Mass Incarceration Essay

The mass incarceration of the mentally ill can be reduced by reverting to institutionalization
Researchers and activists alike are concerned about the rate at which individuals with mental illness are incarcerated in the United States. Many consider that the increase in incarceration is a direct result of deinstitutionalization. In this essay, I will discuss how the solutions to the prevention of the incarceration of the mentally ill but ultimately lead to the common goal of improving the care of the mentally ill. This will be done by comparing and contrasting the key points of Knoll, Etter et al and Kincaid. The points discussed will be their views on the cause of mass incarceration, the way in which they approach solutions to the problem and the suggested role of law enforcement officers in this solution.
The first point addressed is whether or not deinstitutionalization led to a rise in the incarceration of the mentally ill. Knoll states, “a reasonable person could not fail to see the correlation among decreased funding for mental health resources, the

80). They both argue that “deinstitutionalization became more of a cost-saving measure than a human rights initiative” and was the catalyst for the mass incarceration issue of mentally ill individuals (Etter et al 87). In contrast to the aforementioned authors, Kincaid does not look at deinstitutionalization as the cause of the incarceration of people who are mentally ill. Instead, the article focuses on how the current problem can be addressed. Kincaid states that mass incarceration of the mentally ill is not a direct result of the deinstitutionalization process but rather because ‘suitable treatment, alternative care, and community support’ is not made readily available and she offers a program that aims to combat the