Search

A matrix is proposed to characterize mental health diversion programs and standardize the reporting of program context, outputs, outcomes, and community settings. Data collection for program reporting is challenging because individual programs report on what is relevant to local conditions and may omit or overlook important contextual or structural factors that are key to programmatic success or failure. This limits generalizability and comparability. Using a standard matrix reporting framework clearly lists the constructs of the program, context, and community systems. Two diversion programs are reported demonstrating the use of the matrix. Although different jurisdictions have a wide spectrum of agencies and resources available to support diversion, and may approach the concept differently, standardizing and streamlining reporting will assist with evaluation of diversion and the creation of sustainable programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a distinct lack of a normative theory for diversion of justice-involved individuals with mental illness at the intersection of the criminal justice and health care systems. The nexus where the criminal justice and health care systems are supposed to connect during diversion is not conceptually framed in a measurable way. The paper proposes a potential systems theory of diversion that explicates the overlapping boundaries within and between the criminal justice and health care systems. From a systems perspective, diversion is operationalized differently depending on the entry of an individual with justice involvement and mental illness into one of the systems. The criminal justice and health care systems have multiple levels (micro-, meso-, and macro-), but individuals enter both systems at the respective systems intersection of the micro- and meso-levels. The theoretical disconnect may fail to consider the impact of criminal justice diversion on the health care system. We propose a unified systems theory of diversion to improve evaluation, comparability, sustainability, resource allocation, and outcomes of diversion programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This introduction offers a primer for this special edition of the Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice. The purpose is to provide an interdisciplinary platform for scholars and practitioners to communicate perspectives of criminal justice, criminology, and law; public policy and administration, economics and political science; social work and sociology; behavioral health, counseling and psychology; public health, emergency medicine, and psychiatry around diversion. While disciplines share objectives of diversion as (1) rehabilitation, (2) efficient case processing, and (3) reducing resources, the defining and reporting of diversion differs. Justice-involved individuals with mental health issues making successful re-entry into the civil society, however, becomes convoluted. Diversion in practice has taken many shapes. Diversion in theory has taken many meanings. This special edition offers a variety of empirical and theoretical articles that attempt to provide clarity to an often implemented and understudied area of criminal justice and health care. Interviews with street-level officials, quantitative analyses of programs, and philosophical challenges to innate assumptions about individuals and systems are seen from a wide variety of scholars. The authors showcase their varied backgrounds with graduate students, university faculty, and practitioners, offering the fields of criminal justice and health care insight into diversion at all levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This conclusion provides a brief synopsis of the research articles presented in this special edition of The Journal of Contemporary Justice. The research findings clearly demonstrate that when the objective of diversion is sought by diversion-based programs where the criminal justice and health care systems intersect, processes and services frequently break down. As this collection of articles highlights, our collective understanding of diversion is siloed by academic discipline; thus, the broader picture of diversion remains muddled. It remains muddled because the reporting of diversion is scattered across disciplinary journals where a more robust understanding of diversion becomes unwieldy if not impossible for researchers and practitioners alike without sifting through multiple books, journals, manuscripts, and websites. Therefore, diversion will continue to elude efficacy without the coordination and cooperation of numerous disciplines spanning both the criminal justice and health care systems diversion. As this collection of articles strongly suggests, there is a need to create a transdisciplinary understanding of diversion as well as publication outlets so best practices can be developed and shared in one place. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Understanding vaccine intentions and attitudes of health professionals is critical as the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna COVID19 vaccines are being administered throughout the United States. This study estimates the level of vaccine hesitancy at a health sciences center in West Texas prior to the distribution of the vaccines. Methods: An analytical cross-sectional study was performed via anonymous Qualtrics survey administered to approximately 4500 faculty, staff, postdoctoral research associates/medical residents, and employees at a multi-campus health sciences university in the United States. Respondents were asked demographic questions and intention to receive the vaccine. Factors associated with the intention to receive a vaccine were determined using logistic regression analysis. Results: A total sample of 2258 subjects were evaluated (50.0% response rate). Among all respondents, 64.6% reported that they would probably or definitely receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Men had higher levels of intention to receive the vaccine (OR = 2.11, 95% CI 1.64-2.71); respondents who indicated yearly influenza vaccines are necessary were also more likely to receive the vaccine (OR = 6.04, 95% CI 4.70-7.75). Eighty-three percent of faculty and 56% of the staff reported intention to receive the vaccine. Respondents who had previously tested positive for COVID-19 reported more interest in receiving the vaccine (58.5% yes vs 41.5% no). Conclusion: In this study, the intention to receive the COVID-19 vaccination at a United States health sciences center falls below the necessary herd immunity estimates. Public health initiatives must be developed to decrease vaccine hesitancy, especially among health professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Foreign- and U.S.-born Hispanic health deteriorates with increasing exposure and acculturation to mainstream U.S. society. Because these associations are robust to (static) socioeconomic controls, negative acculturation has become their primary explanation. This overemphasis, however, has neglected important alternative structural explanations. Examining Hispanic mortality using the 1998-2006 U.S. National Health Interview Survey-Linked Mortality File according to nativity, immigrant adaptation measures, and health behaviors, this study presents indirect but compelling evidence that suggests negative acculturation is not the only or main explanation for this deterioration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]