Mental health records pose a challenge to private investigators
When I began working as a private investigator I had no idea that, in addition to the standard criminal, civil and traffic courts most people are familiar with, there are specialized courts designed to handle specific types of cases. There are juvenile courts to handle cases involving minors. Some jurisdictions have drug courts designed to handle cases involving defendants suffering from addiction. And there are mental health courts that act as an alternative path within the criminal justice system for those suffering from mental illness or disability.
May is Mental Health Awareness Month, and it’s a good time to step back and appreciate the progress our country has made in destigmatizing a condition that was once seen as a personal weakness or failing. In recent years many high-profile athletes and celebrities have gone public about their struggles with mental health. Earlier this year, newly-elected Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman announced he was taking time off to seek treatment for depression. These kinds of stories were unheard of just a generation ago. Thankfully, our society is beginning to understand that mental health, like physical health, is a subject that affects us all, and not a topic that need be confined to whispers.
Special courts for special circumstances
In 2000, the US Congress established the Mental Health Courts Program, run by the Department of Justice, to help fund specialized courts to deal with defendants suffering from mental illness or mental disability and who have been charged with a misdemeanor or nonviolent offense. The idea was, and is, to provide an alternative process to the mainstream criminal court system in cases involving defendants with mental illness or disability. In jurisdictions that have mental health courts, a criminal defendant who qualifies might request to have their case referred to it. Once court-mandated treatment is complete, the case returns to the main criminal court, often at a reduced charge.
Mental health courts typically feature judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys trained and experienced in dealing with mentally ill or disabled people. As such, they may offer a greater sensitivity and understanding of the defendant’s actions than their counterparts in the mainstream criminal courts.
There currently are nearly 500 adult mental health courts nationwide and more than 50 juvenile mental health courts, according to figures from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Not all jurisdictions have them, although the number has been growing as more communities see the benefit not only of diverting people with mental illness and disability to courts designed for their special needs, but of freeing up resources in mainstream courts.
Private records don’t always stay private
Health records in general are subject to federal and state confidentiality laws and typically out of the reach of private investigators and the public. However, mental health information may crop up from time to time in publicly available court records. For instance, they could appear, or be described, as part of a custody dispute if one party argues that the mental health of the other should be taken into consideration by the court. Clues about a subject’s mental health may also be found in criminal records, such as an arrest report in which officers at the scene describe unusual behavior by the subject or learn that the subject is taking psychiatric medications. Orders of protection are another potential source for information about a defendant’s mental health condition, as are calls for service by police, which typically can be obtained through an open records request.
While mental health court records typically are not available for review, the existence of a mental health court case may be public information depending on the jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions even allow the public to search mental health courts by party name to see if a case involving a subject exists. In other instances, a defendant’s diversion to mental health court might be noted in the criminal case docket.
Knowledge that a subject’s case was diverted to a mental health court shouldn’t be taken as any more or less than it is. It means the subject met eligibility requirements for such a referral, but likely won’t shed light on the nature of that eligibility. It also shouldn’t be taken as evidence that the subject’s mental health presents a danger to others. Just as our overall understanding of mental illness is evolving, so, too, should our understanding of its role in the court system.