Predictors of shared decision making with people who have a serious mental illness and who are under justice supervision in the community

Challenges to Employing Shared Decision Making With Adults Under Community Supervision Who Have a Mental Illness

Adults under community corrections supervision and who have a mental illness (MI) are expected to comply with conditions of release which often include involvement with supportive social services. The rates of technical violation, arrest, and incarceration that result from failure to comply with these mandates are exceedingly high. Shared decision making among officer-supervisors and client-supervisees is a promising approach to promote engagement in community corrections services among supervisees who have MI. This paper reviews recent research on shared decision making and identifies three barriers to its implementation in this context: (1) a lack of role clarity, (2) a predilection for risk avoidance, and (3) stigma toward supervisees. Empirically supported recommendations are suggested to aid in overcoming these obstacles, facilitate shared decision making, and promote recovery among this population: (1) unification of supervisor rehabilitative and public safety roles, (2) maximizing opportunities for self-determination through low-stakes events and/or enhancement of supervisee strengths and capabilities, and (3) supervisor training in principles of mental health recovery.

End-of-Life Care in Individuals With Serious Mental Illness

Background

Approximately 4.5% of the population live with serious mental illness (SMI), a term referring to mental health disorders that are chronic, impair function, and require ongoing treatment. People living with SMI are at risk of premature mortality relative to people without SMI. Chronic medical illnesses contribute significantly to mortality among individuals with SMI. The standard of care for individuals with serious medical illnesses includes palliative care. However, the provision of palliative care has not been operationalized for individuals with SMI.

Objectives

To review existing data on end-of-life and palliative care for individuals with serious medical illness and comorbid serious mental illness. To operationalize the role of the consultation-liaison (C-L) psychiatrist in such care, with a particular eye towards redressing disparities.

Methods

In this narrative review, we draw upon a review of the literature on end-of-life and palliative care provision for individuals with serious medical illness and comorbid serious medical illness. We also draw upon the experiences of the authors in formulating best practices for the care of such patients.

Results

Individuals with SMI are at risk of suboptimal end-of-life care. Patient, clinician, and system-level factors all contribute to disparities including decreased access to palliative care, uneven continued engagement with mental health services, and low rates of advance care planning. C-L psychiatrists can use their expertise at the intersection of medicine and psychiatry to address such disparities by (1) correcting misassumptions, (2) promoting advance care planning, (3) engaging long-term caregivers, (4) recognizing social needs, (5) ensuring ongoing access to psychiatric treatment, and (6) addressing suffering.

Conclusions

There are significant disparities in the end-of-life care of individuals with SMI. C-L psychiatrists have expertise to ally with medical providers and redress these disparities.