Babatunde O. Adekson, PhD Student, Counselor Education and Supervision Warner School of Education and Human Development, University of Rochester. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Babatunde O. Adekson, PhD Student, Counselor Education and Supervision Warner School of Education and Human Development, University of Rochester. PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 78cfd9-MWMxO



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Babatunde O. Adekson, PhD Student, Counselor Education and Supervision Warner School of Education and Human Development, University of Rochester.

Description:

Structural and Public Stigmas in the American Probation System: Effect of Deinstitutionalization on Criminalization of Mental Illness. Babatunde O. Adekson, PhD ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:0
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Date added: 13 August 2020
Slides: 2
Provided by: cass116
Learn more at: http://www.aadaweb.org
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Babatunde O. Adekson, PhD Student, Counselor Education and Supervision Warner School of Education and Human Development, University of Rochester.


1
  • Structural and Public Stigmas in the American
    Probation System Effect of Deinstitutionalization
    on Criminalization of Mental Illness.
  • Babatunde O. Adekson, PhD Student, Counselor
    Education and SupervisionWarner School of
    Education and Human Development, University of
    Rochester.

Introduction There is a need to contextualize the
structural and public stigmas experienced by
offenders/probationers with mental illness (PMIs)
within the probation system as evolving from the
movement to deinstitutionalize mental health
care. The negative public perception about
individuals with mental illness was strengthened
by the social and communal frustrations caused by
deinstitutionalization (i.e., increase in
untreated mentally ill individuals in the
community). It was also dependent on the
socio-historical beliefs about mental illness and
about deviant behavior in American culture. There
are convergent themes used in the literature to
describe the series of promises and consequences
inherent in the mental health public policies and
social programs of the late 1950s and 1960s
coined as deinstitutionalization. The basic
premise of this policy was the closure of
psychiatric hospitals, with the transition of the
most psychiatrically-impaired individuals into
community based medication-assisted and/or
psychosocial treatments, and the transition of
other less impaired individuals to their families
and into the community (Durham, 1989 Lamb, 1998
Lamb, 2001 Morrow, Dagg Pederson, 2008
Newton, Rosen, Tennant, Hobbs, Lapsley Tribe,
2000 Palermo, Gumz Liska, 1992).
Deinstitutionalization is in some ways
responsible for the systemic disintegration of
community based treatment and the decompensation
and criminal institutionalization of cohorts of
individuals with mental illness. The argument is
that these individuals would have been able to
access services from the once functional
psychiatric hospitals or obtain services from
community mental health centers (Chaimowitz,
2011Lurigio, 2011). Consequentially, one of the
major consequences of the policies of
deinstitutionalization is stigma the opinion
that an attribute such as having mental illness
is discrediting and warrants an aggressive
reaction from society (Corrigan, 2005 Goffman,
1963).
Definitions of stigma Goffman (1963) defined
stigma as an attribute constructed because of a
perceived or actual discredited inadequacy,
defect, or handicap. According to this
definition, stigma then is reinforced based on
the relationship between these attributes and the
series of socially constructed stereotypes about
that individuals discredited imperfections. Insti
tutional practices and relatedness to structural
stigma Institutional practices formed by
sociopolitical forces that represent the
policies of private and governmental institutions
has been identified as a barrier
counterproductive to the opportunities of
stigmatized groups (Corrigan, Watson, Heyrman,
Warpinski, Gracia, Slopen Hall, 2005).
Structural stigma arises because of the
prejudices of individuals in power who endorse
legislation and organizational rules that
discriminate against people with mental illness.
Sociologists have also acknowledged that this
form of stigma develops as a result of the
historic, economic, and political injustices
wrought by prejudice and discrimination in the
United States (Corrigan Kleinlein, 2005). The
key component of structural stigma is not the
intent but rather the effect of mandating certain
groups into subordinate positions in society.
Relevant Theories used to explain stigma of
mental illness and deviance Structural stigma
results from social forces that develop over many
years to limit and in some cases eliminate
resources and supports needed (Corrigan Lam,
2007) to be successful in a very competitive
economic and social system. There are two levels
of structural stigma found in society
Institutional policies and social structures.
Stigma at an individual level of analysis (i.e.,
public stigma) is the emergence of societal
structures that limit and impact the life
opportunities of people with mental illness
(Corrigan Kleinlein, 2005). Public stigma is an
interactional dynamic perpetuated at the
individual and group levels that is based on
psychological perspectives, attitudes, and
behavior towards a particular person or group.
Stigma of criminality and deviance is
distinguishable from the stigma of mental
illness. The stigmatized criminal is
conceptualized as a scapegoat, upon whom
aggression is displaced from the frustrating
agent and who then turns out to be a catalyst for
the psychic genesis (Shoham Rahav, 1982, p.
89) of the stigma.
About PowerShow.com