Discovering Mental Ill Health: ‘Problem-Solving’ in an English Magistrates’ Court

  • Timothy Auburn
  • Cordet Smart
  • Gisella Hanley Santos
  • Jill Annison
  • Daniel Gilling


In this chapter, we examine one particular approach to problem-solving in the English criminal justice system. The incorporation of problem-solving into Magistrates’ Courts for low-risk offenders has been called a ‘window of opportunity’ (Donoghue, 2014) insofar as it provides an opportunity to engage with ‘hard-to-reach’ social groups. It aims to identify any problems which are acting as barriers to a better life and signpost the person to services which can help address these problems. One of the aims of the project that we have been conducting on community justice is to examine how problem-solving works as a specific set of practices for those with mental ill health problems.


Mental Health Conversation Analysis Discourse Marker Problem Claim Negative Polarity Item 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Attorney General’s Office. (2009). Engaging Communities in Criminal Justice. London: Crown Copyright (Cm 7583). Retrieved on 30th April 2015 at: Scholar
  2. Berman, G., & Fox, A. (2009). Lasting change or passing fad: Problem solving justice in England and Wales. London: The Policy Exchange.Google Scholar
  3. Bradley, K. (2009). The Bradley Report. London: Crown Copyright. Retrieved on 17th March 2015 at: Scholar
  4. Butler, C., Pooter, J., Danby, S., Emmison, M., & Hepburn, A. (2010). Advice-implicative interrogatives: Building ‘Client-centred’ support in a children’s helpline. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73, 265–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Byng, R., Quinn, C., Sheaf, R., Samle, C., Duggan, S., Harrison, D., Owens, C., Smithson, P., Wright, C., Annison, J., Brown, C., Taylor, R., Henley, W., Qureshi, A., Shenton, D., Porter, I., Warrington, C., & Campbell, J. (2012). COCOA: Care of offenders, Continuity of access. Final report. NIHR Service Delivery and Organisation Programme. Project 08/1713/210. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  6. Cattell, J., Mackie, A., Prestage, Y., & Wood, M. (2013). Results from the Offender Man-agement Community Cohort Study (OMCCS): Assessment and sentence planning. Ministry of justice analytical series. London: Crown Copyright. Retrievd at: Scholar
  7. Centre for Mental Health. (2014). Criminal justice and mental health. Retrieved on 19th April 2015 at: Scholar
  8. Clayman, S., & Heritage, J. (2002). Questioning presidents: Journalistic deference and adversarialness in the Press Conferences of U.S. Presidents Eisenhower and Reagan. Journal of Communication, 52, 749–775. doi 10.1111/j.1460–2466.2002.tb02572.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Donoghue, J. (2014). Transforming criminal justice? Problem-solving and court specialisation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Enfield, N. J., Stivers, T., & Levinson, S. C. (2010). Question-response sequences in conversation across ten languages: An introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2615–2619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehrlich, S., & Freed, A. F. (2010). The function of questions in institutional discourse. In Freed, A. F. & Ehrlich, S. (Eds.), ‘Why do you ask?’: The function of questions in institutional discourse (pp. 3–19). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Fazel, S., & Seewald, K. (2012). Severe mental illness in 33,588 prisoners worldwide: Systematic review and meta-regression analysis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 200, 364–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fox, B. A., & Thompson, S. A. (2010). Responses to Wh-questions in English conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43, 133–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Freed, A. F., & Ehrlich, S. (Eds.) (2010). ‘Why do you ask?’: The function of questions in institutional discourse. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gilling, D., & Jolley, M. (2012). A case study of an English Community Court. British Journal of Community Justice, 10(2), 55–69.Google Scholar
  16. Heritage, J. (2003). Designing questions and setting agendas in news interviews. In P. J. Glen, C. D. LeBaron, & J. Mandelbaum (Eds.), Studies in language and social interaction: In honor of Robert Hopper (pp. 57–90). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  17. —. (2010). Questioning in medicine. In A. F. Freed & S. Ehrlich (Eds.), ‘Why do you ask?’: The function of questions in institutional discourse (pp. 42–68). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. —. (2012). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1), 15–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heritage, J., & Sefi, S. (1992). Dilemmas of advice: Aspects of the delivery and reception of advice in interactions between health visitors and first-time mothers. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 359–417). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M. L. (1994). Constituting and maintaining activities across sequences: And-prefacing as a feature of question-design. Language in Society, 23, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heritage, J., & Watson, R. (1979). Formulations as conversational objects. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language (pp. 123–162). New York: Irvington Press.Google Scholar
  23. Johnstone, L., & Dallos, R. (Eds.) (2013). Formulation in psychology and psychotherapy: Making sense of people’s problems (2nd edition). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Kidwell, M. (2009). What happened?: An epistemics of before and after in ‘at-the-scene’ police questioning. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42, 20–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mair, G., & Millings, M. (2011). Doing justice locally: The North Liverpool Community Justice Centre. London: Centre for Crime and Justice Studies.Google Scholar
  26. Ministry of Justice. (2010). Green Paper Evidence Report. Breaking the cycle: Effective punishment, rehabilitation and sentencing of offenders. London: Crown Copyright.Google Scholar
  27. Ministry of Justice. (2014a). Criminal justice statistics quarterly update to March 2014: England and Wales. Ministry of Justice Statistics Bulletin. London: Crown Copyright. Retrievd at: Google Scholar
  28. Ministry of Justice. (2014b). Transforming rehabilitation: A summary of evidence on reducing reoffending (2nd edition). Ministry of Justice Analytical Series. Crown Copyright. Retrieved at: Scholar
  29. NOMS. (2014). Mental health treatment requirements: Guidance on supporting integrated delivery. London: National Offender Management Service.Google Scholar
  30. Pilnick, A. (2003). ‘Patient counselling’ by pharmacists: Four approaches to the delivery of counselling sequences and their interactional reception. Social Science and Medicine, 56, 835–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Raymond, G. (2003). Grammar and social organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review, 68, 939–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rogers, A., & Pilgrim, D. (2014). A sociology of mental health and illness (5th edition). Maidenhead, Berkshire, England: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scott, G., & Moffatt, S. (2012). The mental health treatment requirement: Realising a better future. London: Centre for Mental Health.Google Scholar
  36. Shaw, C, Pooter, J., & Hepburn, A. (2015). Advice-implicative actions: Using interrogatives and assessments to deliver advice in mundane conversation. Discourse Studies, 17, 317–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Steensig, J., & Drew, P. (2008). Introduction: Questioning and affiliation/disaffiliation in interaction. Discourse Studies, 10, 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stokoe, E. (2011). Simulated interaction and communication skills training: The ‘Conversation Analytic Roleplay Method’. In C. E. Antaki (Ed.), Applied conversation analysis: Changing institutional practices. London: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  39. Vehviläinen, S. (2001). Evaluative advice in educational counseling: The use of disagreement in the ‘Stepwise entry’ to advice. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 34, 371–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Recommended reading

  1. • Bradley, K. (2009). The Bradley Report. London: Crown Copyright.Google Scholar
  2. • Heritage, J. (2010). Questioning in medicine. In A. F. Freed & S. Ehrlich (Eds.), ‘Why do you ask?’: The function of questions in institutional discourse (pp. 42–68). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Timothy Auburn, Cordet Smart, Gisella Hanley Santos, Jill Annison, and Daniel Gilling 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timothy Auburn
  • Cordet Smart
  • Gisella Hanley Santos
  • Jill Annison
  • Daniel Gilling

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations