Vermont’s Broken Laws at the Intersection of Criminal Justice and Mental Health Systems
This commentary is by David Gartenstein, who works as a deputy state’s attorney in Windham County.
Introduction
Vermont’s laws at the intersection of the criminal justice and mental health systems are broken. The government needs to be able to act when people cause harm to others, but Vermont law does not provide a consistently effective response when people with mental illness and cognitive disabilities commit crimes.
The Challenge
Criminal justice is about responsibility and consequences, but there are times when offenders’ cognitive status prevents those issues from being reached. When defendants do not understand the legal system and cannot help their lawyers, they are found incompetent, so charges cannot proceed and responsibility cannot be determined. People with mental illness or cognitive disabilities who did not understand their conduct was a crime or could not conform their conduct to legal requirements are found insane and cannot be held criminally responsible.
The Need for Action
To make sure our community is safe, the risk posed when people commit crimes, including incompetent or insane defendants, should be assessed, and supervision, monitoring, treatment and programming should be delivered. This is where Vermont law breaks down.
- Based on poor drafting 50 years ago that the Legislature never fixed, Vermont law only authorizes an initial 90-day commitment to Department of Mental Health custody when a person is found incompetent or is acquitted by reason of insanity based on mental illness.
- The law does not distinguish whether the person was making a ruckus, possessed drugs, drove drunk, burglarized a home, assaulted another, sexually offended or killed someone.
At the end of those 90 days, the Department of Mental Health has sole authority to seek continued treatment for up to a year at a time. If the department applies for continued treatment, decisions are made in secret proceedings that prosecutors and victims cannot attend. When the Department of Mental Health does not seek continued treatment, its decision is unreviewable.
Vermont has no structured system to monitor if incompetent defendants have progressed so they can understand the process, help their lawyers and be routed back to criminal court. Vermont has no structured system for determining when criminal cases against incompetent defendants should end. Neither are victim rights comprehensively protected.
The Inadequacy of Current Commitment
What happens during the Department of Mental Health commitment also often is inadequate. A small group of mentally ill defendants who pose risk of harm to self or others need to be committed to treatment in mental health hospital beds. The number of these beds in Vermont is small, and the commitment criteria are rigorous. But the problem with Vermont’s system runs deeper than a shortage of beds.
When a mentally ill, incompetent or insane defendant does not need hospitalization, Vermont law only authorizes community based civil commitment for treatment, provided by the Department of Mental Health through non-governmental organizations that deliver care on a voluntary treatment model.
The NGOs do not assess risk, supervise or monitor defendants or provide programming to respond to criminal conduct. As the Department of Mental Health administers the system, it is little more than an opportunity for mentally ill offenders to seek treatment if they choose to, and the department routinely allows commitment orders to end if defendants decline to engage.
If defendants are non-compliant with treatment orders, the only remedy is hospitalization, but that only happens rarely, based on clinical needs. People in Department of Mental Health custody often continue committing crimes with little or no response from the NGO or the department. I handle prosecutions against incompetent defendants with multiple pending cases, and as part of my work l am regularly confronted with this systemic problem.
The Impact on the Community
The problems with this system exist in real life. Defendants charged with all types of crimes, including murder, burglary, assaults and sex offenses, are found incompetent and insane. This criminal conduct harms our neighbors and family members. It tears at the fabric of our community. But prosecutors routinely must tell victims that cases cannot move forward; Department of Mental Health will not monitor, supervise or ensure treatment; victim rights will not be protected; and information about the offender is not available. Many incompetent offenders are charged repeatedly. They cycle through a revolving door of criminal conduct, arrest, jail, hospitalization and discharge.
The article discusses the broken intersection of Vermont’s criminal justice and mental health systems, which directly relates to the goals of promoting good health and well-being (SDG 3), ensuring gender equality (SDG 5), reducing inequalities (SDG 10), and establishing peace, justice, and strong institutions (SDG 16). The article highlights the need to address mental health issues within the criminal justice system, eliminate violence against mentally ill or cognitively disabled individuals, promote inclusion and equal treatment for all defendants, and ensure access to justice. While the article does not explicitly mention indicators, these indicators can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets. They focus on mortality rates related to non-communicable diseases, prevalence of violence against women, income inequality, and reporting of violence to authorities. Copyright: Dive into this article, curated with care by SDG Investors Inc. Our advanced AI technology searches through vast amounts of data to spotlight how we are all moving forward with the Sustainable Development Goals. While we own the rights to this content, we invite you to share it to help spread knowledge and spark action on the SDGs. Fuente: vtdigger.org Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future. 1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?
2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?
3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?
4. Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators
SDGs
Targets
Indicators
SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one-third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.
Indicator 3.4.1: Mortality rate attributed to cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, or chronic respiratory disease.
SDG 5: Gender Equality
Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.
Indicator 5.2.1: Proportion of ever-partnered women and girls subjected to physical, sexual, or psychological violence by a current or former intimate partner in the previous 12 months.
SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.
Indicator 10.2.1: Proportion of people living below 50 percent of median income, disaggregated by age, sex, disability, and other relevant characteristics.
SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
Indicator 16.3.1: Proportion of victims of violence in the previous 12 months who reported their victimization to competent authorities or other officially recognized mechanisms.
