.
- Introduction: Thesis: mentally ill people belong in treatment, not prisons
- Statistics: The Criminalization of Mentally Ill People: Prevalence data on psychiatric disorders across U.S. jails
- Deinstitutionalization: 1950s hospital closures pushed mentally ill into criminal system
- Problems Associated with Incarcerating Mentally Ill Persons: Recidivism, costs, management difficulties, suicide risk
- Possible Solutions: Six policy reforms to shift focus toward treatment
- Conclusion: Deinstitutionalization caused harm; treatment frameworks urgently needed
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds its argument in specific, concrete statistics — percentages of inmates with psychiatric disorders, daily housing cost comparisons, recidivism rates — which give the policy claims quantitative weight.
- Uses vivid, well-chosen anecdotes (the Mississippi Hinds County Jail inmate, Linda Kraige in Virginia) to humanize the data without displacing it.
- Balances problem identification with an equally detailed solutions section, giving the paper a practical, policy-oriented shape rather than stopping at critique.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of a problem-cause-effect-solution structure. It defines key terms precisely at the outset, traces a single root cause (deinstitutionalization) through multiple downstream effects, and then maps each effect onto a corresponding policy remedy. This parallel architecture makes the argument easy to follow and shows that proposed solutions are directly responsive to identified problems rather than generic recommendations.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a thesis-driven introduction and a brief glossary of key terms. The second section establishes the statistical scope of the problem. The third section identifies deinstitutionalization as the principal cause. The fourth section details four major categories of harm caused by incarcerating mentally ill persons. The fifth section proposes six specific policy interventions. The conclusion synthesizes the argument and reaffirms the call for a treatment-centered approach.
Introduction
Mental illnesses are among the most serious health concerns facing administrators and policymakers in America today. With the declining availability of both mental health community treatment programs and inpatient psychiatry beds in the few facilities that remain, more and more mentally ill persons are going without treatment and the essential services needed to help them cope effectively with their conditions. Police are often the first responders whenever a mentally ill patient experiences a relapse and acts out due to symptoms of their condition; worryingly, however, rather than being taken to mental health facilities for treatment, most of these individuals end up in jails and prisons.
From the very outset, prison and correctional systems were not designed to respond to the needs of people with mental health problems. When such people are housed there, they become more vulnerable to abuse, fail to receive necessary treatment and care, and end up costing the taxpayer significantly more in medical expenses than the average prisoner. Owing to the unfavorable prison environment, their symptoms worsen, and despite this, their chances of reconnecting with essential services such as Medicaid upon release are very minimal. Worsening symptoms, coupled with frustration, mean a higher risk of recidivism and increased danger to the community.
Since one of the core purposes of the criminal justice system is to ensure the successful reintegration of offenders into the community, there is a need to reorganize the current arrangement so that it focuses more on treatment and less on punishment in the handling of mentally ill persons. Achieving that will, however, require first acknowledging that the closure of state psychiatric hospitals is responsible for the rising numbers of incarcerated mentally ill individuals, that it is directly related to the rising rate of violent crime, and that it imposes a heavier burden on the taxpayer — costing twice as much as assertive community treatment programs.
Before proceeding to the main discussion, it is prudent to define a number of key terms used throughout this paper.
Mental illness: a condition that impairs a person's normal functioning, feelings, moods, thinking, and relational ability (Busfield, 2011). Studies have found major depression, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia to be the most common mental illnesses and psychiatric disorders affecting prisoners in the American jail system (Treatment Advocacy Center, 2007; Torrey et al., 2010).
Incarceration: the confinement of a person in prison or jail.
Deinstitutionalization: the policy of emptying state psychiatric institutions and then closing them to minimize overcrowding, prevent the deterioration of care, save federal funds, or simply "liberate" persons who have been confined (Torrey et al., 2010).
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.