Your name Miranda Rowe English 2100 October 8, 2014 INTRODUCTION Over the course of United States history, many questions have been raised about the treatment of the mentally ill. These debates have led to medical and social changes for the plight of these individuals, such as the government policy of “deinstitutionalization,” which addressed the question of if patients were being treated humanely or not in psychiatric hospitals during the 1950s. The policy, officially executed in 1955, sought to stop the isolated and inhumane treatment of the mentally ill by releasing mental patients from long-stay psychiatric hospitals to smaller and less isolated community mental health services. After deinstitutionalization, around the 1970s, a new question about the treatment of the mentally ill was raised and is still being addressed today—have jails and prisons become the new mental hospitals? Many of the following sources support that that they have and point to deinstitutionalization as a major catalyst for the switch. Some argue that other aspects such as a lack of funds for mental hospitals and police interaction are causes for the issue. Other sources also blame such aspects, but interconnect them with deinstitutionalization and illustrate the policy as an overall cause. Whatever the reason, the reality of this issue is urgent because the mentally ill who are in jails and prisons, some most likely innocent, cannot receive the treatment they need from these institutions and their illnesses can worsen. Their conditions are inhumane and wrong. These individuals need help and the public can play a vital role in reforming the current U.S. mental health system. Authors who are experts in the mental health and criminal justice field were used as a selection criteria for many of the sources, but all sources are from reliable news outlets and scholarly journals. New and older sources were also selected in order to gain a better view of the changes in the topic over the past 40 years. Some of the sources may be bias because they only provide the views and opinions of police officers and others who work in criminal justice, and not in psychiatric hospitals or centers. Others provide both. Some works fail to differentiate between the mentally ill and the serious mentally ill, and these tend to be older sources. Serious mental illness (SMI) includes schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depression, and other severe disorders. Of the authors who do differentiate, they assert that jails and prisons have become the new hospitals more for the serious mentally ill than for the lesser mentally ill. Some suggest that only jails are involved in this change and not necessarily prisons. Overall, these works are applicable to a larger paper that supports the main argument, or to one that only focuses on the serious mentally ill or only jails in regard to the switch. The sources can also help validate a paper that integrates deinstitutionalization and argues it is a c.

1. Your name
Miranda Rowe
English 2100
October 8, 2014
INTRODUCTION
Over the course of United States history, many questions have
been raised about the treatment of the mentally ill. These
debates have led to medical and social changes for the plight of
these individuals, such as the government policy of
“deinstitutionalization,” which addressed the question of if
patients were being treated humanely or not in psychiatric
hospitals during the 1950s. The policy, officially executed in
1955, sought to stop the isolated and inhumane treatment of the
mentally ill by releasing mental patients from long-stay
psychiatric hospitals to smaller and less isolated community
mental health services. After deinstitutionalization, around the
1970s, a new question about the treatment of the mentally ill
was raised and is still being addressed today—have jails and
prisons become the new mental hospitals? Many of the
following sources support that that they have and point to
deinstitutionalization as a major catalyst for the switch. Some
argue that other aspects such as a lack of funds for mental
hospitals and police interaction are causes for the issue. Other
sources also blame such aspects, but interconnect them with
deinstitutionalization and illustrate the policy as an overall
cause. Whatever the reason, the reality of this issue is urgent
because the mentally ill who are in jails and prisons, some most
likely innocent, cannot receive the treatment they need from
these institutions and their illnesses can worsen. Their
conditions are inhumane and wrong. These individuals need
help and the public can play a vital role in reforming the current

2. U.S. mental health system.
Authors who are experts in the mental health and criminal
justice field were used as a selection criteria for many of the
sources, but all sources are from reliable news outlets and
scholarly journals. New and older sources were also selected in
order to gain a better view of the changes in the topic over the
past 40 years. Some of the sources may be bias because they
only provide the views and opinions of police officers and
others who work in criminal justice, and not in psychiatric
hospitals or centers. Others provide both. Some works fail to
differentiate between the mentally ill and the serious mentally
ill, and these tend to be older sources. Serious mental illness
(SMI) includes schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major
depression, and other severe disorders. Of the authors who do
differentiate, they assert that jails and prisons have become the
new hospitals more for the serious mentally ill than for the
lesser mentally ill. Some suggest that only jails are involved in
this change and not necessarily prisons. Overall, these works
are applicable to a larger paper that supports the main argument,
or to one that only focuses on the serious mentally ill or only
jails in regard to the switch. The sources can also help validate
a paper that integrates deinstitutionalization and argues it is a
central cause for the shift of mental hospitals to jails and
prisons.
References
Butterfield, F. (1998) Asylums behind bars: A special report;
Prisons replace hospitals for the nation’s mentally ill. The New
York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/
1998/03/05/us/asylums-behind-bars-special-report-prisons-
replace-hospitals-for-nation-s.html

3. In this article, Butterfield uses six different cases of the serious
mentally ill whose conduct was either mistaken for intentional
criminal behavior or that going to jail was their only source of
treatment. Additionally, he mentions the prevalence of serious
mental illness (SMI) in various jails and prisons across the
nation and uses the opinions of experts in the mental health and
criminal justice fields, such as E. Fuller Torrey and Richard
Lamb. Butterfield also addresses that the younger population of
the mentally ill is especially susceptible to incarceration and
one expert connects this problem to “the breakdown of the
public mental health system.” Butterfield concludes that those
suffering from SMI are not being able to receive the community
treatment that deinstitutionalization initiated. One former
psychiatrist from a state mental hospital states he was wrong in
supporting the policy. Overall, the article contains a lot of
reliable information that is consistent with other sources, such
as that 40 percent of individuals with a serious mental illness
have been arrested at some point in their lives, and that could be
used to fortify that jails and prisons have become the new
mental hospitals.
Deinsitutionalization: A psychiatric Titanic. (2005). PBS.
Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/ wgbh/pages/frontline/s
This article looks at the policy of deinstitutionalization and how
it has affected the mentally ill in deep detail. A study is also
included that shows that deinstitutionalization has been
effective in every state and has decreased the number of
patients in public mental hospitals since 1955. The source
concludes through this study and other findings, that jails and
prisons have become the new mental hospitals. This source is
especially useful for a paper that focuses on
deinstitutionalization, which has been blamed for the switch in
almost every other source, because gives a clear and thorough
summary of the history and the outcomes of the policy.

4. Domino, M. E., Norton, E. C., Morrissey, J. P., & Thakur, N.
(2004). Cost shifting to jails after a change to managed mental
health care. Health Services Research, 39(5), 1379-1402. Doi:
10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00295.x
Lamb, H. R. (1989). The homeless mentally ill. Western Journal
of Medicine, 151(3), 313. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Richard Lamb is a Professor of Psychiatry and Director of
Mental Health Policy and Law at the University of South
Carolina. In this excerpt, he addresses that state mental
hospitals are better in the treatment of the serious mentally ill
than the community. He asserts that community mental health
treatment is not adequate for these individuals due to a lack of
“asylum” and “sanctuary” and as a result, a majority of these
individuals are homeless. In other sources it was found that
serious mentally ill individuals who are homeless are more
subject to arrest, an important component to possibly talk about
in a paper. This source unlike others, provides comparisons of
psychiatric hospital care to community care versus jails to
psychiatric hospitals, which could be integrated into my paper
to help make it more balanced.
Lamb, H. R., & Bachrach, L. L. (2001). Some perspectives on
deinstitutionalization. Psychiatric Services, 52(8), 1039-1045.

5. doi:10.1176
Multiple perspectives on the effectiveness of
deinstitutionalization are addressed, including the unintended
consequence that a large number of the serious mentally ill have
become homeless and criminalized. The authors argue that
community health care is insufficient for these individuals and
makes them more susceptible to incarceration. Other reasons
besides deinstitutionalization are provided, but the authors
mainly blame the latter. They suggest what kinds of solutions
and treatments should be used instead for individuals with SMI,
such as highly structured 24-hour care, which is consistent with
other sources. This is another reliable source that gives an in-
depth look on the impact of deinstitutionalization and could be
used to support the argument that the switch of mental hospitals
to jails and prisons is largely due to the policy of
deinstitutionalization.
Lamb, H. R., & Weinberger, L. E. (2005). The shift of
psychiatric inpatient care from hospitals to jails and prisons.
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law,
33(4), 529-534. Retrieved from
http://www.jaapl.org.ezproxy.libraries.wright.edu:2048/
content/33/4/529.abstract
Lamb and Weinberger conclude that the serious mentally ill
who would have been psychiatrically hospitalized before are
now being incarcerated instead. Various causes for this shift are
suggested and it is argued that the main cause is a decrease in
state mental hospital beds as a result of deinstitutionalization,
which correlates with other sources. The authors suggest that to
decrease the number of the serious mentally ill in the criminal
justice system, there must be an increase in hospital beds, better
community care, and 24-hour structured care. This source
contains similar support as many other sources, but also offers

6. insightful solutions that have not been mentioned in others that
could be useful to my paper.
Peternelj-Taylor, C. (2008). Criminalization of the mentally ill.
Journal of Forensic Nursing, 4(4), 185-187. doi:10.1037/0033-
2909.94.1.54
This source is from a Nursing perspective, which is different
from that of other sources and may help make my paper better-
rounded. Peternelj-Taylor includes trends from the United
States which illustrate that almost half of or more jail inmates
and prisoners have SMI. She asserts that jails and prisons
cannot meet the needs of these individuals and that the adoption
of diversion schemes may help in the treatment of their
disorders. This is a possible solution that can be mentioned in a
paper. Diversion schemes have been mentioned in other sources,
but Peternelj-Taylor’s perspective is more detailed and
balanced, as she mentions both the effectiveness and
ineffectiveness of them and is unbiased.
Steadman, H. J., Monahan, J., Duffee, B., & Hartstone, E.
(1984). Impact of state mental hospital deinstitutionalization on
United States prison populations, 1968-1978, Journal of
Criminal Law and Criminology, 75(2), 474. Retrieved from
http://www.northwestern.edu
A study was based on the question of if the impact of
deinstitutionalization caused a shift or not of mental hospital
patients to state prisons between 1968 and 1978. This source is
unique from others in that it looks at specific data for the earlier
years of the time period that is included in my topic. Little
support was found that deinstitutionalization was a cause, or
that there had been a shift of mental hospitals to state prisons at
all. The researchers, which include experts Henry Steadman and
John Monahan, suggest that perhaps the increase in jail
populations is due to longer sentencing lengths instead.

7. However, they also suggest that jails may be involved in the
shift instead of prisons. This source is mainly an opposing
viewpoint and can fit into a refutation or a paper the supports
the opposing argument, but can also be used in a paper that
argues that jails have become the new mental hospitals.
Teplin, L. A. (1983). The criminalization of the mentally ill:
speculation in search of data. Psychological Bulletin, 94(1), 54-
67. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.94.1.54
Teplin examines the hypothesis that mentally ill persons are
being processed through the criminal justice system instead of
being treated in mental hospitals. This is done through the
investigation of police decision making, archival studies, and
the prevalence of mental disorder among jail detainees. She
concludes that current research may be flawed and it only offers
modest support of the hypothesis, but this argument may be
dismantled with more recent research. The conclusion can be
interpreted as an opposing viewpoint and used to support that
the switch has not occurred. However, the article also contains
some reliable support, like from experts in the field, which
could be used in support of the argument too, but specifically
only for jails and not prisons. This source is overall unbiased
and contains useful information for either argument.
Torrey, E. F. (1995). Jails and prisons--America's new mental
hospitals. American Journal of Public Health, 85(12), 1611-
1613. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.libraries.wright.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.
ebscohost.com/
login.aspx?direct=true&db=mnh&AN=7503330&site=eds-live

8. Edwin Torrey is a research psychiatrist specializing in bipolar
disorder and schizophrenia. He argues that jails and prisons
have become the new mental hospitals for the serious mentally
ill through findings that there are more individuals with SMI in
jails than mental hospitals in four major U.S. cities. One of his
reasons for this issue is that sometimes the police arrest these
individuals on “no charge” because they have no other place to
go for treatment. He also argues deinstitutionalization is a
cause. Torrey provides solutions such as jail diversion
programs, which are supported by other experts such as Henry
Steadman. However, even though Torrey argues that the switch
involves both jails and prisons, he only provides findings on
jails, which makes the source more useful for a paper
supporting the “jail-only” perspective.
Torrey, E. F., Kennard, A. D., Eslinger, D., Lamb, H. R., &
Pavie J. (2010). More mentally ill persons are in jails and
prisons than hospitals: A survey of the states. Treatment
Advocacy Center, 1-15. Retrieved from:
http://www.treatmentadvocacycenter.org
The study conducted by the authors in 2004 looks at the odds of
a serious mentally ill individual being in jail or prison
compared to a hospital and the number of inpatient beds
available in psychiatric hospitals, each by state. It was found all
states had an average of more individuals with SMI in jails and
prisons than in hospitals, and this trend has increased over the
years. The authors strongly support that a main cause is the
increasing rate of deinstitutionalization and argue that society
has reverted to the inhumane treatment of the mentally ill of the
1840s. As the results were compared to past studies, a lot of
findings not found in other sources from the 1970s and beyond
are included that I could use in my paper. The most recent
support is also included, which will help make my paper more
applicable to today, but this support may be bias as it is only
the views of sheriffs and other workers in the criminal justice

9. system. I could also mention some of the authors’ solutions to
the problem as part of my conclusion.
Annotated Bibliography Assignment
This assignment is designed as the first step to completing a
sophomore/ junior level research paper. There will be many
times throughout your collegiate career that professors will ask
for an Annotated Bibliography to accompany research work.
View this assignment as a building block to the end of the
semester research paper.
Requirements:
· Annotated Bibliography will include 10 entries
· Sources will consist of: six academic (library, scholarly, peer-
reviewed journals) and four (popular) sources
· No more than two to four entries per page
· Cited in APA format (unless an English major)
· Double-spaced
· Each entry should contain: a summation of the article, an
analysis of the information, and a reflection of how it should be
used in your large paper.
· Entries are no longer than SIX sentences
· One inch margins on all sides
· Includes an abstract of research paper
Abstract: A summary of research
· Length: 150 to 250 Words
· Single paragraph
· Double-spaced
· Contain your research topic, methods, data, and conclusions
· Possible implications for your research and future work that
may be valuable (for you or others)
· A thesis statement
· Contains no “copying” from the research paper except thesis
statement
The idea of an abstract is to allow readers to decide if the

10. information your paper provides is what they are looking for.
Think of this as an Introduction to your paper—that completely
summarizes what the big paper is about. During your research
you will find that abstracts have the ability to save researchers
an enormous amount of time. By being purposeful about your
summation and practicing brevity—future researchers will thank
you.
Sheet1English 2100 Annotated Bibliography
RubricName:
_____________________________________________________
___________The bibliography has a specific focus - a particular
topic012345The bibliography contains 10 to 15
sources012345The bibliography is technically correct
(APA/MLA)012345The annotations offer critical evaluation as
well as summary (X3)03691215The annotations accurately
summarize the main issues in each source (X2)0246810The
annotations indicate the relationship of entires to the other
entries (X2)0246810The introduction offers relevant
information about the topic (X2)0246810The introduction puts
the subject of the bibliography in some context for readers
(X2)0246810The introduction analyzes the works presented
(X2)0246810The introduction shows readers why they should be
interested in the topic (X2)0246810The introduction offers
some ideas for the application of the works cited
(X2)0246810The work is properly formatted012345 (Single
spaced, readable font, one inch margins, 2 - 4 annotations per
page)The bibliography is free of grammatical and mechanical
errors012345Total/110:Comments:
Sheet2
Sheet3
Your name
English 2100
October 8, 2014

11. INTRODUCTION
Over the course of United States history, many questions have
been raised about the treatment of the mentally ill. These
debates have led to medical and social changes for the plight of
these individuals, such as the government policy of
“deinstitutionalization,” which addressed the question of if
patients were being treated humanely or not in psychiatric
hospitals during the 1950s. The policy, officially executed in
1955, sought to stop the isolated and inhumane treatment of the
mentally ill by releasing mental patients from long-stay
psychiatric hospitals to smaller and less isolated community
mental health services. After deinstitutionalization, around the
1970s, a new question about the treatment of the mentally ill
was raised and is still being addressed today—have jails and
prisons become the new mental hospitals? Many of the
following sources support that that they have and point to
deinstitutionalization as a major catalyst for the switch. Some
argue that other aspects such as a lack of funds for mental
hospitals and police interaction are causes for the issue. Other
sources also blame such aspects, but interconnect them with
deinstitutionalization and illustrate the policy as an overall
cause. Whatever the reason, the reality of this issue is urgent
because the mentally ill who are in jails and prisons, some most
likely innocent, cannot receive the treatment they need from
these institutions and their illnesses can worsen. Their
conditions are inhumane and wrong. These individuals need
help and the public can play a vital role in reforming the current
U.S. mental health system.
Authors who are experts in the mental health and criminal
justice field were used as a selection criteria for many of the
sources, but all sources are from reliable news outlets and
scholarly journals. New and older sources were also selected in
order to gain a better view of the changes in the topic over the

12. past 40 years. Some of the sources may be bias because they
only provide the views and opinions of police officers and
others who work in criminal justice, and not in psychiatric
hospitals or centers. Others provide both. Some works fail to
differentiate between the mentally ill and the serious mentally
ill, and these tend to be older sources. Serious mental illness
(SMI) includes schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major
depression, and other severe disorders. Of the authors who do
differentiate, they assert that jails and prisons have become the
new hospitals more for the serious mentally ill than for the
lesser mentally ill. Some suggest that only jails are involved in
this change and not necessarily prisons. Overall, these works
are applicable to a larger paper that supports the main argument,
or to one that only focuses on the serious mentally ill or only
jails in regard to the switch. The sources can also help validate
a paper that integrates deinstitutionalization and argues it is a
central cause for the shift of mental hospitals to jails and
prisons.
References
Butterfield, F. (1998) Asylums behind bars: A special report;
Prisons replace hospitals for the nation’s mentally ill. The New
York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/
1998/03/05/us/asylums-behind-bars-special-report-prisons-
replace-hospitals-for-nation-s.html
In this article, Butterfield uses six different cases of the serious
mentally ill whose conduct was either mistaken for intentional
criminal behavior or that going to jail was their only source of
treatment. Additionally, he mentions the prevalence of serious
mental illness (SMI) in various jails and prisons across the

13. nation and uses the opinions of experts in the mental health and
criminal justice fields, such as E. Fuller Torrey and Richard
Lamb. Butterfield also addresses that the younger population of
the mentally ill is especially susceptible to incarceration and
one expert connects this problem to “the breakdown of the
public mental health system.” Butterfield concludes that those
suffering from SMI are not being able to receive the community
treatment that deinstitutionalization initiated. One former
psychiatrist from a state mental hospital states he was wrong in
supporting the policy. Overall, the article contains a lot of
reliable information that is consistent with other sources, such
as that 40 percent of individuals with a serious mental illness
have been arrested at some point in their lives, and that could be
used to fortify that jails and prisons have become the new
mental hospitals.
Deinsitutionalization: A psychiatric Titanic. (2005). PBS.
Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/ wgbh/pages/frontline/s
This article looks at the policy of deinstitutionalization and how
it has affected the mentally ill in deep detail. A study is also
included that shows that deinstitutionalization has been
effective in every state and has decreased the number of
patients in public mental hospitals since 1955. The source
concludes through this study and other findings, that jails and
prisons have become the new mental hospitals. This source is
especially useful for a paper that focuses on
deinstitutionalization, which has been blamed for the switch in
almost every other source, because gives a clear and thorough
summary of the history and the outcomes of the policy.
Domino, M. E., Norton, E. C., Morrissey, J. P., & Thakur, N.
(2004). Cost shifting to jails after a change to managed mental
health care. Health Services Research, 39(5), 1379-1402. Doi:
10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00295.x

14. Lamb, H. R. (1989). The homeless mentally ill. Western Journal
of Medicine, 151(3), 313. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Richard Lamb is a Professor of Psychiatry and Director of
Mental Health Policy and Law at the University of South
Carolina. In this excerpt, he addresses that state mental
hospitals are better in the treatment of the serious mentally ill
than the community. He asserts that community mental health
treatment is not adequate for these individuals due to a lack of
“asylum” and “sanctuary” and as a result, a majority of these
individuals are homeless. In other sources it was found that
serious mentally ill individuals who are homeless are more
subject to arrest, an important component to possibly talk about
in a paper. This source unlike others, provides comparisons of
psychiatric hospital care to community care versus jails to
psychiatric hospitals, which could be integrated into my paper
to help make it more balanced.
Lamb, H. R., & Bachrach, L. L. (2001). Some perspectives on
deinstitutionalization. Psychiatric Services, 52(8), 1039-1045.
doi:10.1176
Multiple perspectives on the effectiveness of
deinstitutionalization are addressed, including the unintended
consequence that a large number of the serious mentally ill have
become homeless and criminalized. The authors argue that

15. community health care is insufficient for these individuals and
makes them more susceptible to incarceration. Other reasons
besides deinstitutionalization are provided, but the authors
mainly blame the latter. They suggest what kinds of solutions
and treatments should be used instead for individuals with SMI,
such as highly structured 24-hour care, which is consistent with
other sources. This is another reliable source that gives an in-
depth look on the impact of deinstitutionalization and could be
used to support the argument that the switch of mental hospitals
to jails and prisons is largely due to the policy of
deinstitutionalization.
Lamb, H. R., & Weinberger, L. E. (2005). The shift of
psychiatric inpatient care from hospitals to jails and prisons.
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law,
33(4), 529-534. Retrieved from
http://www.jaapl.org.ezproxy.libraries.wright.edu:2048/
content/33/4/529.abstract
Lamb and Weinberger conclude that the serious mentally ill
who would have been psychiatrically hospitalized before are
now being incarcerated instead. Various causes for this shift are
suggested and it is argued that the main cause is a decrease in
state mental hospital beds as a result of deinstitutionalization,
which correlates with other sources. The authors suggest that to
decrease the number of the serious mentally ill in the criminal
justice system, there must be an increase in hospital beds, better
community care, and 24-hour structured care. This source
contains similar support as many other sources, but also offers
insightful solutions that have not been mentioned in others that
could be useful to my paper.
Peternelj-Taylor, C. (2008). Criminalization of the mentally ill.
Journal of Forensic Nursing, 4(4), 185-187. doi:10.1037/0033-
2909.94.1.54

16. This source is from a Nursing perspective, which is different
from that of other sources and may help make my paper better-
rounded. Peternelj-Taylor includes trends from the United
States which illustrate that almost half of or more jail inmates
and prisoners have SMI. She asserts that jails and prisons
cannot meet the needs of these individuals and that the adoption
of diversion schemes may help in the treatment of their
disorders. This is a possible solution that can be mentioned in a
paper. Diversion schemes have been mentioned in other sources,
but Peternelj-Taylor’s perspective is more detailed and
balanced, as she mentions both the effectiveness and
ineffectiveness of them and is unbiased.
Steadman, H. J., Monahan, J., Duffee, B., & Hartstone, E.
(1984). Impact of state mental hospital deinstitutionalization on
United States prison populations, 1968-1978, Journal of
Criminal Law and Criminology, 75(2), 474. Retrieved from
http://www.northwestern.edu
A study was based on the question of if the impact of
deinstitutionalization caused a shift or not of mental hospital
patients to state prisons between 1968 and 1978. This source is
unique from others in that it looks at specific data for the earlier
years of the time period that is included in my topic. Little
support was found that deinstitutionalization was a cause, or
that there had been a shift of mental hospitals to state prisons at
all. The researchers, which include experts Henry Steadman and
John Monahan, suggest that perhaps the increase in jail
populations is due to longer sentencing lengths instead.
However, they also suggest that jails may be involved in the
shift instead of prisons. This source is mainly an opposing
viewpoint and can fit into a refutation or a paper the supports
the opposing argument, but can also be used in a paper that
argues that jails have become the new mental hospitals.

17. Teplin, L. A. (1983). The criminalization of the mentally ill:
speculation in search of data. Psychological Bulletin, 94(1), 54-
67. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.94.1.54
Teplin examines the hypothesis that mentally ill persons are
being processed through the criminal justice system instead of
being treated in mental hospitals. This is done through the
investigation of police decision making, archival studies, and
the prevalence of mental disorder among jail detainees. She
concludes that current research may be flawed and it only offers
modest support of the hypothesis, but this argument may be
dismantled with more recent research. The conclusion can be
interpreted as an opposing viewpoint and used to support that
the switch has not occurred. However, the article also contains
some reliable support, like from experts in the field, which
could be used in support of the argument too, but specifically
only for jails and not prisons. This source is overall unbiased
and contains useful information for either argument.
Torrey, E. F. (1995). Jails and prisons--America's new mental
hospitals. American Journal of Public Health, 85(12), 1611-
1613. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.libraries.wright.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.
ebscohost.com/
login.aspx?direct=true&db=mnh&AN=7503330&site=eds-live
Edwin Torrey is a research psychiatrist specializing in bipolar
disorder and schizophrenia. He argues that jails and prisons
have become the new mental hospitals for the serious mentally
ill through findings that there are more individuals with SMI in
jails than mental hospitals in four major U.S. cities. One of his
reasons for this issue is that sometimes the police arrest these

18. individuals on “no charge” because they have no other place to
go for treatment. He also argues deinstitutionalization is a
cause. Torrey provides solutions such as jail diversion
programs, which are supported by other experts such as Henry
Steadman. However, even though Torrey argues that the switch
involves both jails and prisons, he only provides findings on
jails, which makes the source more useful for a paper
supporting the “jail-only” perspective.
Torrey, E. F., Kennard, A. D., Eslinger, D., Lamb, H. R., &
Pavie J. (2010). More mentally ill persons are in jails and
prisons than hospitals: A survey of the states. Treatment
Advocacy Center, 1-15. Retrieved from:
http://www.treatmentadvocacycenter.org
The study conducted by the authors in 2004 looks at the odds of
a serious mentally ill individual being in jail or prison
compared to a hospital and the number of inpatient beds
available in psychiatric hospitals, each by state. It was found all
states had an average of more individuals with SMI in jails and
prisons than in hospitals, and this trend has increased over the
years. The authors strongly support that a main cause is the
increasing rate of deinstitutionalization and argue that society
has reverted to the inhumane treatment of the mentally ill of the
1840s. As the results were compared to past studies, a lot of
findings not found in other sources from the 1970s and beyond
are included that I could use in my paper. The most recent
support is also included, which will help make my paper more
applicable to today, but this support may be bias as it is only
the views of sheriffs and other workers in the criminal justice
system. I could also mention some of the authors’ solutions to
the problem as part of my conclusion.