Deinstitutionalization or deinstitutionalization is the process of replacing long-stay psychiatric hospitals with less isolated community mental health service for those diagnosed with a mental disorder or developmental disability. Deinstitutionalization can have multiple definitions; the first focuses on reducing the population size of mental institutions. This can be accomplished by releasing individuals from institutions, shortening the length of stays, and reducing both admissions and readmission.[1] The second definition refers to reforming mental hospitals' institutional processes so as to reduce or eliminate reinforcement of dependency, hopelessness, learned helplessness, and other maladaptive behaviors.[1]

According to psychiatrist and author Thomas Szasz (1920–present), deinstitutionalization is the policy and practice of transferring homeless, involuntarily hospitalised mental patients from state mental hospitals into many different kinds of de facto psychiatric institutions funded largely by the federal government. These federally subsidised institutions began in the United States and were quickly adopted by most Western governments. The plan was set in motion by the Community Mental Health Act as a part of John F. Kennedy's legislature and passed by the US Congress in 1963, mandating the appointment of a commission to make recommendations for "combating mental illness in the United States" (Thomas Szasz, 'Coercion as Cure', p. 34).

In many cases the mass deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill in the Western world from the 1960s onward has translated into policies of "community release". Individuals who previously would have been in mental institutions are no longer supervised by health care workers. Some have considered deinstitutionalization to be a failure.[2]



The 19th century saw a large expansion in the number and size of asylums in Western industrialised countries. Although initially based on principles of moral treatment, they became overstretched, non-therapeutic, isolated in location, and neglected in practice.[3]

20th century

By the beginning of the 20th century, ever-increasing admissions had resulted in serious overcrowding causing many problems for the institutions. Funding was often cut, especially during periods of economic decline and wartime. Asylums became notorious for poor living conditions, lack of hygiene, overcrowding, ill-treatment, and abuse of patients, many patients even starved to death.[4]

The first community-based alternatives were suggested and tentatively implemented in the 1920s and 1930s, although asylum numbers continued to increase up to the 1950s. The movement for deinstitutionalization came to the forefront in various countries in the 1950s and 1960s.

The prevailing public arguments, time of onset, and pace of reforms varied by country.[4] Class action lawsuits in the United States, and the scrutiny of institutions through disability activism and antipsychiatry, helped expose the poor conditions and treatment. Sociologists and others argued that such institutions maintained or created dependency, passivity, exclusion and disability, which caused people to become institutionalised.

There was an argument that community services would be cheaper, and it was suggested that new psychiatric medications made it more feasible to release people into the community.[5]

A key text in the development of deinstitutionalization was Asylums by Erving Goffman.[6]

Unfortunately groups such as mental health professionals, public officials, families, advocacy groups, public citizens, and unions held differing views on deinstitutionalization.[7]


Community services that developed included supported housing with full or partial supervision, and specialised teams (such as assertive community treatment and early intervention teams) in the community. Costs have been reported to be as generally equivalent as inpatient hospitalisation, even lower in some cases (depending on how well or poorly funded community alternative are).[4] Some regions introduced laws enabling forced medication in the community for those with psychiatric diagnoses.

Although deinstitutionalization has been positive for the majority of patients, it also has severe shortcomings.[8]

Expectations that community care would lead to fuller social integration have not been achieved; many remain without work, have limited social contacts and often live in sheltered environments.

New community services were often uncoordinated and unable to meet complex needs. Services in the community sometimes isolated the mentally ill within a new ghetto, where service users meet each other but have little contact with the rest of the public community. It has been said that instead of "community psychiatry", reforms established a "psychiatric community".[4]

Existing patients were often discharged without sufficient preparation or support. A greater proportion of people with mental disorders became homeless or went to prison. Widespread homelessness occurred in some states in the USA and some other countries.[4] Families can often play a crucial role in the care of those who would typically be placed in long-term treatment centers. However, many mentally ill people are resistant to such help due to the nature of their conditions. The majority of those who would be under continuous care in long-stay psychiatric hospitals are paranoid and delusional to the point that they refuse help and do not believe they need it, which makes it difficult to treat them.[9]

Moves to community living and services led to various concerns and fears, from both the individuals themselves and other members of the community. Over a quarter of individuals accessing community mental health services in a US inner-city area are victims of at least one violent crime in a year, a proportion eleven times higher than the inner-city average.

The proportion is many times greater in every category of crime, including rape/sexual assault, other violent assaults, and personal and property theft. The rates are similar in those with developmental disabilities.[10][11]

Despite perceptions by the public and media that people with mental disorders released into the community are more likely to be dangerous and violent, a large study indicated that they were no more likely to commit violence than those in the neighborhoods (usually economically deprived and high in substance abuse and crime) to which they typically lived.[12]

Findings on violence committed by those with mental disorders in the community have been inconsistent and related to numerous factors; a higher rate of more serious offenses such as homicide have sometimes been found but, despite high-profile homicide cases, the evidence suggests this has not increased over the period of deinstitutionalization.[13][14][15] The aggression and violence that does occur, in either direction, is usually within family settings rather than between strangers.[16]

Deinstitutionalization and the status of psychiatric institutions around the world


In Japan, the number of hospital beds has risen steadily over the last few decades.[4]

In Hong Kong, a number of residential care services such as half-way houses, long-stay care homes, supported hostels are provided for the discharged patients. In addition, a number of community support services such as Community Rehabilitation Day Services, Community Mental Health Link, Community Mental Health Care, etc. have been launched to facilitate the patients to re-integrate into the community.

New Zealand

New Zealand established a reconciliation initiative in 2005 in the context of ongoing compensation payouts to ex-patients of state-run mental institutions in the 1970s to 1990s. The forum heard of poor reasons for admissions; unsanitary and overcrowded conditions; lack of communication to patients and family members; physical violence and sexual misconduct and abuse; inadequate complaints mechanisms; pressures and difficulties for staff, within an authoritarian psychiatric hierarchy based on containment; fear and humiliation in the misuse of seclusion; over-use and abuse of ECT, psychiatric medication and other treatments/punishments, including group therapy, with continued adverse effects; lack of support on discharge; interrupted lives and lost potential; and continued stigma, prejudice and emotional distress and trauma.

There were some references to instances of helpful aspects or kindnesses despite the system. Participants were offered counseling to help them deal with their experiences, and advice on their rights, including access to records and legal redress.[17]


Uganda has one psychiatric hospital.[4]


Countries where deinstitutionalization has happened may be experiencing a process of "re-institutionalisation" or relocation to different institutions, as evidenced by increases in the number of supported housing facilities, forensic psychiatric beds and rising numbers in the prison population.[18]

Some developing European countries[specify] still rely on asylums.


Italy was the first country to start deinstitutionalization of mental health care and to develop a community-based psychiatric system.[19] The Italian example originated samples of effective and innovative service models and paved the way for deinstitutionalization of mental patients.[19] In 1978, the passing of Basaglia Law had started Italian psychiatric reform that terminated with the very end of the Italian state mental hospital system in 1998.[20] The reform was directed towards the gradual dismantling of the psychiatric hospitals and required a comprehensive, integrated and responsible community mental health service.[21]:665 The object of community care was to reverse the long-accepted practice of isolating the mental ill in large institutions, to promote their integration in the community offering them a milieu which is socially stimulating, while avoiding subjecting them to too intense social pressures.[21]:664

United Kingdom

See Care in the Community.

North America

United States

The United States has experienced two waves of deinstitutionalization. The first wave began in the 1950's and targeted people with mental illness.[1] The second wave began roughly 15 years later and focused on individuals who had been diagnosed with a developmental disability (e.g. mental retardation).[1] Although these waves began over 50 years ago, deinstitutionalization continues today. However, these waves are growing smaller as fewer people are sent to institutions.

Numerous social forces have led to a move for deinstitutionalization. However, researchers generally speak of six main factors: criticisms of public mental hospitals, incorporation of mind-altering drugs in treatment, support from President Kennedy for federal policy changes in the treatment for those with mental illnesses, shifts to community based care, changes in public opinion of those with mental disabilities, and individual state's desire to reduce cost of mental hospitals.[1]

Criticisms of public mental hospitals

The public's awareness of the conditions of mental institutions began to increase during World War II (WWII). During this period, conscientious objectors (COs) were assigned to alternative positions in which there were manpower shortages.[1] Around 2,000 of them were assigned to fill job positions in understaffed mental institutions.[1] In 1946, there was an expose in Life magazine detailing the shortfallings of many mental health facilities.[1] This expose was be one of the first featured articles about the quality of mental institutions. Following WWII, articles and exposes about the mental hospital conditions would bombard popular and scholarly magazines and periodicals. In 1946, COs featured in the Life expose formed the National Mental Health Foundation, which was successful at convincing states to increase funding for mental institutions via public opinion support.[1] 5 years later, the National Mental Health Foundation merged with the Hygiene and Psychiatric Foundation to form the National Association of Mental Health.

Another revelation during WWII relevant to deinstitutionalization was the epidemiological finding that 1 out of 8 men considered for military service for WWII were rejected based on neurological or psychiatric basis.[1] These findings increased awareness that mental illness was moderately prevalent. More importantly, people began to realize the cost associated with admission to mental institutions (i.e. cost of lost productivity and mental health services).[1]

This time period brought about change in the public and congressional attitudes toward the mentally ill. Since many individuals suffering from mental illness had served in the military, many began to think that more knowledge about mental illness and better services would not only benefit those that served but also national security as a whole.[1] Moreover, Congress passed the National Mental Health Act of 1946, which created the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). The NIMH was pivotal in funding essential health research for the developing mental health field.[1]

The role of pharmacotherapy and deinstitutionalization

During the 1950s many new drugs became available and incorporated into therapy for the mentally ill. These new drugs were effective in reducing severe symptoms, which could then allow people with mental illnesses to live in communities ranging from their own homes to half-way houses to nursing homes, etc.[1] Drug therapy was not only quintessential for the depopulation of mental institutions, but it also opened opportunities for employment for the mentally ill.[1]

President Kennedy's Support of Policy Change

In 1955, the Joint Commission on Mental Health and Health was authorised to investigate problems related to the mentally ill. President John F. Kennedy had a special interest in the issue of mental health because his sister Rosemary had been lobotomized at the age of 23 at request of her father because she left the convent she had been placed in.[1] Shortly after his inauguration, Kennedy appointed a special "President's Panel of Mental Retardation".[1] The panel included professionals and leaders of the organization. In 1962, the panel published a report with 112 recommendations to better serve the mentally ill. In conjunction with the Joint Commission on Mental Health and Health, The Presidential Panel of Mental Retardation, and Kennedy's influence, two important pieces of legislation were passed in 1963: The Maternal and Child Health and Mental Retardation Planning Amendments and the Mental Retardation Facilities and Community Mental Health Centers Act.[1] The first piece of legislation increased funding for research that focused on prevention of retardation. The second piece of legislation provided funding for community facilities that serve people with mental disabilities. Both of these Acts furthered the process of deinstitutionalization.

The shift to community based mental health care

In general, professionals, civil rights leaders, and humanitarians saw the shift from institutional confinement to local care as the appropriate approach.[1] The Deinstitutionalization Movement started off slowly but gained momentum as it adopted philosophies from the Civil Rights Movement.[1] During the 1960s, deinstitutionalization increased dramatically as the average length of stay within mental institutions decreased by more than half.[1] Many patients began to be placed in community care facilities instead of long term care institutions.[1] Thus, the deinstitutionalization that took place in the United States has been considered by some to be more of a "transitionalisation", that is, a transition from a mental institution to a more human community centered facility.[1]

Changing public opinion of the mentally ill

Although public opinion of the mentally ill has increased, it is still often stigmatised. As a result, advocacy movements in support of mental health have emerged.[1] These movements focus on reducing stigma and discrimination and increasing support groups and awareness. Another notable movement, the consumer or ex-patient movement began as protests in the 1970s.[1] Many of the participants consisted of ex-patients of mental institutions who felt the need to challenge the system's treatment of the mentally ill.[1] Initially, this movement targeted issues surrounding involuntary commitment, use of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), antipsychotic medication, and coercive psychiatry.[1] The Liberation of Mental Patients, Project Release, and Insane Liberation Front were all examples of consumer movements and organisations. Many of these advocacy groups were successful in the judiciary system. The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled in favor of the Mental Patient's Liberation Front in the case of Rogers vs. Okin.[1] This ruling established the notion that patients had the right to refuse treatment. Another group, the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), was very successful in its lobbying efforts to improve services and gain equality of insurance coverage for mental illnesses.[1] President Bill Clinton signed the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 allowing NAMI to reach its goal on the insurance coverage issue.

Government's desire to reduce cost and spending on hospitalisation

As hospitalisation costs increased, both the federal and state governments were motivated to find less expensive alternatives to hospitalisation.[1] The 1965 amendments to Social Security shifted about 50 percent of the mental health care costs from state to the federal government.[1] This motivated the government to promote deinstitutionalization.

A number of factors led to an increase in homelessness, including macroeconomic shifts, but observers also saw a change related to deinstitutionalization.[22][23][24] Studies from the late 1980's indicated that one-third to one-half of homeless people had severe psychiatric disorders, often co-occurring with substance abuse.[25][26]

A process of indirect cost-shifting may have led to a form of "re-institutionalisation" through the increased use of jail detention for those with mental disorders deemed unmanageable and noncompliant.[27][28] When laws were enacted requiring communities to take more responsibility for mental health care, needed funding often was absent, therefore resulting in jail becoming the default option,[29] with jails long documented as cheaper than psychiatric care.[27] In Summer 2009, author and columnist Heather Mac Donald stated in City Journal, "jails have become society's primary mental institutions, though few have the funding or expertise to carry out that role properly... at Rikers, 28 percent of the inmates require mental health services, a number that rises each year."[30]

South America

In several South American countries, the total number of beds in asylum-type institutions has decreased, replaced by psychiatric inpatient units in general hospitals and other local settings.[4]

See also



  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae Stroman, Duane. 2003. The Disability Rights Movement: From Deinstitutionalization to Self-determination. University Press of America.
  2. ^ Documenting the Failure of Deinstitutionalization by E. Fuller Torrey, MD
  3. ^ Wright D (April 1997). "Getting out of the asylum: understanding the confinement of the insane in the nineteenth century". Soc Hist Med 10 (1): 137–55. doi:10.1093/shm/10.1.137. PMID 11619188. 
  4. ^ a b c d e f g h Fakhourya W, Priebea S (August 2007). "Deinstitutionalization and reinstitutionalization: major changes in the provision of mental healthcare". Psychiatry 6 (8): 313–316. doi:10.1016/j.mppsy.2007.05.008. 
  5. ^ Rochefort DA (Spring 1984). "Origins of the "Third psychiatric revolution": the Community Mental Health Centers Act of 1963". J Health Polit Policy Law 9 (1): 1–30. doi:10.1215/03616878-9-1-1. PMID 6736594. 
  6. ^ Mac Suibhne, Séamus (7 October 2009). "Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and other Inmates". BMJ 339: b4109. doi:10.1136/bmj.b4109. 
  7. ^ Scherl DJ, Macht LB (September 1979). "Deinstitutionalization in the absence of consensus". Hosp Community Psychiatry 30 (9): 599–604. PMID 223959. 
  8. ^ Torrey, E. Fuller (1997). "Deinstitutionalization: A Psychiatric "Titanic"". Out of the Shadows: Confronting America's Mental Illness Crisis. John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved 21 October 2011. , excerpted by Frontline (
  9. ^ The Insanity Offense: How America’s Failure to Treat the Seriously Mentally Ill Endangers Its Citizens, E. Fuller Torey © 2008 ISBN 978-0-393-06658-6
  10. ^ Teplin LA, McClelland GM, Abram KM, Weiner DA (August 2005). "Crime Victimization in Adults With Severe Mental Illness: Comparison With the National Crime Victimization Survey". Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 62 (8): 911–21. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.62.8.911. PMC 1389236. PMID 16061769. 
  11. ^ Petersilia JR (2001). "Crime Victims With Developmental Disabilities: A Review Essay". Criminal Justice and Behavior 28 (6): 655–94. doi:10.1177/009385480102800601. 
  12. ^ Steadman HJ, Mulvey EP, Monahan J, et al. (May 1998). "Violence by people discharged from acute psychiatric inpatient facilities and by others in the same neighborhoods". Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 55 (5): 393–401. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.55.5.393. PMID 9596041. 
  13. ^ Sirotich F (2008). "Correlates of Crime and Violence among Persons with Mental Disorder: An Evidence-Based Review". Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention 8 (2): 171–94. doi:10.1093/brief-treatment/mhn006. 
  14. ^ Stuart H (June 2003). "Violence and mental illness: an overview". World Psychiatry 2 (2): 121–4. PMC 1525086. PMID 16946914. 
  15. ^ Taylor PJ, Gunn J (January 1999). "Homicides by people with mental illness: Myth and reality". Br J Psychiatry 174 (1): 9–14. doi:10.1192/bjp.174.1.9. PMID 10211145. 
  16. ^ Solomon PL, Cavanaugh MM, Gelles RJ (January 2005). "Family violence among adults with severe mental illness: a neglected area of research". Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 6 (1): 40–54. doi:10.1177/1524838004272464. PMID 15574672. 
  17. ^ Dept of Internal Affairs, New Zealand Government. Te Āiotanga: Report of the Confidential Forum for Former In-Patients of Psychiatric Hospitals June 2007
  18. ^ Priebe S, Badesconyi A, Fioritti A, et al. (January 2005). "Reinstitutionalisation in mental health care: comparison of data on service provision from six European countries". BMJ 330 (7483): 123–6. doi:10.1136/bmj.38296.611215.AE. PMC 544427. PMID 15567803. 
  19. ^ a b Russo G., Carelli F. (May 2009). "Dismantling asylums: The Italian Job". London Journal of Primary Care. 
  20. ^ Burti L. (2001). "Italian psychiatric reform 20 plus years after". Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica. Supplementum (410): 41–46. PMID 11863050. 
  21. ^ a b Tansella M. (November 1986). "Community psychiatry without mental hospitals--the Italian experience: a review". Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 79 (11): 664–669. PMC 1290535. PMID 3795212. 
  22. ^ Scanlon, John (October 2, 1989). "Homelessness: Describing the Symptoms, Prescribing a Cure". Backgrounder (Heritage Foundation). 729. 
  23. ^ Rubin, Lillian B., "Sand Castles and Snake Pits: Homelessness, Public Policy, and the Law of Unintended Consequences", Dissent journal, Fall 2007.
  24. ^ Friedman, Michael B., "Keeping The Promise of Community Mental Health", The Journal News, August 8, 2003
  25. ^ McQuistion HL, Finnerty M, Hirschowitz J, Susser ES (May 2003). "Challenges for psychiatry in serving homeless people with psychiatric disorders". Psychiatr Serv 54 (5): 669–76. doi:10.1176/ PMID 12719496. 
  26. ^ Feldman S (June 1983). "Out of the hospital, onto the streets: the overselling of benevolence". Hastings Cent Rep 13 (3): 5–7. doi:10.2307/3561609. JSTOR 3561609. PMID 6885404. 
  27. ^ a b Torrey, E. Fuller; Stieber, Joan; Ezekiel, Jonathan; Wolfe, Sidney M; Sharfstein, Joshua; Noble, John H; Flynn, Laurie M (1992). Criminalizing the Seriously Mentally Ill: The Abuse of Jails as Mental Hospitals. A joint report of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill and Public Citizen's Health Research Group. ISBN 0-7881-4279-8. Retrieved 12 November 2010 
  28. ^ Domino ME, Norton EC, Morrissey JP, Thakur N (October 2004). "Cost Shifting to Jails after a Change to Managed Mental Health Care". Health Serv Res 39 (5): 1379–401. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00295.x. PMC 1361075. PMID 15333114. 
  29. ^ Roche, Timothy (July 10, 2000). "The Chief and His Ward". Time.,9171,997441,00.html. Retrieved 12 November 2010 
  30. ^ Mac Donald, Heather. "The Jail Inferno". City Journal. Retrieved July 27, 2009. 


Further reading

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Нужен реферат?

Look at other dictionaries:

  • Deinstitutionalisation (orphanages and children's institutions) — Former Berlin Pankow orphanage Deinstitutionalisation is the process of reforming child care systems and closing down orphanages and childrens institutions, finding new placements for children currently resident and setting up replacement… …   Wikipedia

  • deinstitutionalisation — deinstitutionalizāˈtion or deinstitutionalisāˈtion noun • • • Main Entry: ↑deinstitutionalize …   Useful english dictionary

  • Orphanage — For other uses, see Orphanage (disambiguation). Former Berlin Pankow orphanage …   Wikipedia

  • Homelessness — is the condition and social category of people who lack housing, because they cannot afford, or are otherwise unable to maintain, regular, safe, and adequate shelter. The term homelessness may also include people whose primary nighttime residence …   Wikipedia

  • Care in the Community — (also called Community Care or Domiciled Care ) is the British policy of deinstitutionalization, treating and caring for physically and mentally disabled people in their homes rather than in an institution. Institutional care was the target of… …   Wikipedia

  • Homelessness in Australia — This article describes homelessness in Australia. The majority of long term homeless people are found in the large cities of Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. *Many of the current homeless population in Australia were previously mentally… …   Wikipedia

  • Tokanui Psychiatric Hospital — Tokanui Hospital was a Psychiatric Hospital located approximately 14 kilometres (9 miles) south east of Te Awamutu, New Zealand.HistoryTokanui Hospital was opened in July, 1912, and was closed in March 1998. The first patients travelled from… …   Wikipedia

  • Outpatient commitment — refers to mental health law that allows the compulsory, community based treatment of individuals with mental illness. In the United States the term assisted outpatient treatment or AOT is often used and refers to a process whereby a judge orders… …   Wikipedia

  • Psychiatric hospital — This article is about modern psychiatric hospitals. For historical lunatic asylums, see history of psychiatric institutions. Traverse City State Hospital, Traverse City, Michigan Psychiatric hospitals, also known as mental hospitals, are… …   Wikipedia

  • Bay Shore, New York — Infobox Settlement official name = Bay Shore, New York settlement type = CDP nickname = motto = imagesize = image caption = image pushpin pushpin label position = pushpin map caption =Location within the state of New York pushpin mapsize =… …   Wikipedia

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”