New Jersey Senate Bill S251

New Jersey 2022-2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/11/22
• Refer: 1/11/22

Caption

Creates "Mental Health Diversion Program" to divert eligible persons away from criminal justice system; appropriates $10 million.

Impact

Upon implementation, the Mental Health Diversion Program is expected to reduce the number of individuals with mental health issues being incarcerated, facilitating their access to necessary mental health services and improving public safety. By prioritizing treatment over punishment, the program aims to prevent recidivism rates among mentally ill individuals, who traditionally may struggle within the standard judicial framework. The Administrative Office of the Courts will oversee the program's administration in collaboration with the New Jersey Department of Health and local mental health agencies, creating a support system that will allow participants to build independent living skills and enhance their overall well-being.

Summary

Senate Bill S251 establishes the 'Mental Health Diversion Program' in New Jersey, which aims to divert eligible individuals with mental illness or mental disabilities away from the criminal justice system and into appropriate treatment services. This initiative recognizes that many who encounter the justice system may be dealing with underlying mental health issues, and thus seeks to provide a more rehabilitative approach. The program will specifically focus on defendants charged with nonviolent petty disorderly offenses, disorderly person offenses, or crimes of the third or fourth degree. Eligible individuals will be assessed by a prosecutor and a judge based on criteria including their mental health diagnosis or evident symptoms of mental illness at the time of arrest or custody.

Contention

Among the notable points of contention regarding SB251 is the concern over resource allocation and the program's effectiveness. The bill appropriates $10 million from the General Fund to ensure proper implementation and operation of the diversion program. Critics may question whether this investment will yield meaningful results in reducing recidivism or if it primarily serves as a new layer within the judicial system that could face bureaucratic hurdles. Furthermore, there could be debates surrounding the breadth of eligibility and the criteria used to identify individuals who qualify for the program, as this may impact the overall efficacy of the initiative.