Abstract
In a recent study of a Criminal Justice Mental Health Team (CJMHT), it was found that highly professional staff worked with a range of clients with various problems and degrees of chaos in their lives, yet for whom the team could do little (Green et al., 2005). Most presented mental health, substance misuse and related problems but did not meet criteria of diagnosis as having a Serious Mental Illness (SMI) and were therefore not eligible for statutory mental health treatment. Further, as diversion away from the criminal justice system to mental health services or referral to other agencies was a primary aim, there were no easy or prioritised routes to further help — quite simply there were often no appropriate services to refer such clients to. Instead, much of the work of the CJMHT involved providing information to other mental health and criminal justice agencies about the court appearance of the individual, the outcome and the client's current mental state. Follow-up of individuals demonstrated that the psychological, social and economic needs of offenders with underlying mental health problems and those with a history of emotional disturbance were poorly addressed by statutory services and underdevelopment of voluntary services (Green et al., 2005). Aware that this finding was not unique, some obvious questions about ‘the system’ arose: ‘whose’ and ‘what’ needs were being met?