Changing characteristics of forensic psychiatric patients in Ontario: a population-based study from 1987 to 2012
To quantify the demand for forensic psychiatric services in Ontario over the past 25 years and investigate whether the sociodemographic, clinical and offense-based characteristics of forensic patients have changed over time.
We investigated all forensic admissions from 1987 to 2012 resulting in a disposition of Not Criminally Responsible on account of Mental Disorder (N = 2533). We present annual proportions of patients with specified sociodemographic, clinical and offense characteristics, and investigate whether the duration of forensic system tenure varies as a function of admission year, psychiatric diagnosis, or index offense.
There has been a steady increase in forensic admissions over this time period, particularly individuals with comorbid substance use disorders and individuals of non-Caucasian ethno-racial background. The proportion of persons committing severe violence has remained low and has decreased over time. Having a comorbid personality, neurological, or substance use disorder significantly increased forensic system tenure, as did committing a violent offense. Individuals who came into the system in earlier years had slower rates of discharge compared to more recent admissions.
Defining the trends characterizing the growth of the forensic population has important policy implications, as forensic services are costly and involve a significant loss of liberty. The current results indicate that young, substance abusing individuals of diverse ethno-racial backgrounds and who commit relatively low-level violence comprise an increasing proportion of Ontario’s forensic population, and suggest that treatment must be optimized to best serve the needs of these individuals.
KeywordsPsychiatric services Mentally ill persons Forensic mental health Time trends Crime
We would like to thank the Honorable Justice Richard Schneider, Angie Baggetta, Sheila McDermott, Chloe Vice and other staff at the Ontario Review Board office for their generous support of this project. In addition, we wish to thank the research analysts who collected the data: Stephanie Fernane, Bronwyn Mackenzie, Crystal Li and Daphne Vrantsidis. This study was funded by the Ontario Mental Health Foundation and Ministry of Health and Long Term Care. Dr. Nicholls would like to acknowledge the consecutive salary support of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research New Investigator Award and Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Scholar Award.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.Abramowitz MZ, Grinshpoon A, Priebe S, Ponizovsky AM (2008) New institutionalization as a rebound phenomenon? The case of Israel. Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sci 45:272–277Google Scholar
- 3.Priebe S, Badesconyi A, Fioritti A, Hansson L, Kilian R, Torres-Gonzales F, Turner T, Wiersma D (2005) Reinstitutionalisation in mental health care: comparison of data on service provision from six European countries. BMJ 330:123–126. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38296.611215.AE CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors Research Institute (n.d.). http://www.nri-inc.org. Accessed 25 Sept 2017
- 9.Appelbaum PS (1994) Almost a revolution: mental health law and the limits of change. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 10.Jones v United States (1983) 463 U.S. 354Google Scholar
- 11.Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act (1984) 18 U.S.C. § 17Google Scholar
- 12.Criminal Code of Canada (1985) R.S.C. c. 46. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/. Accessed 25 Sept 2017
- 14.Zapf PA, Golding SL, Roesch R (2006) Criminal responsibility and the insanity defense. In: Weiner IB, Hess AK (eds) The handbook of forensic psychology, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 332–363Google Scholar
- 15.R v M’Naghten (1843) 10 Cl. and F. 200, 8 Eng.Rep. 718Google Scholar
- 16.Bill C-30 (1992) An act to amend the criminal code and to amend the National Defense Act and the Young Offenders Act in consequence thereof (c. 43, s. 4)Google Scholar
- 17.Winko v British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute) (1999) 135 C.C.C. (3d) 129 (S.C.C.)Google Scholar
- 18.Nussbaum D, Malcolmson S, Dosis O (2000) Summary of research on Bill C-30 implementation in Ontario during 1993 and 1994. In: Eaves D, Ogloff JRP, Roesch R (eds) Mental disorders and the criminal code: Legal background and contemporary perspectives. Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute, Burnaby, pp 104–118Google Scholar
- 19.Ohayon M, Crocker A (2000) Impact of Bill C-30 in the province of Quebec. In: Eaves D, Ogloff JRP, Roesch R (eds) Mental disorders and the criminal code: legal background and contemporary perspectives. Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute, Burnaby, pp 119–128Google Scholar
- 20.Roesch R, Ogloff JRP, Hart SD, Dempster RJ, Zapf PA, Whittemore KE (1997) The impact of Canadian criminal code changes on remands and assessments of fitness to stand trial and criminal responsibility in British Columbia. Can J Psychiatry 42:509–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674379704200508 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Department of Justice Canada (2006) The Review Board systems in Canada: an overview of results from the mentally disordered accused data collection study. Author, OttawaGoogle Scholar
- 24.Schneider RD, Forestell M, MacGarvie S (2002) Statistical survey of provincial and territorial review boards. Department of Justice Canada, OttawaGoogle Scholar
- 25.Balachandra K, Swaminath S, Litman LC (2004) Impact of Winko on absolute discharges. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 32:173–177Google Scholar
- 26.Ontario Review Board (2015) Annual report. Author, TorontoGoogle Scholar
- 27.Crocker AG, Nicholls TL, Seto MC, Côté G, Charette Y, Caulet M (2015) The national trajectory project of individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder in Canada. Part 1: context and methods. Can J Psychiatry 60:98–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371506000304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Nicholls TL, Crocker AG, Seto MC, Wilson CM, Charette Y, Côté G (2015) The national trajectory project of individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. Part 5: how essential are gender-specific forensic psychiatric services? Can J Psychiatry 60:135–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371506000308 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Charette Y, Crocker AG, Seto MC, Salem L, Nicholls TL, Caulet M (2015) The national trajectory project of individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder in Canada. Part 4: criminal recidivism. Can J Psychiatry 60:127–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371506000307 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Statistics Canada (2011) National Household Survey. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E. Accessed 16 May 2018
- 31.Jacobs P, Moffatt J, Dewa CS, Nguyen T, Zhang T, Lesage A (2014) Criminal justice and forensic psychiatry costs in Alberta. Institute of Health Economics, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
- 32.Vigod SN, Kurdyak PA, Seitz D, Herrmann N, Fung K, Lin E, Perlman C, Taylor VH, Rochon PA, Gruneir A (2015) READMIT: a clinical risk index to predict 30-day readmission after discharge from acute psychiatric units. J Psychiatr Res 61:205–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.12.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Centre for Addiction and Mental Health v Ontario (2012) 342 O.N.C.A.Google Scholar
- 38.Robbins PC, Monahan J, Silver E (2003) Mental disorder, violence, and gender. Law Hum Behav 27:561–571. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:LAHU.0000004886.13268.f2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Social and Aboriginal Statistics Division (2011) Aboriginal peoples: fact sheet for Canada. Statistics Canada, OttawaGoogle Scholar
- 43.Simpson AIF, Penney SR, Seto M, Crocker AG, Nicholls TN, Darby PL (2014) Changing characteristics of the Review Board population in Ontario: a population-based study from 1987 to 2012. Report commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-term CareGoogle Scholar
- 46.Cannabis A (2017) S.O. c. 26, Sched. 1Google Scholar