Dr Kerri Eagle1, Ms Corrie Goodhand1
1UNSW, Randwick, Australia
Biography:
Dr Kerri Eagle received her medical degree from the University of Sydney. She is a fellow of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists. She also has undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications in law and has practised as a solicitor. She is a qualified and experienced forensic psychiatrist working in private practice. She is also a Clinical Director for Justice Health NSW and Senior Conjoint Lecturer for UNSW. She has published articles in national and international peer reviewed journals.
Abstract:
Background: The Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW) was amended in 2013 to allow the effective extension of the limiting terms of unfit offenders. The amendment was an extension of the preventative detention regime in NSW to those with disabilities that prevent them from being fit for trial. Concerns have been raised about the inherent disadvantages, ethical and human rights challenges associated with the legislation.
Objectives and Methods: An analysis of the available statistical data, relevant peer reviewed literature and caselaw about limiting term extension orders since 2013 with discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the legislation in the context of risk management and international ethical and human rights standards.
Findings: The number of extension orders since 2013 has increased but remain a comparatively small number. Extension orders have resulted in the continued incarceration of a small but significant number of unfit offenders. The need for extension orders appears to reflect delays and/or gaps in providing necessary services and supports. Extension orders place unfit offenders at a relative disadvantage when compared to other offenders and contravene the UN CRPD.
Conclusion: It is always easier to detain individuals at risk, rather than implement effective support and treatment services that will address the risk over the longer term. Detaining and/or restricting unfit individuals on the basis of risk occurs at a significant cost to the most vulnerable in society, is essentially a stop gap measure and does not address the risk to the community over the longer term.