Comments on “A Guide to Implementing Police-Based
Diversion Programs”
The following remarks are in response to A Guide to Implementing Police-Based
Diversion Programs by Melissa Miller Reuland, of the Police Executive
Research Forum, Washington, DC, and published by the National GAINS Center’s
TAPA Center for Jail Diversion in 2004.
The Center is funded by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA) to address “the Technical Assistance and Policy
Analysis needs of communities in developing programs to divert people
with mental illness from jail into community-based treatment and supports” (see
www.gainsctr.com/b/tapa/about/default.asp).
As can be seen from our site,
MCES is a free-standing nonprofit emergency psychiatric hospital located in the
western suburbs of
Since 1975, we have offered
crisis intervention training to police and other criminal justice system
personnel as the foundation of a broad jail diversion strategy for the mentally
ill. One measure of the effectiveness of
our efforts is that the incidence of mental illness among the inmates of our
county prison is well below the rates documented for such facilities
nationally.
Given this background, we have
some comments on the Guide. We commend the quality and thoroughness of the
research and the clarity of the rationale and guidelines that are offered for
organizing a police-based specialized police mental health response
capability. Overall the publication is a
useful addition to the jail diversion literature.
Our concern lies with the short-shrift
given to alternative approaches to jail diversion. Two such approaches are briefly described in
the narrative. One is the “police-based
specialized mental health response” in which mental health consultants in a
department’s employ provide on-site and remote support to officers on “mental
health calls.” The other is the “mental
health based specialized mental health response.” We are basically an example of the latter.
Given the Guide’s title, we
understand that its purpose is not to fully lay out the advantages and
disadvantages of each of these three approaches, but rather to center attention
on “police-based” models (see Chapter 2) and more specifically, the
“police-based specialized police response” model, exemplified by the Crisis
Intervention Team (CIT) (see Chapters 3-4), which is certainly the most
well-known and most studied of the three.
However, in setting aside the
alternative approaches and concentrating on the CIT model, the validity and
utility of the alternative models are minimized, if not marginalized. In essence, the Guide projects what might
be characterized as a one-model-fits-all position.
The Guide overlooks the fact
that the three models were each developed in response to particular sets of
local needs, community values, mental health resources, and police structures
and organizations, among other variables.
It is the community situation that determines the applicability of the
model to be adopted not the features or the popularity of the available
options. What makes one model more
appropriate is how well it serves as a means to local ends.
A model is not more universally
applicable than the others in and of itself.
Each is a tool that is only effective when used in the right
situation. For example, we feel that our
approach “works” because it has evolved to meet the needs of a county served by
over fifty municipal departments covering locales from urban to semi-rural,
plus the Pennsylvania State Police and a number of special police forces. Our model is not inherently better than the
CIT model (or vice versa). It just best
suits the local conditions that shaped it.
In closing, we feel that both
the police and mental health sectors across the country would be better served by
help in identifying an approach that meets local needs rather than only being offered
guidance on implementing one approach in all communities. Serious mental illness exists in every
jurisdiction. Individuals with major
psychiatric disorders are at high risk of police contact. Police will be first on the scene of
situations involving people in crisis or behaviors linked to mental
illness. All parties will benefit from a
local response capability that makes the best use of the police and mental
health resources in their community.
Donald S. Kline, PhD
Director, MCES Criminal Justice Department
Posted 5.19.05