Congress passed a bill in October that authorizes funding to establish up to 100 mental health courts for nonviolent offenders who are mentally ill. President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law last month.

The passage of S 1865, which authorizes $10 million in appropriations annually from 2001 through 2004, coincides with a tremendous upsurge in the number of persons with mental illness being held with little or no treatment in the nation’s prisons and jails.

Recent reports estimate that 16 percent of inmates have a mental illness and that 25 percent to 40 percent of America’s mentally ill come into contact with the criminal justice system during their lifetime.

"The inappropriate incarceration of people with mental illness who have committed nonviolent crimes is a national disgrace. Mental health courts should help divert them into treatment and away from prisons and jails. The federal mental health court program is the first step in trying to deal with this huge problem," said Steven Sharfstein, M.D., vice chair of APA’s Joint Commission on Government Relations, in an interview with Psychiatric News. He testified on this issue before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime in September.

The Senate unanimously passed the bill in September, and the House cleared it in October.

Senators Michael DeWine (R-Ohio), a former prosecutor, and Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) introduced the legislation, known as "America’s Law Enforcement and Mental Health Project," last year. Rep. Ted Strickland (D-Ohio), a psychologist, introduced the House companion version (HR 2594) also last year.

The lawmakers were impressed with the positive results that mental health courts in Broward County, Fla., and King County, Wash., have had with this alternative for nonviolent mentally ill offenders. Special judges hear cases involving persons with mental illness and decide whether the offender should be placed in outpatient or inpatient treatment programs. The judges also require the offender to be monitored closely, according to the legislation.

Beginning in 2001, grants will be awarded to states, state courts, local courts, and Indian tribal governments to set up programs involving judicial supervision and training of law-enforcement and judiciary personnel to identify and address the unique needs of mentally ill offenders, the legislation states.

Another provision requires centralized case management for each mentally ill offender including the coordination of their mental health treatment plans and social services needs, such as housing placement, vocational training, education, job placement, health care, and relapse prevention, according to the legislation.

DeWine and Strickland maintain that mental health courts are a less expensive and more effective alternative than incarcerating nonviolent persons with mental illness. Advocates of the mental health courts anticipate that the outcome data required from programs that receive the grants will show how urgent the need is to establish these courts.