Mentally‐Disordered Offenders: Multi‐Agency Training
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/13619322199600020 |
| Pages | 31-32 |
| Published date | 01 June 1996 |
| Date | 01 June 1996 |
| Author | Dorothy Tonak |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care |
The Mental Health Review 1:2 © Pavilion Publishing (Brighton) 1996 31
Mentally-Disordered Offenders:
Multi-Agency Training
FOCUS ON…
Dorothy Tonak, Associate Consultant
CMHSD
One of the fundamental issues underpinning
good practice for mentally-disordered
offenders, as restated in the 1992 Joint
Review,1is effective multi-agency working.
The report of the Review’s Staffing and Training
Advisory Group stated that ‘it is a little artificial to
identify particular issues as “multi-agency” since
a joint approach runs to the heart of so much that
needs to be done to develop services for mentally-
disordered offenders’. Although relatively small
numbers of people are involved, mentally-disordered
offenders may have many problems: unemployment,
homelessness, severe mental health problems,
behavioural problems and potential for (re)offending.
Effective care is based on a well co-ordinated mix of
multi-agency interventions and a locally-developed
framework for professionals to follow when deciding
that an offender is suffering from a mental illness.
The complete interdependence of statutory and
voluntary services underpins all work in this field.
A vigorous approach to training is vital. The
Review states: ‘We recommend that training for
work with mentally-disordered offenders is reflected
in the plans of all relevant agencies and that, as far
as possible, these should be based on joint or
complimentary approaches. Action locally should
be matched by a co-ordinated approach to training
issues at national level’. The training needs for joint
working with mentally-disordered offenders are
being recognised, although progress in this country
has been slow. The International Institute for
Special Offender Services and Policy Research2and
partners in Northern Italy are currently planning
training for agencies working with discharged
prisoners with mental health problems. Another
planned training project between the American
states and countries in Europe aims to increase the
mobility of students and provide joint training with
mentally-disordered offenders.
The earliest schemes in this country in which
multi-agency professionals were involved were
diversion/panel schemes. These schemes quickly
highlighted the lack of knowledge about the roles
and responsibilities of each agency and the need
to retain individual organisational boundaries while
working across agencies. Thus, training in this area
needs to combine: practical information about health
and social services, the independent sector, the
criminal justice system and the Criminal Justice
Act of 1991; the social and health care needs of a
person with a mental illness, crucially including risk-
assessment at every stage; what alternative provisions
are available locally and how to access them; how to
work with a diversity of service systems, including
the housing department, benefits office, and the like;
and clarity about what is required to continually work
at organisational interfaces (in terms of information
about individuals, procedures to ensure safety and
meet CJS requirements, and so on).
Below are examples of how some key professional
groups have responded to the challenge of such
training.
The Police: within the Metropolitan Police, the
Clunis report was the catalyst for an in-depth but
rapid review of policy, training and overall approach
to this sensitive aspect to policing. A working party
was set up which produced a training package for
24,000 operational officers up to and including the
rank of inspector, and reference-documents for
To continue reading
Request your trial