Search

While First Nations Peoples in Australia experience high rates of criminal justice contact, there is limited research on their experiences of the forensic mental health system. This study aims to develop new understandings of how First Nations Peoples experience and understand the forensic mental health system in NSW. Interviews were conducted with ten First Nations Peoples in contact with the forensic mental health system, including forensic patients and their family members. Participants described challenging life experiences prior to their contact with the forensic mental health system, with community services often failing to respond to their mental health needs. While participants reported some positive experiences with the forensic mental health system, they ultimately described an urgent need for culturally appropriate programs that facilitate connections to family and Community. Forensic mental health services should be co-designed alongside First Nations Peoples and communities to improve outcomes and avoid re-traumatisation through contact with services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People who have been in custody are more likely to experience multiple, long standing health issues. They are at high risk of illness and injury post release and experience poor access to health services both of which contribute to high rates of recidivism. The study was conducted to examine Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal former prisoners' risk of hospitalisation and rehospitalisation in the five years post release from custody and identified the common reasons for hospitalisations. Methods: Common reasons for hospital admission were identified by conducting descriptive analysis of linked data, related to former prisoners, from NSW Ministry of Health and Corrective Services NSW. This relied upon admitted patient data for 1899 patients. Of this cohort, 1075 people had been admitted to hospital at least once and remained out of custody over a five year period. The independent variables we studied included age, sex, and whether or not the person was Aboriginal. We conducted univariate and multivariate analysis on the following dependent variables: number of admissions over five years after release; more than one admission; days between custody and first hospitalisation; and days between first and second hospitalisation. Results: Mental and behavioural disorders, injuries and poisoning, and infectious or parasitic diseases were the three most common reasons for admission. Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal former prisoners had a broadly similar pattern of reasons for admission. Yet Aboriginal former prisoners were more likely than non-Aboriginal former prisoners to have a shorter mean interval between hospital admission and readmission (187 days compared to 259 days, t = 2.90, p-0.004). Conclusions: Despite poorer health among Aboriginal people, there were broadly similar patterns of reasons for admission to hospital among Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal former prisoners. There may be a number of explanations for this. The cohort was not a representative sample of the NSW prison population. There was an overrepresentation of individuals with cognitive disability (intellectual disability, acquired brain injury, dementia, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder) in the study population, which may have impacted on this group accessing hospital health care. Alternatively perhaps there were fewer presentations to hospital by Aboriginal former prisoners despite a greater need. The shorter interval between hospital admission and readmission for Aboriginal former prisoners may suggest the need for better follow up care in the community after discharge from hospital. This presents an opportunity for primary health care services to work more closely with hospitals to identify and manage Aboriginal former prisoners discharged from hospital so as to prevent readmission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on the development of the Our Ways to Planning framework. The framework is intended as a guide for Australian organisations to work in safe and culturally appropriate ways to assist and enable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with disability to make plans about their physical and mental health, wellbeing and future. The Our Ways to Planning framework is based on data collected via community-led research undertaken with Aboriginal people with disability and their family members and workers from five communities in New South Wales. Community mapping, an arts-based research method, was used to learn about the experiences of Aboriginal people with disability and their families regarding planning and access to services. Using iterative, thematic analysis, the research team identified core themes and concepts around which to structure the framework. The framework identifies three 'bridges' to organisational readiness for planning: knowledge, understanding and choice. It focuses on the importance of non-Aboriginal-led organisations learning from, and collaborating with, community-based Aboriginal-led organisations in order to build capacity in both types of organisations. The framework advocates for open and respectful organisational engagement with the needs of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people with disability. It also acknowledges the importance of developing an awareness of Aboriginal cultures, histories and points of view, given their influence on planning processes. The Our Ways to Planning framework provides a model for organisational capacity-building for effective planning that responds directly to the experiences and needs of Aboriginal people with disability, family members and workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is well established that First Nations Peoples in Australia are overrepresented within the criminal justice system. However, First Nations Peoples appear to be comparatively underrepresented in the forensic mental health system, and little is known about their outcomes once released from secure care. Objective: To compare the characteristics and rates of repeat criminal justice contact for a criminal charge of First Nations and non-First Nations forensic patients in New South Wales. Methods: Data on the sample were extracted from the New South Wales Mental Health Review Tribunal paper and electronic files matched to the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research Reoffending Database. Characteristics of First Nations and non-First Nations patients were compared using univariate logistic regression analysis. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression was used to determine predictors of post-release criminal charges. Results: Key differences in the sociodemographic, clinical and forensic characteristics of First Nations compared with non-First Nations forensic patients were identified. The time to first criminal justice contact following release was significantly shorter for First Nations forensic patients (p < 0.01). Conclusion: The findings of this study confirm that First Nations forensic patients have distinct and complex needs that are apparent at entry to the forensic mental health system and that their poorer criminal justice contact rates following release from secure care indicate that these needs are not being adequately met either during treatment or once in the community. Responses to these study findings must consider the complex and continuing impact of colonisation on First Nations Peoples, as well as the need for solutions to be culturally safe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Opioid agonist treatment is effective but resource intensive to administer safely in custodial settings, leading to significant under‐treatment of opioid dependence in these settings world‐wide. This study assessed the safety of subcutaneous slow‐release depot buprenorphine in custody. Design Open‐label, non‐randomized trial. Setting: Correctional centres in New South Wales, Australia. Participants: Sixty‐seven men and women, aged ≥ 18 years of various security classifications with a diagnosis of moderate to severe DSM‐5 opioid use disorder currently serving a custodial sentence of ≥ 6 months were recruited between November 2018 and July 2019. Patients not in opioid agonist treatment at recruitment commenced depot buprenorphine; patients already stable on oral methadone treatment were recruited to the comparison arm. Intervention and comparator: Depot buprenorphine (CAM2038 weekly for 4 weeks then monthly) and daily oral methadone. Measurements Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) monitoring and physical examinations at every visit. Participants were administered a survey assessing self‐reported diversion and substance use at baseline and weeks 4 and 16. Findings Retention in depot buprenorphine treatment was 92.3%. Ninety‐four per cent of patients reported at least one adverse event, typically mild and transient. No diversion was identified. The prevalence of self‐reported non‐prescribed opioid use among depot buprenorphine patients decreased significantly between baseline (97%) and week 16 (12%, odds ratio = 0.0035, 95% confidence interval = 0.0007–0.018, P < 0.0001). Conclusions: This first study of depot buprenorphine in custodial settings showed treatment retention and outcomes comparable to those observed in community settings and for other opioid agonist treatment used in custodial settings, without increased risk of diversion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The objective of this review was to synthesise evidence on the health and social support needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people leaving prison and on programs which aid successful community re‐entry. A systematic literature review was undertaken of peer‐reviewed and grey literature published between 2001 and 2013, focusing on the post‐release needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults and pre‐ and post‐release programs. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have high health and social support needs on leaving prison. There is little literature evidence that re‐entry programs commonly consider health needs, support linkages with primary care or Aboriginal Medical Services, or are designed in consideration of the particular needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. In the absence of evaluative evidence on re‐entry programs in this group, we have synthesised the best practice recommendations. Re‐entry programs must be culturally competent in design and delivery, holistic, take a long‐term view, involve families and communities, demonstrate interagency coordination and promote linkages between prison and community‐based services. There is an urgent need for accessible pre‐ and post‐release programs which meet the particular needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, including their health needs. Programs must be flexible, comprehensive and accessible to those on remand or with short sentences. Stronger linkage with primary care and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community controlled health organisations is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and Rationale Cycling in and out of prison is recognised as extremely damaging and disempowering for the families of Aboriginal Australians and their communities. We examined the impact of incarceration and the return of former inmates to their communities on family members and how primary health care services might provide better support to Aboriginal families and communities. Methods A human rights-based framework was used as an interpretive lens to analyse findings from ten interviews with family members of Aboriginal former inmates. Three human rights principles were invoked: the accountability of duty bearers, participation of right holders, and equity and non-discrimination. Findings The impact on Aboriginal family members of supporting a relative in custody and post release is substantial. In the absence of adequate post-release discharge planning and communication between services, it was left to family members to identify the immediate needs of former inmates and also to establish their own links with community services, including primary health care. Family members have therefore acted as important brokers to accessing primary health care services. According to the human rights framework, both family members and inmates are right holders. However, unless an inmate is on parole, there is no single agency responsible for meeting the needs of the former inmates. Therefore, there is no official duty-bearer. Primary health care services may provide health care, information, emotional and instrumental support to former inmates and family members but the manner in which this occurs is largely reactive. Relevance to policy, research or practice needs There is a need to identify which organisations are the key duty bearers for former inmates and family members and how best to support them to ensure the rights holders can access their rights to health and wellbeing. Rather than a single organisation, the key to effective post-release support is a linked and collaborative service network model. Primary health care needs to link with appropriate other social and human services so that when families and former inmates seek support they are ready to activate the network as well as provide targeted health interventions as needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Aboriginal Australians are more likely than other Australians to cycle in and out of prison on remand or by serving multiple short sentences--a form of serial incarceration and institutionalisation. This cycle contributes to the over-representation of Aboriginal Australians in prison and higher rates of recidivism. Our research examined how primary health care can better meet the health care and social support needs of Aboriginal Australians transitioning from prison to the community. Methods: Purposive sampling was used to identify 30 interviewees. Twelve interviews were with Aboriginal people who had been in prison; ten were with family members and eight with community service providers who worked with former inmates. Thematic analysis was conducted on the interviewees' description of their experience of services provided to prisoners both during incarceration and on transition to the community. Results: Interviewees believed that effective access to primary health care on release and during transition was positively influenced by providing appropriate healthcare to inmates in custody and by properly planning for their release. Further, interviewees felt that poor communication between health care providers in custody and in the community prior to an inmate's release, contributed to a lack of comprehensive management of chronic conditions. System level barriers to timely communication between in-custody and community providers included inmates being placed on remand which contributed to uncertainty regarding release dates and therefore difficulties planning for release, cycling in and out of prison on short sentences and being released to freedom without access to support services. Conclusions: For Aboriginal former inmates and family members, release from prison was a period of significant emotional stress and commonly involved managing complex needs. To support their transition into the community, Aboriginal former inmates would benefit from immediate access to culturally- responsive community -primary health care services. At present, however, pre-release planning is not always available, especially for Aboriginal inmates who are more likely to be on remand or in custody for less than six months. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Aboriginal Australians are more likely than other Australians to cycle in and out of prison on remand or by serving multiple short sentences—a form of serial incarceration and institutionalisation. This cycle contributes to the over-representation of Aboriginal Australians in prison and higher rates of recidivism. Our research examined how primary health care can better meet the health care and social support needs of Aboriginal Australians transitioning from prison to the community. Methods: Purposive sampling was used to identify 30 interviewees. Twelve interviews were with Aboriginal people who had been in prison; ten were with family members and eight with community service providers who worked with former inmates. Thematic analysis was conducted on the interviewees’ description of their experience of services provided to prisoners both during incarceration and on transition to the community. Results: Interviewees believed that effective access to primary health care on release and during transition was positively influenced by providing appropriate healthcare to inmates in custody and by properly planning for their release. Further, interviewees felt that poor communication between health care providers in custody and in the community prior to an inmate’s release, contributed to a lack of comprehensive management of chronic conditions. System level barriers to timely communication between in-custody and community providers included inmates being placed on remand which contributed to uncertainty regarding release dates and therefore difficulties planning for release, cycling in and out of prison on short sentences and being released to freedom without access to support services. Conclusions: For Aboriginal former inmates and family members, release from prison was a period of significant emotional stress and commonly involved managing complex needs. To support their transition into the community, Aboriginal former inmates would benefit from immediate access to culturally- responsive community -primary health care services. At present, however, pre-release planning is not always available, especially for Aboriginal inmates who are more likely to be on remand or in custody for less than six months. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]