The New York Experience

SUMMARY

In response to changes in health care delivery, a coalition of therapists in New York City mounted a campaign to network with peers on the local, state and national level to exchange information and resources. The Mental Health Task Force explored new models of practice such as psychiatric home care, developed alliances with consumers and monitored regulatory agencies and legislation.     

Juvenile Justice Reform in New York State

ABSTRACT

This article describes the work at the Division of Criminal Justice Services of New York State, in collaboration with other state partners, integrating developments in neuroscience, in particularly the understanding of the adolescent brain, into practical, well informed changes to the juvenile justice system in New York State. The process started in earnest in 2010 with a statewide collective impact planning process that included data-driven analysis, extensive interviews with juvenile justice stakeholders, and an analysis of effective practices in New York State and across the nation. This process resulted in the implementation of action steps outlined in a strategic plan for juvenile justice reform entitled Safe Communities, Successful Youth: A Shared Vision for the New York State Juvenile Justice System, released in July 2011. Since that time, we have developed a sophisticated network of juvenile justice stakeholders to come together to work on implementing effective strategies to promote youth success and ensure public safety. Specifically, we have developed statewide metrics and county profiles that allow us to track 235 data points across the juvenile justice system over time so we can get a sense of system effectiveness and pinpoint potential areas of focus. We have also established nine Regional Youth Justice Teams across the State to bring system stakeholders together on a regional basis so that we can more effectively impact change based on the needs of different communities. Finally, we are excited that we will soon be launching a new best practices institute, which will help us to develop and share model interventions for our most vulnerable youth.     

The New York Psychoanalytic Civil War.

The goal of this contribution is to give an overall survey of the analytic schisms in the New York area from 1934 on. The general background, laying the groundwork for potential schisms, is described. There were several major schisms in the New York area. The first related to Horney's departure from the New York Psychoanalytic Society and Institute. There were multiple splits in this group which eventuated in a psychoanalytic facility at the New York Medical College, as well as the establishment of the William Alanson White Institute. Then there was the establishment of a psychoanalytic training facility at Columbia University, one at the Downstate Medical Center, and another at the New York University School of Medicine. The various factors that played a role in the splits are discussed. Finally, there is a discussion of why psychoanalytic schisms take place.     

Restoration of Firearm Rights in New York

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 encouraged states to create processes by which individuals who have lost their rights to firearm possession for mental-illness-related reasons could receive relief from restrictions. Over 20 states have created relief processes for this sub-group, but there still exists considerable state-by-state heterogeneity. The spectrum ranges from states that require a physician's opinion regarding appropriateness for restoration to those that rely solely on judicial proceedings without input from psychiatrists or other mental health professionals. This article reviews the restoration process in New York State, a model in which psychiatrists participate in the process of assessing whether an individual's firearm rights can be restored. It discusses the legislative background of these regulations, the specific policies and procedures governing the restoration process, and clinical considerations for the forensic evaluation. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Civil commitment laws in nineteenth-century New York

The roots of nineteenth-century American civil commitment law lay in English common law, in particular poor law, with its mixed motives of helping lunatics and of protecting the community from them. As state institutions assumed an increasingly large share of the burden of restraint in the 1840s and 1850s, such confinement decisions became subject to greater public scrutiny. This can be seen particularly clearly in New York State, which in 1842 passed a law requiring that two physicians examine each alleged lunatic and report their findings to a judge who then made the final commitment decision. After the Civil War, a number of legal decisions limited the state's power to initiate civil commitments to cases of clear social danger, though families were not so confined. An 1874 statute further tightened procedural guidelines for civil commitments. A State Commissioner in Lunacy was appointed to oversee the internal workings of lunatic asylums. Yet such legal “reforms” failed to slow the increasing tendency of both families and communities to use such institutions as long-term holding places for the socially marginal or threatening.     

A retrospective examination of outpatient commitment in New York

Outpatient commitment (OC) is a growing trend in mental health treatment. The impetus for this movement has been partly due to the public perception that some mentally ill outpatients are prone to violence as result of poor treatment compliance. Numerous studies have shown that poor treatment compliance is associated with increased hospitalization, substance abuse, homelessness, and contact with the criminal justice system. This study examined treatment effectiveness, demographic variables, hospital utilization, and violence among 100 OC participants in New York. Results indicate that OC can be an effective means of increasing treatment compliance and reducing hospitalization and encounters with the criminal justice system.     

Central New York Psychiatric Center: an approach to the treatment of co-occurring disorders in the New York State correctional mental health system

Central New York Psychiatric Center operates a maximum security inpatient treatment hospital and outpatient mental health services for all of the 72 New York State prisons. In this article prevalence data, patient characteristics, and interventions offered to inmates diagnosed with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse disorders in the New York State prison system are reviewed and discussed. Available interventions have resulted from the close collaboration of the State Department of Correctional Services and State Office of Mental Health. Aspects of current programs and plans for future service developments are discussed along with implications for the treatment of an offender population diagnosed with a co-occurring disorder.     

The New York Jewish Student Syndrome: Stereotype and Facts

Psychiatric professionals at a midwestern university outpatient clinic consistently describe certain symptom characteristics for New York Jewish (NY-J) students. All student applicants during 1966-67 completed pre-intake questionnaires, which included a previously validated 20-item symptom checklist. Neither NY-J male or female students could be distinguished on stated symptoms from urban non-Jews or other Jewish students more than expected by chance. Differences obtained were mainly in expressive style, including a search for “meaning” by the NY-J students; however, the forces inherent in “studenthood” appeared to make the various ethnic and demographic groups more similar than different.     

Community-Based Interventions in New York City After 9/11

Abstract

The horrors of 9/11 have created tremendous psychosocial needs in the population of New York. For all major providers in this field, this has meant taking up the challenge of learning within the new situation, creating new frameworks for intervention, and implementing programs that previously had not been a part of the traditional social services environment. In this article, we will describe the process of transforming this challenge into an opportunity for organizational, professional and conceptual growth.