Research Dossier

Cesia Pinedo

Introduction
My Research Dossier shows my research process and how new information caused me to
shift the direction of my paper. When I first started my research process I was originally going to
look into the different modes of treatment on a global scale. However, after the news of the
shooting in Oregon I decided to take my research another direction. The research I have been
looking into will help me evaluate the effect that mental illness stigmas has on the behavior
towards the mentally ill.
The issues of how to deal with the mentally ill arises after a mass shooting. This could be
beneficial for those who suffer from mental illness as people become aware of the needs they
have. On the other side of this it could cause the development of negative stereotypes for those
with mental illness. Over the past few years the stigma of the mentally ill has been evolving with
the improvement of technology and better understanding of diagnosing patients, I will be looking
at the impact these stigmas have on the way people act towards those with mental illness.

Pre-existing stigmas might be difficult to view as they have formed the way people think
of subjects or issues. Different stigmas determine the way people act towards certain things, in
the case of mental illness stigmas, they can be shaped off the way others present them or
personal experiences. In recent years, the medias depiction of the mentally ill is that of a subject
that is not being properly dealt with. With different influences surrounding people, stigmas can
be shaped into non-accurate representations at times. Due to this there are many ways that mental
illness are viewed, in some cases the public is highly caution for their safety as they view mental
illness as a safety hazard for they are too unstable.

People seem to distance themselves from the mentally ill with great precaution as they
do not know how to understand them. The stigma the mentally ill are unstable people that our
society doesnt know how to control seems to flourish with such evidences. People were shown
to regard the mentally ill with some sort of discrimination because of fear of not knowing what
they could end up doing (Corrigan, P., Markowitz, F. E., Watson, A., Rowan, D., & Kubiak, M.
A., 2003). (McGinty, E. E., Webster, D. W., & Barry, C. L, 2014) (Ilgen, M. A., Zivin, K.,
McCammon, R. J., & Valenstein, M., 2008).

In addition to this, there have been studies showing the correlation between mental
illness and violence (Friedman, R. A. ,2006). This leads there to be a stigma that the mentally ill
are more prone to being violent. This view causes there to be a fear of the mentally ill
community. (Hiday, V. A., 1995). This kind of thought process has led to the investigation of
the impact of mental illness on crime in a case study (Fazel, S., Grann, M., & Psych, C. , 2006).
(Diamond, P. M., Wang, E. W., Holzer III, C. E., & Thomas, C, 2001).

However, there is a view that the current stigma involved with mental illness is far too
harsh and that they can be treated in a non-negative light. After reviewing personal testimonies,
many people diagnosed with mentally illness are affected of their illness due to the way people
view them (Dinos, S., Stevens, S., Serfaty, M., Weich, S., & King, M., 2004) (Parle, 2012).
These type of results are common among people with mental illness, it causes deeper problems
in families and lives as such a negative stigma is difficult to overcome (Hinshaw., 2007).

Research Proposal

To: Dr. Guenzel

From: Cesia Pinedo

Subject of my paper: Stigmas toward the mentally ill

Purpose: My Major and why writing about this topic will be beneficial to me: My major is Health
Science Pre-Clinic and I think that writing on this topic will help me understand how social issues can
impact the possible patient population. It is important to look at the various factors that could help more
people with illnesses of any sort to be treated. After viewing how the mistreatment of those with mental
disabilities, there are some improvements that us as a society should do.

Preliminary Thesis/Argument: The pre-existing stigmas of mental illness have shown changes
throughout the past few years. This prompts me to evaluate the impact of mental illness stigmas on the
behavior towards those how have a mental illness.

Intended audience: The class will see the effects that stigmas have on the medical field in regards to
mental illness. They will also see there are many existing stereotypes the media invokes that we are not
even aware of anymore. This will show the need to break these existing stereotypes. By representing my
research I can also reach a larger unintended audience who plan to look into the effects of mental illness

stigmas. The more familiar people get with these kinds of issues the easier it is to deal with them without
offending anyone. The audience has different experiences but we are all around the same age so there
are certain analogies that I might be able to use to connect with them better.

Types of research areas: Scholarly research, field research, along with Internet evidence is what I will be
using.

Kinds of sources I will use and why they will benefit my paper: Scholarly research will provide me
information about the mental illness field and it can also give me statistics that correlate with my research
paper. The reason I am using field based research is because it will have the most credibility when it
comes to finding out diagnosis of real people and having testimonies from people that I have come into
contact with. I will not use internet sources for testimonies as many cases can be falsified. The health and
medical field are very broad disciplines that value new information from different tested sources.

Graphs or charts: The charts that I am thinking would help the readers visualize the changes in mental
illness diagnosis are bar graphs showing the amount of people diagnosed with different mental illness.

Documentation Style: I will use what most Health Science papers use, APA (American Psychological
Association).

Research Map
One: *How has mental illness stigmas affect the treatment of the mentally ill?
*How does the impact of the media effect the stigmas of mental illness?
*Does the treatment of mental illness change across countries because of
culture, technology, location, or a mixture?
Two:

*Mental illness stigma

*Treatment for mental illness

*Advances in the mental health field

*violence and mental illness

Three:*Library research: Journals/books on mental illness

*Field research: interviews for testimonies
*Internet research: google (analysis on cultural stigmas of mental illness),
online articles dealing with mental illness stigmas
Four:

October
Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

FinalDra

Stats

Bio

ft:

Exam III

Exam:

Researc
h
dossier

III

November/December
Fr
Sun
1

Mon
2

Tue
3

Wed
4

Thu
5

Psych

Draft

Exam III

Rhetori

i
6

Sat
7

13

14

cal
Analysi
s
8

10

11

12
Final
Draft
Rhetori
cal
Analysi
s

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

25

26

27

28

Draft 1
Research
paper
22

23

24
Draft 3
Research
paper

29

30

Self-

Final

assessme

Draft

nt/

researc

reflection
8

h paper
10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

Eportfolio
due
.

ADDITIONAL UNKNOWN DATES

LIBRARY RESEARCH: AT LEAST 1

INTERNET RESEARCH: 3 HR/WK

HR/WK
PREER EDITING: TBA
INTERVIEWS: END OF OCT.

F2F CONFERENCE: TBA

PRESENTATIONS: ???

NOVEMBER

Annotated Bibliography
Attitudes Toward Mental Health - 35 States, District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, 2007. (2010,
May 28). Retrieved October 8, 2015.
Negative attitudes about mental illness often underlie stigma, which can cause affected
persons to deny symptoms; delay treatment; be excluded from employment, housing, or
relationships; and interfere with recovery. Understanding attitudes toward mental illness at the
state level could help target initiatives to reduce stigma, but state-level data are scant. To study
such attitudes, CDC analyzed data from the District of Columbia (DC), Puerto Rico, and the 35
states participating in the 2007 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) (the most
recent data available), which included two questions on attitudes toward mental illness. Most
adults (88.6%) agreed with a statement that treatment can help persons with mental illness lead
normal lives, but fewer (57.3%) agreed with a statement that people are generally caring and
sympathetic to persons with mental illness. Responses to these questions differed by age, sex,
race/ethnicity, and education level. Although most adults with mental health symptoms (77.6%)
agreed that treatment can help persons with mental illness lead normal lives, fewer persons with
symptoms (24.6%) believed that people are caring and sympathetic to persons with mental
illness. This report provides the first state-specific estimates of these attitudes and provides a
baseline for monitoring trends. Initiatives that can educate the public about how to support
persons with mental illness and local programs and media support to decrease negative
stereotypes of mental illness can reduce barriers for those seeking or receiving treatment for
mental illness. - Abstract by author
This information was reported by R Manderscheid, PhD, National Association of County
Behavioral Health and Developmental Disability Directors, P Delvecchio, MSW, C Marshall,

Center for Mental Health Svcs, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Svcs Admin, RG Palpant,
MS, J Bigham, TH Bornemann, EdD, Carter Center Mental Health Program. R Kobau, MPH,
MAPP, M Zack, MD, G Langmaid, W Thompson, PhD, and D Lubar, MSW, Division of Adult
and Community Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion,
CDC. This report has several collaborators with impressive credentials making it a credible
source for me to use.
This report has a bias of not using all 50 states as well as excluding households without
telephones. In the report they mention that they could only survey people who spoke English or
Spanish due to limited resources.
Corrigan, P. W. (2007). How clinical diagnosis might exacerbate the stigma of mental
illness. Social Work, 52(1), 31-39.
Stigma can greatly exacerbate the experience of mental illness. Diagnostic classification
frequently used by clinical social workers may intensify this stigma by enhancing the public's
sense of groupness and differentness when perceiving people with mental illness. The
homogeneity assumed by stereotypes may lead mental health professionals and the public to
view individuals in terms of their diagnostic labels. The stability of stereotypes may exacerbate
notions that people with mental illness do not recover. Several strategies may diminish the
unintended effects of diagnosis. Dimensional approaches to diagnosis may not augment stigma in
the same manner as classification. Moreover, regular interaction with people with mental illness
and focusing on recovery may diminish the stigmatizing effects of diagnosis. - Abstract by
author.

The author is Patrick W. Corrigan, who is a professor of Psychology in the Institute of

Psychology of Illinois Institute of Technology. He has taken part of several articles as well as is a
licensed clinical psychologist making me consider him a credible source.
The bias of this source is that it heavily states that current stigmas are too harsh and that
we as a society show change the way we view the mentally ill.
Corrigan, P., Markowitz, F. E., Watson, A., Rowan, D., & Kubiak, M. A. (2003). An attribution
model of public discrimination towards persons with mental illness. Journal of health
and Social Behavior, 162-179.
In this study, we build on previous work by developing and estimating a model of the
relationships between causal attributions (e.g., controllability, responsibility), familiarity with
mental illness, dangerousness, emotional responses (e.g., pity, anger, fear), and helping and
rejecting responses. Using survey data containing responses to hypothetical vignettes, we
examine these relationships in a sample of 518 community college students. Consistent with
attribution theory, causal attributions affect beliefs about persons responsibility for causing their
condition, beliefs which in turn lead to affective reactions, resulting in rejecting responses such
as avoidance, coercion, segregation, and withholding help. However, consistent with a danger
appraisal hypothesis, the effects of perceptions of dangerousness on helping and rejecting
responses are unmediated by responsibility beliefs. Much of the dangerousness effects operate by
increasing fear, a particularly strong predictor of support for coercive treatment. The results from
this study also suggest that familiarity with mental illness reduces discriminatory responses.
-Abstract by author

The authors of this are Patrick W. Corrigan, who was affiliated with the University of
Chicago as are the authors, Amy Watson, and David Rowan. The other authors are Fred E.
Markowitz, affiliated with Northern Illinois University, and Mary Ann Kubiak, who is affiliated
with Prairie State College. Since this is a Peer Reviewed Journal it increases its credibility.
The bias of this source is that is it based on a sample that cannot be generalized and it
leans toward the side that current existing stigma are in the wrong.
Diamond, P. M., Wang, E. W., Holzer III, C. E., & Thomas, C. (2001). The prevalence of mental
illness in prison. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services
Research, 29(1), 21-40.
Over the last decade state prisons have experienced unprecedented growth and many
demographic changes. At the same time, courts are requiring states to provide mental health
screening and treatment to prisoners. Findings from recent studies indicate that the prevalence of
mental illness is higher in prisons than in the community, and comorbidity is common. Our
ability to generalize from these studies is limited, however, because of major shifts in the
demographic mix in prisons during the past decade. New studies on the prevalence of mental
illness in prisons, which consider these recent changes would help planners allocate funds and
staff to more effectively meet the needs of these individuals. Abstract by author
The authors are Pamela Diamond affiliated with Sam Houston University of the College
of Criminal Justice, Eugene Wang and Anges des Cruser affiliated with Texas Tech University,
Charles Holzer and Christopher affiliated with the University of Texas part of the Medical

Branch Departmetn of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences. Since this is a Peer Reviewed Journal
it makes it more credible.
The bias of this source is that it views the mentally ill as another sector that should be
dealt differently in the justice system.
Dinos, S., Stevens, S., Serfaty, M., Weich, S., & King, M. (2004). Stigma: the feelings and
experiences of 46 people with mental illness Qualitative study.The British Journal of
Psychiatry, 184(2), 176-181.
Background Stigma defines people in terms of some distinguishing characteristic and
devalues them as a consequence. Aims To describe the relationship of stigma with mental illness,
psychiatric diagnosis, treatment and its consequences of stigma for the individual.
Method Narrative interviews were conducted by trained users of the local mental health
services; 46 patients were recruited from community and day mental health services in North
London. Results Stigma was a pervasive concern to almost all participants. People with
psychosis or drug dependence were most likely to report feelings and experiences of stigma and
were most affected by them. Those with depression, anxiety and personality disorders were more
affected by patronising attitudes and feelings of stigma even if they had not experienced any
overt discrimination. However, experiences were not universally negative. Conclusions Stigma
may influence how a psychiatric diagnosisis accepted, whether treatment will be adhered to and
how people with mental illness function in the world. However, perceptions of mental illness and
diagnoses can be helpful and non-stigmatising for some patients. Abstract by author

The authors are Sokratis Dinos, Marc Serfaty, Scott Weich, Michael King who are
affiliated with Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Royal Free and University
College Medical School, and Scott Stevens affiliated with Camden and Islington Mental Health
Consortium. Since this is a Peer-Reviewed journal it has more credibility.
The bias of this report is that the data is based on self-reports of a cross-sectional sample
and it did not include people not in contact with community mental health services making the
sampling nonrandom.
Fazel, S., Grann, M., & Psych, C. (2006). The population impact of severe mental illness on
violent crime. The American journal of psychiatry, 163(8), 1397-1403.
Objective: This study aimed to determine the population impact of patients with severe
mental illness on violent crime. Method: Sweden possesses high-quality national registers for all
hospital admissions and criminal convictions. All individuals discharged from the hospital with
ICD diagnoses of schizophrenia and other psychoses (N=98,082) were linked to the crime
register to determine the population-attributable risk of patients with severe mental illness to
violent crime. The attributable risk was calculated by gender, three age bands (1524, 2539, and
40 years and over), and offense type. Results: Over a 13-year period, there were 45 violent
crimes committed per 1,000 inhabitants. Of these, 2.4 were attributable to patients with severe
mental illness. This corresponds to a population-attributable risk fraction of 5.2%. This
attributable risk fraction was higher in women than men across all age bands. In women ages 25
39, it was 14.0%, and in women over 40, it was 19.0%. The attributable risk fractions were
lowest in those ages 1524 (2.3% for male patients and 2.9% for female
patients). Conclusions: The population impact of patients with severe mental illness on violent

crime, estimated by calculating the population-attributable risk, varies by gender and age.
Overall, the population-attributable risk fraction of patients was 5%, suggesting that patients with
severe mental illness commit one in 20 violent crimes. Abstract by author
The authors are Seena Fazel, who is affiliated with the Department of Psychiatry at the
University of Oxford, and Martin Grann who is affiliated with the Centre for Violence
Prevention Karolinska Institution in Sweden. These are both credible establishments and this is a
Peer Review Journa making this a good source for me to use.
The bias of this source is that it is only looking at a certain case for 13 years, having this
not be applied to other places. The culture of where this took place also impacts the results.
Friedman, R. A. (2006). Violence and mental illnesshow strong is the link?.New England
Journal of Medicine, 355(20), 2064-2066.
A study showed that patients with serious mental illness those with schizophrenia,
major depression, or bipolar disorder were two to three times as likely as people without such
an illness to be assaultive. However, serious mental illness is quite rare, it actually contributes
very little to the overall rate of violence in the general population. The challenge for medical
practitioners is to remain aware that some of their psychiatric patients do in fact pose a small risk
of violence, while not losing sight of the larger perspective that most people who are violent
are not mentally ill, and most people who are mentally ill are not violent. Abstract by author
The author is Richard Alan Friedman who is a professor of Clinical Psychiatry and is the
Director of the Psychopharmacology Clinic. This shows that he has vast knowledge in psychiatry
and he has expertise in Psycho-Pharmacology. This makes him a credible source to use.

The bias of this journal is that it is heavily influence by Friedmans own personal
experience and the way the reacts to patients now.
Goodman, L. A., Salyers, M. P., Mueser, K. T., Rosenberg, S. D., Swartz, M., Essock, S. M., ... &
Swanson, J. (2001). Recent victimization in women and men with severe mental illness:
Prevalence and correlates. Journal of traumatic stress, 14(4), 615-632.
The problem of violence against individuals with severe mental illness (SMI) has
received relatively little notice, despite several studies suggesting an exceptionally high
prevalence of victimization in this population. This paper describes the results of an investigation
of the prevalence and correlates of past year physical and sexual assault among a large sample of
women and men with SMI drawn from inpatient and outpatient settings across 4 states. Results
confirmed preliminary findings of a high prevalence of victimization in this population (with
sexual abuse more prevalent for women and physical abuse more prevalent for men), and
indicated the existence of a range of correlates of recent victimization, including demographic
factors and living circumstances, history of childhood abuse, and psychiatric illness severity and
substance abuse. The research and clinical implications of these findings are discussed. -Abstract
by author.
The authors are Lisa A Goodman who is affiliated with Boston, Michelle P. Salyers from
Indiana University, Kin T. Mueser affiliated with Indiana University, , Stanley Rosenberg
affiliated with New-Hampshire Dartmouth part of the Psychiatric Research Center , Marvin
Swartz affiliated with Duke University, Susan Essock affiliated with Mount Sinai School of
Medicine, Fred Osher affiliated with the University of Maryland School of Medicine, Marian

Butterfield affiliated with Department of Veterans Affair in Duke University. As this is a PeerReviewed Journal it has more credibility, even more so with so many collaborators.
The bias of this source is it is based on a sample in a cross-sectional survey making this
not as reliable as it could have been.
Hiday, V. A. (1995). The social context of mental illness and violence. Journal of Health and
Social Behavior, 122-137.
For years a debate existed in the literature concerning whether or not mentally ill persons
were more dangerous than others. Empirical work was hampered by conceptual and
methodologically shortcomings, and was therefore unable to settle the debate. Recently,
methodologically sophisticated studies have produced evidence which indicates a modest
association between active major mental disorders and violence. While some interpret this
association to mean that mental illness or particular symptoms directly cause unwarranted
physical aggression, this paper examines the case for the social context stabling socializing and
environmental conditions which are causal in both violence and the development of mental
disorder. It reviews the literature, indicating lacunae in our knowledge base, and posits a causal
model which links social stratification with both mental illness and violence through the
structured types of strains, events, situations, and persons an individual experiences as an integral
part of life.
Abstract by author

The author is Virginia Aldige Hiday who is a professor at North Carolina University in
the Department of Sociology. She is well respected in her area of expertise. This is also a PeerReview journal making increasing its credibility.
The bias is toward the side that the negative stigmas are not accurate and it hopes to show
how the way the mental ill are viewed will change.

Hinshaw, S. (2007). The mark of shame stigma of mental illness and an agenda for change.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. Link, B. G., Phelan, J. C., Bresnahan, M., Stueve, A., &
Pescosolido, B. A. (1999)

Of all the stigmatized conditions in current society, mental illness is near or at the top of
the list, generating the kinds of stereotypes, fear, and rejection that are reminiscent of longstanding attitudes toward leprosy. Mental disorders threaten stability and order, and media
coverage exacerbates this situation by uniformly equating mental illness with violence. As a
result, stigma is rampant, spurring family silence, outright discrimination, a lack of parity for
mental health care coverage, and social isolation. The pain of mental illness is searing enough,
but the added layer of stigma affects personal well-being, economic productivity, and public
health, fueling a vicious cycle of lowered expectations, deep shame, and hopelessness. In this
groundbreaking book, Stephen P. Hinshaw examines the long-standing tendency to stigmatize
those with mental illness. He also provides practical, multilevel strategies for overcoming this
serious problem, including enlightened social policies that encourage contact with those afflicted,
media coverage emphasizing their underlying humanity, family education, and responsive
treatment. The Mark of Shame is a deeply inspiring and passionate work that is realistic and at
times harrowing, yet filled with optimism. It combines personal accounts with information from

social and evolutionary psychology, sociology, and public policy to provide messages or hope
that are essential for anyone afflicted or familiar with mental illness.

The author is Stephan P. Hinshaw, he is a professor of Psychology as well as Vice-Chair

for Psychology in the University of California. He is particularly interested in clinical child and
adolescent psychology. He has conducted several research programs making him a credible
source to use in my paper.

The bias is strongly toward mental illness stigmas being harmful and incorrect on how
the public should view the mentally ill.

Ilgen, M. A., Zivin, K., McCammon, R. J., & Valenstein, M. (2008). Mental illness, previous
suicidality, and access to guns in the United States.Psychiatric Services, 59(2), 198-20
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the association between mental disorders, prior
suicidality, and access to guns and gun safety in the U.S. population. METHODS: Using data
from adult participants (N=5,692) from the National Comorbidity Survey: Replication (NCS-R),
this study examined relationships between mental disorders, past suicidality, and gun access and
safety practices. RESULTS: Individuals with lifetime mental disorders (N=3,528) were as
likely as those without (N=2,034) to have access to a gun (34.1% versus 36.3%; odds ratio
[OR]=.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]=.8-1.1), carry a gun (4.8% versus 5.0%; OR=1.0, CI=.71.40), or store a gun in an unsafe manner (6.2% versus 7.3%; OR=.9, CI=.5-1.4). However,
individuals with a prior suicide attempt were less likely than those without such an attempt to
have access to a gun (23.8% versus 36.0%; OR=.6, CI=.5-.8). CONCLUSIONS: Given the

previously established relationship between mental health risk factors and suicide, this study
highlights the need to assess for gun access among high-risk individuals. -Abstract by author.

The authors were Dr. Ilgen who is affiliated with the Department of Veterans Affairs Ann
Arbor, and with the Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, along with Dr. Zivin and
Dr. Valenstein who are with the Department of Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor, Michigan, and with
the Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, with which Mr. McCammon
is also affiliated. Their credentials indicate that they have sufficient knowledge in psychiatrics
and as this is a peer reviewed journal is gains credibility as a source.

The bias is that the work is solely based on the data collected not taking into
consideration other factors that could affect the results.

McGinty, E. E., Webster, D. W., & Barry, C. L. (2014). Effects of news media messages about
mass shootings on attitudes toward persons with serious mental illness and public support
for gun control policies. Retrieved October 6, 2015
Recent mass shootings by persons seemingly afflicted with serious mental illness (SMI)
have received extensive news media coverage and prompted national dialogue about the causes
of, and policy responses to, mass shootings. News media framing of SMI as a cause of gun
violence may influence public attitudes about persons with SMI and support for gun violence
prevention proposals. We analyzed the content of a 25% random sample of news stories on SMI
and gun violence published in 14 national and regional new sources from 1997 to 20102. Across
the study period, most news coverage occurred in the wake of mass shootings and dangerous

people with SMI were more likely than more weapons to be mentioned as a cause of gun
violence. -Abstract by author

The authors are Emma E. McGinty is with the Department of Health Policy and
Management, the Center for Gun Policy and Research, and the Institute for Health and Social
Policy, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD. Daniel W. Webster
and Colleen L. Barry are with the Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Gun
Policy and Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Marian Jarlenski is
with the Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of
Public Health.

The bias is that media effects heavily in a negative way the stigma of mentally ill.
Parle, S. (2012, October 7). How does stigma affect people with mental illness? Retrieved
October 6, 2015. Oct. 2011: 12-14. Vol 108 No 28. Web. 04 Nov. 2015.
People with mental health problems experience many different types of stigma. This
article explores the attitudes and beliefs of the general public towards people with mental illness,
and the lived experiences and feelings of service users and their relatives.
The author is Siobhan Parle is community psychiatric nurse, Berkshire Health Foundation
Trust. She is known in her field and her article is by the Nursing Time a well-respected medical
source. This source seems to be credible to use.
The bias is that there is a very negative stigma for the mentally ill in the public and how
with more research and dedication there can be improvement on stopping it.

Torrey, E. F. (1994). Violent behavior by individuals with serious mental illness.Psychiatric

Services, 45(7), 653-662.

The perceived association between violent behavior and serious mental illness was
explored to determine the validity of claims by mental health advocates that individuals with
serious mental illness are no more dangerous than members of the general population. Methods:
The author reviewed recent studies and media accounts of violent behavior by individuals with
serious mental illness, with emphasis given to the most recent studies. Results and conclusions:
Although the vast majority of individuals with serious mental illness are not more dangerous
than members of the general population, recent findings suggest the existence of a subgroup that
is more dangerous. A history of violent behavior, noncompliance with medications, and
substance abuse are important predictors of violent behavior in this subgroup. The findings imply
that the criteria for involuntary hospitalization, involuntary medication, outpatient commitment,
the monitoring of medication compliance, and other mandated follow-up procedures may need to
be revised. The existence of a subgroup of seriously mentally ill patients who exhibit violent
behavior undermines efforts by mental health advocates to reduce the stigma of mental illness by
denying an association with violence. Until the problem of violence by this subgroup is
addressed, it will be difficult to substantially decrease the stigma associated with serious mental
illness. Abstract by author

The author is Torrey E who is a research psychiatrist specializing in schizophrenia and

bipolar disorder. He worked on a clinical staff of St. Elizabeths Hospital. He has conducted

several studies on mental illnesses. He is well known in field and is a credible source to use as
this is a Peer-Reviewed Journal.

The bias is towards the side that mentally ill people have a greater tendency to be violent.