Navigating Forensic Mental Health: Patient Perceptions of Procedural Justice and Coercion in Canada

Introduction

Perceptions of Procedural Justice and Coercion among Forensic Psychiatric Patients is an article that explores the patient’s perception of procedural coercion and justice in a setting of forensic mental well-being in Canada. The increment of interest in forensic mental health research has been spearheaded by recovery and risk paradigms that inform and support mental health in forensic patients. However, a gap still exists between the forensic patient's mental health recovery rate and the vital components perceived by the treatment providers and forensic patients. Despite the gap, there is still a little understanding of how the forensic patients understand their mental health system to the point of legitimacy and fairness and how their views affect the progress recovery, the risk for adversity, and treatment engagement (Simpson et al., 2020). The review aims to discuss how the patient's understating affects their recovery rate, treatment engagement, and risk for adversity.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Perceptions of Procedural Justice and Coercion among Forensic Psychiatric Patients Review

The relation of the forensic patient's knowledge in the association of risk of adversity, treatment engagement, and recovery rate is related to the perception of coercion among forensic patients' treatment. The article analyzes the positive experience of procedural justice with its relation to progress recovery and treatment engagement. Besides, it argues the negative relationship of perceived coercion and the outcomes and the positive regard to the adversity and risk measurement. Furthermore, it shows the grander patient-clinician concordance with reverence to recovery and estimates of risk related to a reduced likelihood of prolonged tenure, reoffending, and readmission under the guidance of the forensic system—the three primary analysis of the article all related to the topic of perception of coercion (Simpson et al., 2020). The reason is that the main agenda of the article talks about the treatment of forensic patients that is related to the forensic patient's treatment. Besides, the report analyzes research that was conducted to investigate the same aspects.

The mixed-methods study is a method of research that was conducted in the article. The research was carried to analyze the patient views of procedural coercion and justice concerning Canada's forensic mental well-being system (Davoren et al., 2013). The study was conducted on one hundred and twenty forensic patients and their chief care providers. It obtains the patient self-assessment of progress and risk in recovery and analyzes the extent of concordance with clinician-rated appraisals of the constructs. Both quantitative and qualitative methods are utilized to determine how victims' views of legitimacy, fairness, and coercion affect their level of risk adversity, progress recovery, and treatment engagement. An eventual two-year checkup has been followed to study the effect of clinician and patient perception on outcomes in the rate of progress, clinical reoffending, and hospital readmission through the forensic system. The research applies to the main goal of the article. In the study, a small group of forensic patients is taken to represent forensic patients' entire population. The assessment is based on the perception of coercion and justice of forensic patients, which is the article's primary goal.

The data that was used was the one that was collected from the forensic patients under study. One hundred twenty forensic patients were picked after being trained on how to answer the questions then Methods were used to manage the data. In the first phase, a quantitative method was used in the collection of data. The type of data that was collected in this stage was sociodemographic data. Besides, the type of data collected was protective, and the risk rate as it appeared on the SAPROF and HCR-20v3 (Penney et al., 2019). In the second phase of the collection of data, a qualitative method was used to collect data. After collecting data in the two phases, integration was done to combine the data—data integration, which was done in stage three. The type of data analyzed at this step was duration tenure, criminal reoffending, and hospital readmission. Qualitative methods were the primary method used in collecting data, and the qualitative approach was used to elaborate and analyze the data collected. The quantitative data that was ordered was the one that was mainly used since the data collected was from a large sample that represented a larger proportion. Besides, some equipment was used during the data collection and analysis process.

The MacArthur Perceived Coercion Scale, Procedural Justice Scale, Programmed Completion and Recovery Scale, Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for violence risk, and Historical Clinical and Risk Management were some of the tools used in the first phase of the analysis of data collected. The MacArthur Perceived Coercion Scale was used to analyze the perception of coercion of forensic patients (Gardner et al., 1993). The scale takes into consideration the outpatient and inpatient victims. The procedural Justice Scale was used to measure the victims' views on the procedural justice environment of their verdict concerning their ongoing treatment and ORB hearing and the forensic mental well-being system's guidance. The Programme Completion and Recovery Scale were used to analyze recovery progress patient engagement, and progress during the treatment process. Historical, Clinical, and Risk Management were used to measure the individuals' risk status. As a result of the data and analysis, some conclusions were drawn from the research.

The conclusion drawn from the research is that clinician and patient agreement concerning progress in recovery and treatment is novel. There is a lack of better understanding and sharing of knowledge on forensic mental health. Besides, Dundrum is one of the measures that can be used in dimension exploration. Given that the association was novel, a different qualitative approach is supposed to be carried out. Further qualitative research will give a clear picture of recovery and risk frameworks that are applied in forensic ORB and Intervention processes. The author used various sources to support his argument.

The author uses both primary and secondary types of sources. The primary reference is the statistical data that has been referred to. The preliminary data made the article useful since it showed that the author had researched the work before coming to his conclusion. Besides, the use of primary sources indicates that what is in position are facts. The author also uses articles and textbooks to support and refer to his work: other research works, and reports, in the paper form part of the secondary reference. The secondary sources have made the author responsible by giving credit to other scholars and acknowledging their works. The inclusion of the secondary references makes the author look benevolent and appreciative. Besides, the secondary sources make the piece look that more research occurred during the process. In this article, a lot of scholarly references have been used. The more sources used it show how the report was researched, and how intense research took place before coming up with the final copy. Besides, the referencing makes it look like the work being represented is accurate. The work's accuracy increases when various sources go into consideration, and a comparison is made. Therefore, the use of both primary and secondary references has made the article more effective in forensic patients' research.

The article was reliable in terms of research carried out and the support of the scholarly articles. The report provided background information about forensic patients. The background helped give information on who the forensic patient is and how they relate to the argument. The research was carried out with a mixed method to enhance the accuracy of the data collected.

The article was well written, both reflectively and thoughtfully. The report highlights its primary goal, which is a relation of the forensic patient's knowledge with the consideration of the risk of adversity, and treatment engagement. It stipulates several arguments to support the idea. It thoughtfully includes a sample of the forensic patient to assess the same case. It uses a small model of forensic patients to represent other patients who might face the same.

The article's limitation is that it doesn't give a richer explanation of the patient's experiences. The item doesn't have a section whereby the affairs of the exact patients are shared. The article still leaves a gap where qualitative research has to be carried out to give a richer explanation of the patient's experiences. However, the report has played a significant role by outsourcing as many sources as possible to support its argument. Even with the limitation that might be visible in the article, there is a piece of clear evidence that it has effectively focused on the critical issues that are relevant in the field. The aspect that it has pointed out includes the fact there is a need to have an agreement between the clinician and the patients on the way forward. However, there is often a disjunction where seemingly the clinician does not provide the requisite information on the mental health issue. However, this is the case when because mental health is different from any other type of ailment. The clinician might not be able to communicate with the patient since effectively

References

Davoren, M., Abidin, Z., Naughton, L., Gibbons, O., Nulty, A., Wright, B., & Kennedy, H. G. (2013). Prospective study of factors influencing conditional discharge from a forensic hospital: the DUNDRUM-3 programme completion and DUNDRUM-4 recovery structured professional judgement instruments and risk. BMC psychiatry, 13(1), 185.

Gardner, W., Hoge, S. K., Bennett, N., Roth, L. H., Lidz, C. W., Monahan, J., & Mulvey, E. P. (1993). Two scales for measuring patients' perceptions for coercion during mental hospital admission. Behavioral sciences & the law, 11(3), 307-321.

Penney, S. R., Seto, M. C., Crocker, A. G., Nicholls, T. L., Grimbos, T., Darby, P. L., & Simpson, A. I. (2019). Changing characteristics of forensic psychiatric patients in Ontario: a population-based study from 1987 to 2012. Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 54(5), 627-638.

Simpson, A. I., Boldt, I., Penney, S., Jones, R., Kidd, S., Nakhost, A., & Wilkie, T. (2020). Perceptions of procedural justice and coercion among forensic psychiatric patients: a study protocol for a prospective, mixed-methods investigation. BMC psychiatry, 20, 1-10.