Stereotype or Unpleasant Fact
Here are the conclusions of a nice review on the association of violence and mental illness.
jwm
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/mh-sm/pubs/mental_illness/index-eng.php#tc
Conclusions:
In light of the foregoing annotated review and discussion, it is possible to identify that which we are relatively confident of, and that about which we remain uncertain.
Given the methodological problems that have plagued this field, a causal inference that mental illness causes violence cannot yet be made for the following reasons:
a) Studies examining the relationship between mental illness and violence have been largely restricted to selected offender or patient populations. Because of their selected nature, these studies are not sufficient to draw etiological inferences about the role of mental illness in causing violence in general. They only provide evidence of an association among selected sub-groups of persons who come into contact with services because they are more likely to be violent in the first place.
b) General population studies that have overcome this selection bias have shown a statistical association between some mental illnesses and violence. However, these studies have been cross-sectional in nature so have been unable to establish the temporal ordering of study factors. Therefore, at best, they could provide only weak evidence to support an etiological inference. In addition, however, it is possible that the statistical associations noted are an artifact of the manner in which mental illness and violence were defined. These studies have failed to derive measures of mental illness that are independent of violence. Given this problem, findings from these studies cannot be used to form the basis of an etiological argument.
Without further well-controlled epidemiological investigations, there is insufficient evidence to infer an etiological relationship between mental illness and violence.
Based on the foregoing review, however, we can be relatively confident that:
a) the prevalence of mental illness (particularly substance abuse disorders) among incarcerated populations is high, reflecting a population that is in particularly great need of services;
b) former mental patients may be at high risk of arrest and violence when released into the community, particularly if they have a history of prior arrests or violence or if they experience psychotic symptoms;
c) family members (not the general public) are the most likely targets of violence from former mentally ill patients in the community; and
d) hospitalized mental patients are at high risk of committing violence, particularly if they have a history of prior violence or if they experience psychotic symptoms.
Here are the conclusions of a nice review on the association of violence and mental illness.
jwm
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/mh-sm/pubs/mental_illness/index-eng.php#tc
Conclusions:
In light of the foregoing annotated review and discussion, it is possible to identify that which we are relatively confident of, and that about which we remain uncertain.
Given the methodological problems that have plagued this field, a causal inference that mental illness causes violence cannot yet be made for the following reasons:
a) Studies examining the relationship between mental illness and violence have been largely restricted to selected offender or patient populations. Because of their selected nature, these studies are not sufficient to draw etiological inferences about the role of mental illness in causing violence in general. They only provide evidence of an association among selected sub-groups of persons who come into contact with services because they are more likely to be violent in the first place.
b) General population studies that have overcome this selection bias have shown a statistical association between some mental illnesses and violence. However, these studies have been cross-sectional in nature so have been unable to establish the temporal ordering of study factors. Therefore, at best, they could provide only weak evidence to support an etiological inference. In addition, however, it is possible that the statistical associations noted are an artifact of the manner in which mental illness and violence were defined. These studies have failed to derive measures of mental illness that are independent of violence. Given this problem, findings from these studies cannot be used to form the basis of an etiological argument.
Without further well-controlled epidemiological investigations, there is insufficient evidence to infer an etiological relationship between mental illness and violence.
Based on the foregoing review, however, we can be relatively confident that:
a) the prevalence of mental illness (particularly substance abuse disorders) among incarcerated populations is high, reflecting a population that is in particularly great need of services;
b) former mental patients may be at high risk of arrest and violence when released into the community, particularly if they have a history of prior arrests or violence or if they experience psychotic symptoms;
c) family members (not the general public) are the most likely targets of violence from former mentally ill patients in the community; and
d) hospitalized mental patients are at high risk of committing violence, particularly if they have a history of prior violence or if they experience psychotic symptoms.
