But that’s a scary thing when they’re leaving people in the community and not letting us know that this persons out there. And I know there’s good reason for that, but it can be scary for us too, especially the young constables who don’t know that maybe they’re getting someone who is completely insane, you know, or who can be, you know, have episodes like that which are potentially very dangerous to police officers (Dylan, 345-351).
The obstacles towards the identification of those with mental illness in the community were often constructed through statements in the text that conveyed keeping secret, or hiding, information regarding the presence of mental illness. The understanding here was that such obscuring of identification of mental illness was at times purposeful, but not necessarily malevolent. The act of hiding information concerning the presence of mental illness served various purposes for the various populations involved, but the net result was to restrict the ability of the police to perform their duties of ensuring public and personal safety.
150 Analysis In various statements the ‘hidden danger’ was constructed as resulting from the individual
with mental illness neglecting to share relevant or accurate information regarding their mental health with police officers. This hiding of mental illness could take the form of providing police with false information:
He was the one that says “Oh, I know you, don’t I?” and the guy would say “Nup”, *Client name+ would say “Nup. No, I don’t think so. No, no”. And *the sergeant+ said “No I know your face. I know your face” and so I showed him the name tag and he said “No that’s not your name” and he said “What’s your name. I know your name. I know that face” and then he said, after a few minutes he said, “You’re *Client name+!” and he *said+ “Oh ok, *Client name+. How have you been and when did you get out” and had time to chat with him properly. “Rightio, put him in the cells”, so I put him in the cells and meanwhile I *asked+ “Who’s he?” He said “That’s *Client name+” and then, you know, told us the story about what he’d done many years prior. Not that many years prior, but, you know, and how incredibly insane he was at the time (laughs) (Dylan, 313-325).
We can be just pretty forthright and say “Hey look. This is what we’ve been told you’ve been doing” and get their story, you know, what’s going on and if we’ve got enough people that-, If we know that this person’s being doing such-and-such and they’re telling us something totally, sort of, different and we’re quite confident to say “No. We’re going to take you back and get it looked at. Get you sane” (Thomas, 303-308).
Analysis 151
Somebody won’t tell us that they’re schizophrenic, but they will tell us that they’re on, for instance, clonazapam, ok? Or somebody won’t tell us that they’re on
clonazapam, but they are schizophrenic and they’re taking medication, so if we, you know, have some sort of cross reference either way to say what we might be looking at (Craig, 366-371).
It is important to note that there was a sense in such statements that this hiding of information by the individual was often not constructed as malevolent in the
understanding that those with mental illness were intentionally attempting to deceive police. Here I am drawing from extra-textual cues such as tone of voice, as well as the construction of the mentally ill subject lacking control over their illness and behaviour (as will be discussed in detail in ‘the cure’ analysis later) to interpret the underlying
understanding of such statements as communicating that this ‘deception’ was attributable to the nature of the individual’s illness and their ability to comprehend what was required of them during interactions with police. If those with mental illness are constructed as constrained in their ability to be forthcoming with important information regarding their disorder, the implication of this is that other parties not affected by mental illness, such as mental health professionals or the police officers themselves, have the responsibility to activate open communications regarding the identification of such individuals in order to evaluate and respond to the particular situation in an appropriate manner. Echoing the discussions regarding the possibility of waiving rights to privacy in ‘raising the flag’, this revealing of hidden information is presented as for the ‘greater good’ despite the attempt by those concerned to conceal information about their mental illness.
152 Analysis This ‘hidden danger’ was also constructed through statements concerning the denial of the
presence of mental illness from responding mental health agencies.
We take them down and say “Oh sorry, there’s nothing wrong with them” and *The family will+ say “There is something wrong with them” and we say “We think there’s something wrong with them too. They’re telling us there’s not and we can’t hold them” (Christine, 268-270).
Here, mental health service providers were constructed as denying the identification of mental illness through the absence of ‘criteria’ despite behaviour present that indicated otherwise. This ‘hiding’ was further emphasised by statements which described mental health agencies declining to identify an individual as mentally ill and this assessment proving to be incorrect through future events.
And so it’s that sort of thing that really frustrates, can be the frustrating thing, when you’re told over and over again it’s behavioural, but in the end it turns out not to be (Jarrod, 77-79).
Turned out-, He was described by the social worker who saw him the following morning after his arrest with the firearm as actively psychotic and you think “Well” (laughs) “If we’d done this three days ago we wouldn’t be in this situation”
Analysis 153 Where mental health services require a person to meet specific criteria, they can exclude
those with mental illness from service provision. This can produce frustrations for the police when their understanding of a ‘mentally ill individual’ does not correspond to the understandings of ‘mental illness’ produced through the criteria of mental health services. The lack of identification and subsequent intervention can lead to more serious offending.
But when they go through an assessment and they say “No, he’s not. We haven’t got a bed for him. No, he’s fine” type thing or “We’re happy to sign off” type thing and the cops are standing there thinking “How can this be? This guys nuts” type thing and, again it’s from a lay persons point of view, but sometimes it’s pretty obvious, I tend to think you know that this person isn’t well and cops are pretty good general, you know-, At, you know...assessing peoples characters and their characteristics and so forth and their personalities and when the cops sort of sit there and think “Hang on, I’m pretty sure this persons mad. They need to be taken away and given some help” and the crisis team are saying “Well no, they’re not mad enough or they’re not bad enough” type thing, then it’s a bit-, Yeah jeez, you lose a little bit of faith in them sometimes (Dylan, 105-117).
The emphasis on the ‘obviousness’ of presenting mental illness symptoms suggests that mental health professionals were declining to identify such individuals as mentally ill due to specific bounded criteria rather than the presence of mental illness. Such statements were often placed in context with others describing how the individual in question was then left in the responsibility and care of the police, suggesting that the purpose of this obscuring of identification could be to avoid responsibility for those with mental illness. This
154 Analysis construction of an ongoing suspicion of mental health agencies willingness to assume
responsibility for those with mental illness suggests the responsibility for care and treatment of those with mental illness is a difficult burden, one that they, and other agencies, are hesitant to adopt (this last understanding will be discussed in detail in the ‘no-man’s land’ analysis).
You could understand their frustration, but sometimes you also felt that they might have been shoving it off to you because they couldn’t do anything, but then they wouldn’t go that step further, like “what do we do?” (Christine, 110-112).
While tensions between ‘knowing’ a person has mental illness and the criteria for diagnosis is apparent, the ‘hiding of information’ by the mental health agencies was highlighted through comparisons to information sharing systems within the criminal justice sector. The criminal justice system was constructed as motivated to share relevant information that would be of benefit to those interacting with the mentally ill in the community.
If they’re going through the prison, generally we’re aware that what their release dates *are+ and that’s on our computer, but under mental health it’s a bit more dodgy as to what sort of information we’re getting (Dylan, 356-359).
Police are, to me, one of the leaders in sharing of information compared to a lot of other government departments (Christine, 268-269).
Analysis 155 Statements that position the police and the criminal justice system as motivated to
problem-solve and coordinate for better outcomes through information sharing systems encourages other agencies to respond in like in order to facilitate integrated community service provision that benefits those with mental illness.