People fixated on MPs often have ‘serious psychotic illness’

More than half of the people analysed by a new centre assessing people ‘‘fixated’’ on politicians had a serious psychotic illness – but most were not in treatment.

The report comes just months after British MP Sir David Amess was stabbed to death while meeting with constituents.

The Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) New Zealand is a new partnership between the police, Parliament, and the Ministry of Health which takes in referrals of concerning behaviour from people fixated on politicians or other public figures or causes – and then intervenes.

Its first annual review found that in the year to July 1 2020 44 of the 87 people referred to it had a ‘‘serious psychotic illness’’.

But just 10 of those were receiving any mental health care at the time of their referral.

Twenty had received some prior mental health care and 14 had never had mental health care.

The researchers said this statistic was ‘‘concerning but not surprising’’.

Those referred were typically middle-aged males: 71 per cent were men and the median age was 47. The majority (69 per cent) were of European descent.

The centre is based on a model developed in the United Kingdom looking at threats to royalty.

Politicians and others can refer individuals to the group following concerning behaviour. That behaviour could include threats, delusions, selfharm, harassment, stalking, displayed through emails, social media posts, phone calls, visits to offices, or direct approaches.

Three-quarters of the referrals concerned people targeting politicians,

while most of the others targeted separate government entities.

The most common behaviour exhibited was ‘‘delusions’’ – seen in 48 per cent of referrals – followed by harassment and threats. Those making referrals could list multiple behaviours for the same person.

The centre found these people generally were ‘‘preoccupied with a grievance arising from a perceived injustice and have a feeling of resentment from being unjustly treated’’. They targeted politicians and other public figures either because they blamed them or wanted their help.

Email was the most common method of contact for this behaviour, but the analysts writing the annual review were more concerned about physical approaches, either to an office or an individual public figure directly.

‘‘A concerning outcome is the number of referrals which involved indirect and direct approaches. Approach behaviours are a well-recognised warning sign in the threat assessment literature,’’ they wrote.

‘‘Indirect approach was the second most utilised method of contact with 28 per cent, whereas approach directly is 6 per cent. Approach indirectly refers to when a referral would visit the representative’s building, e.g. parliamentary precinct, MP’s electorate office, etc. in person.’’

A small number of the referrals involved property damage or actual violence.

Two-thirds of those referred had some criminal history prior to the referral, and most of those who didn’t had experienced some other interaction with police. After referral, the centre typically intervened by referring the

person to mental health services or talking to police.

The report’s authors wrote that New Zealand’s generally approachable and open political culture increased the chances of this behaviour.