A Typology of Lifetime Criminal Justice Involvement Among Homeless Individuals With Mental Illness: Identifying Needs to Better Target Intervention
| Author | Ashley J. Lemieux,Marichelle C. Leclair,Tonia L. Nicholls,Anne G. Crocker,Laurence Roy |
| DOI | 10.1177/0093854819900305 |
| Published date | 01 July 2020 |
| Date | 01 July 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2020
A Typology of lifeTime CriminAl JusTiCe
involvemenT Among Homeless
individuAls WiTH menTAl illness
identifying needs to Better Target intervention
ASHLEy J. LEMIEUx
MARICHELLE C. LECLAIR
Institut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel
Université de Montréal
LAURENCE ROy
McGill University
Douglas Mental Health University Institute
TONIA L. NICHOLLS
The University of British Columbia
BC Mental Health & Substance Use Services
ANNE G. CROCkER
Institut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel
Université de Montréal
This study aimed to characterize lifetime criminal involvement among homeless people with mental illness in Canada
(N = 1,682). A latent profile analysis yielded five classes. Most participants fell within the Fewer Needs (75.5%) group,
characterized by less complex psychosocial histories and few criminal charges. Participants with Extensive Criminogenic
Needs (5.0%) and Acute and Extensive Criminogenic Needs (5.0%) had more charges for justice administration, violent, and
mischief/public order offenses and were more likely to have been charged before their first homelessness episode. Participants
with Needs Associated with Homelessness (10.6%) and Needs Associated with Drugs (3.8%) were similar, although the former
AuTHors’ noTe: This work was supported by a Mental Health Commission of Canada grant awarded to
Eric A. Latimer. Over the course of this study, Ashley J. Lemieux was granted doctoral research scholarships
from Fond de Recherche du Québec–Société et Culture (FRQ–SC), and from Équipe Vulnérabilité, intégration
sociale et violence (VISEV), as well as a McGill University Department of Psychiatry for Graduate Excellence
Fellowship in Mental Health Research. Marichelle C. Leclair would like to acknowledge the financial support
of FRQ-SC in the form of an MSc fellowship, and VISEV as a bursary. Laurence Roy would like to acknowledge
the Fonds de recherche Québec–Santé (FRQ-S) for her Junior 1 Chercheurs-boursiers salary award. Tonia L.
Nicholls would like to acknowledge the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for her New Investigator
salary support and her Foundation Award. Anne G. Crocker received consecutive salary awards from CIHR
and FRQ-S, as well as a McGill University William Dawson Scholar Award during this study. Correspondence
concerning this article should be addressed to Ashley J. Lemieux, Planning, Programming and Research
Officer, Responsible of the Safety, Justice, and Mental Health Technology Assessment Unit of the Institut
national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel, 10905 Henri-Bourassa Boul. East, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
H1C 1H1; e-mail: ashley.lemieux.pinel@ssss.gouv.qc.ca.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2020, Vol. 47, No. 7, July 2020, 790 –807.
DOI: 10.1177/0093854819900305
ht
ps:/
doi.
rg
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
© 2020 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology
790
Lemieux et al. / MENTAL ILLNESS, HOMELESSNESS, AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE INVOLVEMENT TyPOLOGy 791
had the longest history of homelessness and the latter had more drug-related charges and were most likely to have drug use
disorder. This typology, which sheds light on the cumulative needs associated with different patterns of lifetime criminal
involvement among homeless people with mental illness, could guide prevention initiatives and intervention strategies.
Keywords: homelessness; mental illness; criminal behavior; typology
Homeless adults with mental illness are overrepresented in the criminal justice system
(for a review, see Roy et al., 2014). People with mental illness are at increased risk of
criminal justice involvement (Fazel et al., 2016; Fisher et al., 2011). Furthermore, individu-
als released from correctional institutions are at increased risk of residential instability
(Geller & Curtis, 2011; kushel et al., 2005), and homelessness increases one’s vulnerability
for contacts with the criminal justice system, through poverty-driven offending, increased
surveillance, and the penalization of everyday life activities, such as sleeping or urinating
in public spaces (Geller & Curtis, 2011; Hiday & Wales, 2011; Nijdam-Jones et al., 2017;
Roy, Crocker, Nicholls, Latimer, & Isaak, 2016).
Several mechanisms linking homelessness, mental illness, and criminal justice involve-
ment have been proposed. Skeem et al. (2011) proposed a model to account for the associa-
tion between criminal behavior and mental illness. Their model, based on three main
mechanisms, overlaps with Hiday and Wales’s (2011) five-group typology of people who
have mental illness and who come into contact with the justice system. The first mechanism
suggests that, for some, poverty and social disadvantage explain the lion’s share of the asso-
ciation between mental illness and criminal behavior, notably through neighborhood disad-
vantage and victimization (kubrin & Stewart, 2006; Seto et al., 2018). Hiday and Wales
(2011) suggested that this reflects a group of individuals who tend to commit acquisitive
and mischief/public order offenses motivated by inadequate living conditions, and another
group whose concomitant substance abuse increases the risk of offending as well as the risk
of being arrested for offenses related to drugs and their procurement.
The second mechanism proposed by Skeem et al. (2011) suggests that mental illness
is associated with poor satisfaction with employment and relationships, which in turn
favors the development of antisocial traits or attitudes and procriminality that contribute
to criminal behavior (Bonta et al., 2014; Skeem et al., 2014). Hiday and Wales (2011)
have also accounted for a similar pathway with a subgroup of individuals with mental
illness whose criminal motivations arise primarily from antisocial traits, antisocial cog-
nitions, and the influence of antisocial peers. Individuals for whom these mechanisms
are relevant would be expected to display a range of criminal behavior, sometimes
including violent crimes.
Finally, the third mechanism suggests that, for a small subgroup of individuals with men-
tal illness, untreated psychiatric symptoms are a direct cause of criminal behavior and vio-
lence (Junginger et al., 2006; Peterson et al., 2014). Hiday and Wales (2011) hypothesized
the existence of two groups for whom mental illness is the primary driver behind criminal
justice involvement: one group of individuals who are arrested primarily for mischief/pub-
lic order offenses as a result of often harmless behaviors stemming from psychiatric symp-
toms occurring in public areas, and another who commit violent offenses driven by high
levels of psychiatric symptomatology, such as hallucinations and delusions, and who are
more likely to be found not criminally responsible due to mental illness.
792 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR
The nature and patterns of offending may point to unique criminogenic needs and dis-
tinct criminal pathways among subgroups of individuals with mental illness who become
entangled with the criminal justice system (Hiday & Wales, 2011; Skeem et al., 2011).
Rehabilitation efforts aimed at individuals with mental illness convicted of crimes focus on
the importance of incorporating the concept of criminogenic risk, using, for example, the
Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) framework (Epperson et al., 2014; Skeem et al., 2015). The
most important criminogenic risk/needs factors identified to date, referred to as the Central
Eight, are criminal history, procriminal attitudes and cognitions, procriminal companions,
antisocial personality pattern, education and employment, family and marital relationships,
and substance abuse (Bonta et al., 2014; Skeem et al., 2015). According to the RNR model,
individuals with different profiles of criminal justice involvement would have different
criminogenic needs and warrant different interventions, both in nature and in intensity
(Bonta & Andrews, 2007; Skeem et al., 2015). The risk principle highlights the importance
of matching the intensity of interventions to the level of risk of the individual (Andrews,
2011; Bonta et al., 2000; Latessa et al., 2010). Moreover, the need principle focuses on the
importance of assessing and targeting criminogenic needs in treatment, whereas the respon-
sivity principle stresses the need for tailoring these interventions to individuals’ particular
strengths and vulnerabilities (Bonta & Andrews, 2007; Skeem et al., 2015). In essence, it is
vital to identify individual characteristics to better target needs and reduce criminal
behavior.
Previous studies have attempted to characterize profiles of criminal justice involve-
ment of those with mental illness. Using cluster analysis, Roy and colleagues (2016)
generated profiles of self-reported criminal justice system contacts among participants in
the 6-month period prior to their enrollment in the At Home/Chez Soi (AH/CS) study of
homelessness. The first cluster comprised participants with multiple justice contacts, who
were more likely to have depression and substance dependence, including a subgroup of
individuals with frequent criminal justice involvement for nonviolent events, and more
severe psychiatric symptomatology. A second cluster of participants were arrested, often
for a disturbance, but were diverted from the criminal justice...
To continue reading
Request your trial