Week 10-Risk Assessments Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What does the criminal justice system define risk and serious harm as?

A

-The risk of re-offending & reconviction - the probability that an offender / prisoner will offend, be arrested, and be reconvicted within 2 years

-The risk of serious harm - if reconvicted, the probability that the offence will be one of “serious harm”

Section 224 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 defines serious harm (in the sentencing context, when determining whether an offender presents a significant risk to the public of serious harm by the commission of further offences) as “death or serious personal injury, whether physical or psychological.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is a risk assessment?

A

-A systematic effort to estimate and evaluate adverse outcomes

-Try to make predictions about future behaviours

-Forensic risk assessments draw on information about the offender and their circumstances in order to reach judgements about their future behaviour

-Concept of risk encompasses “the nature, severity, imminence and frequency or duration of harm - as well as its likelihood.” (Litwack et al., 2006, pp.493)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Define likelihood

A

Probability of the occurrence of an event

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Define seriousness and dangerousness

A

S-Predicted future behaviours can differ in their level of seriousness

D-Adverse outcomes and how undesirable those outcomes would be

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

How may an offender be labelled as dangerous?

A

-On the basis of a high probability of committing many offences
OR
-Because of the potential to perpetrate a small number of very serious offences
OR
-More commonly an unknown mix of the two

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

The risk of harm posed by offenders to others can be seen as having what 2 key dimensions?

A
  1. The relative likelihood that an offence will occur
  2. The relative impact or harm of the offence - what exactly might happen, to what or whom under what circumstances and why

-It is important to understand these 2 dimensions of risk. Some crimes (e.g., shoplifting) have relatively little impact or harm but statistically are the most common

-Others (e.g., homicide) are rare but cause maximum damage

-It is important to identify the person or groups of people who are specifically at risk; this allows resources and protective measures to be applied effectively

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Risk is categorised as a risk to who?

A

-The public: either generally or a specific group such as the elderly, vulnerable adults (e.g., those with a learning disability), women or an ethnic minority group

-A known adult; such as a previous victim or partner, an authoritative person or a celebrity

-Prisoners: within a custodial viewing

-Children: either specific children or children in general

-Staff: anyone working with the individual whether from probation, the prison service, police or other agency (e.g., health)

-Self: the possibility that the individual will commit suicide or self-harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

How is the level of risk categorised?

A

-LOW: current evidence does not indicate a likelihood of causing serious harm

-MEDIUM: there are identifiable indicators of serious harm. The offenders has the potential to cause such harm, but is unlikely to do so unless there is a change in circumstances e.g., failure to take medication, loss of accommodation, relationship breakdown, drug or alcohol misuse

-HIGH: there are identifiable indicators of serious harm. The potential event could happen at any time and the impact would be serious

-VERY HIGH: there is an imminent risk of serious harm. The potential event is more likely than not to happen as soon as the opportunity arises and the impact would be serious

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

A good risk assessment will do what?

A

-Make a prediction of risk along both dimensions - likelihood and impact of harm

-Identify the likelihood of re-offending

-Identify the risk of harm (what harm and to whom?)

-Identify the key risk factors that led to the offence under consideration and that should be addressed e.g., drug dealing or use

-To reduce the likelihood of further offending

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What can risk assessments be used for?

A

Assess likelihood that someone will:
-Reoffend and for what type of offence
-Cause harm to others
-Treatment needs of that person
-Individuals treatability and treatment readiness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Give an example of a failure to conduct a risk assessment: Zahid Murabek

A

-8th February 2000 Zahid was in the young offenders institute for petty theft

-Was a known racist and killed his cellmate (double check in recording)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Who uses risk assessments?

A

-Police

-Courts

-Prisons

-Treatment providers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Risk assessments are carried out at what various stages of an offender pathway?

A

-During investigation

-Pre-sentence

-At admission to an institution

-Pre treatment

-Post treatment

-Pre-release

-Post-release

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What are the consequences of false negatives?

A

-Non-custodial sentence or released from prison early

-Leads to more victims

-Additional costs to society

-Given suspended sentences or community orders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What are the consequences of false negatives? Andrew Dawson

A

-Got done for murder with an elderly shopkeeper then small theft given life sentence then released on license (if you offend straight to prison again) with a turn around suddenly killing 2 people both were helpless elderly usually

-Called himself the angel of mercy and had an impulse to kill

-Probation offenders insisted he would have been fine and gave no indications

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What are the consequences of false negatives? Zara Aleena

A

-Zara was killed and sexually assaulted by Jordan Mcsweeney a prolific thief roaming the streets (was taken into care, domestically abused and expelled from schools)

-Was recalled to prison but not quick enough due to paperwork

-No one realised he was high risk due to viewing issues in isolation (e.g., violent tendencies in prison, 9 offences, domestic abused his partners) and probation offenders had 9 days and didn’t have enough time and information to determine this

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What are the consequences of false positives?

A

-Parole is rejected in prison for longer than necessary

-Infringement of human rights

-Damage to the individual

-Waste of public resources

18
Q

What are the consequences of false positives? Kim Kardashian

A

Non-violent drug conviction of Alice Johnson was taken to the oval office by Kim Kardashian after arguing unfairness over life sentence over 3 offences

19
Q

What is the overarching aim of a risk assessment?

A

-To maximise the proportion of correct predictions

-Minimise the false positives and negatives

20
Q

Risk factors: What are Static factors?

A

Static factors cannot be changed or influenced and are based on historical events or characteristics such as the offender’s gender, age, offending history, previous convictions

-Family background
-Previous offending behaviours
-Offence history
-Victim characteristics

21
Q

Risk factors: What are Dynamic risk factors?

A

Dynamic risk factors relate to the attitudes, circumstances and behaviours that underpin or support offending

Can change through interventions (theoretically!)

Psychological:
-Cognitive distortions, empathy, problem solving, decision making

Social:
-Peer groups, employment status, relationship status

Behavioural:
-Impulsivity, anger issues, risk taking (related to lack of consequential thinking), drug taking

22
Q

Types of risk assessment: What are clinical risk assessments?

A

-Clinicians use their own experience and intuition

-Collect background information

-Observations of the offender by professionals

-Interviews with the offender

-Comes from the medical field and seen as diagnostic method of assessment

-May use a rating list or checklist

-The risk factors differ in clinical assessments based on the individual

23
Q

What are some strengths and weaknesses of Clinical risk assessments?

A

-The debate centres on the accuracy of the clinician’s ability to predict violence

-The clinician can assess emotional state throughout the interview. For example, emotional traits such as lack of empathy and anger (Menzies, Webster & Sepejak, 1985) and physiological and behavioural traits such as chanting, flared nostrils, flushed face and clenching of the jaw/hands (Berg, Bell & Tupin, 2000)

-Thornberry and Jacoby (1979) 65% who were subsequently released into the community only 11% were re-arrested for violent offences

-Monahan’s (1984) claim that 2/3 of all clinical predictions of violence are incorrect

-Susceptible to decision-making heuristics and biases

-We tend to look for information that proves our hypothesis instead of being wrong

-Predictions of rare events with a large sum of information often results in high errors (false positive)

-To some degree, lay people can also make similar predictions of risk to clinicians meaning the risk assessments are more down to the individual rather than the actual components of the risk assessment

24
Q

Risk assessments: What are Actuarial risk assessments?

A

-Uniform rules and strict decision making criteria are applied

-Based on longitudinal studies which assess associations between risk factors at the outcome being measured

-These require analysis of substantial sample from which generalisations are to be drawn

-Use algorithms or statistical equations often of static risk factors

-Give risk score or risk level

-Generalise which risk factors are associated with which risk factor

25
Q

What are some strengths and weaknesses of actuarial risk assessments?

A

-Eliminates the subjective errors present in clinical judgement

-Douglas, Ogloff & Hart (2003) have criticised actuarial tools for being rigid, lacking sensitivity to change and failing to aid risk management and the prevention of violence

-Difficulty in generalising from a group to an individual (Scott & Resnick, 2006)

-Oversimplify the complexity of factors involved because cases are diverse in nature

-Rely solely on an actuarial tool could cause potentially important indicators of violent behaviour to be missed

-Could miss indicators based off the models used

26
Q

What did Webster & Hucker (2007) say?

A

“to yield statistically significant effects summarized across large numbers of people, particular factors seen in isolation or even limited combinations, have to be very powerful to ‘show through’.

Researchers have sometimes failed to realize that their studies rest on what they are presently able to measure, that a good deal of hard-to-index information necessarily remains crucial in the making of individual release decisions”.

-Basically to reach that significant value, it needs a large power

-Suggesting you have to be more flexible rather than rigid

27
Q

What is Structured Clinical Judgement?

A

-Structured clinical format

-A focus on dynamic factors (e.g., attitudes, level of future planning, stress etc.,)

-Dispositional factors (e.g., personality)

-Trait factors (e.g., attitudes, deviant sexual interests, impulsivity)

-Contextual factors (e.g., potential destabilisers)

-Enables systematic judgements

-Improve accuracy of predictions

-Assisting in planning and delivery of treatment and managment

-Used regularly in practise and is often seen as a compromise using clinical and actuarial measures to help predict future crimes

28
Q

How is Structured Clinical Judgement achieved?

A

Hanson & Thornton (1999), the predictive accuracy of professional risk assessments (both actuarial and clinical) is only slightly better than chance

-Combining empirically established risk factors with clinical judgement

-The use of both actuarial tools and structured risk assessment instruments in conjunction with clinical interviews has therefore been judged to be most effective (Scott & Resnick, 2006)

-This recommendation harvests the benefits of both actuarial tools and clinical judgement (structured or unaided) while minimising their limitations in practise

-Clinician is given some level of the flexibility and discretion for when cases contain idiosyncrasies but yet they can still provide and empirically based individual risk assessment.

-Completing risk assessments with a person results in a far more meaningful and better adhered to plan of action

-Basically saying prediction of re-offending is like flipping a coin

29
Q

What are some popular measures in Structured Clinical Judgement?

A

-Offender Assessment System (OASys)

-Level of Service Inventory - Revised (LSI-R) - Primary actuarial measure for non-mentally ill offenders (usually used for sentencing and parole decisions)

-Psychopathy Checklist - Revised (PCL-R) - Primary measure for psychopathy, which is highly correlated with recidivism and risk of violence

-Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) - for adolescents 12-18 years old

-HCR-20 (Historical, Clinical, and Risk Management) - Primary risk assessment measure for mentally ill offenders

30
Q

What are the Pros of Structured Professional Judgement?

A

-Grounded in actuarial variables

-Good validity - Combination of static and dynamic factors increases power

-More useful than purely actuarial as can help define strategies to manage risk

-Useful in identifying specific factors that increase or decrease risk

-Does have a ‘clinical override’ component

-Risk assessment informs risk management - How to keep this person and other people safe?

31
Q

What are the cons of Structured Clinical Judgement?

A

-Needs more research - outcome studies

-Problems trying to combine actuarial & clinical measures, particularly if they contradict each other (Dawes et al., 1989)

-HCR-20 good at predicting risk in ‘high scorers’ but less good in the ‘middle or low’ range scores (Strand et al., 1999)

32
Q

What did Monahan et al (2006) say?

A

“The factors related to more serious violence may or may not be the same ones associated with less serious violence.”

-Those risk factors are associated with different levels of harm

33
Q

What is HCR-20 as an example?

A

-Historical, Clinical, Risk management and the number 20 refers to the number of items

-The HCR-20 takes account of the individual/client’s current mental, emotional and behavioural functioning

-Using information from a number of sources such as face-to-face interviews, observation, clinical notes, ward notes, and psychological and neurological testing

34
Q

What are Historical Factors?

A

Can’t change because it has already happened so history of problems with:
-Violence

-Other antisocial behaviour

-Relationship instability

-Employment problems

-Substance use

-Major mental disorders e.g., schizophrenia

-Personality disorders

-Traumatic experiences

-Violent attitudes

-Treatment or supervision response

35
Q

What are clinical factors?

A

-Insight (in relation to their own perceptions of their offending behaviour)

-Violent ideation or intent

-Symptoms of major mental disorder

-Instability

-Treatment of supervision response

36
Q

What are some future risk problems?

A

-Professional services and plans

-Living situation

-Personal support

-Treatment or supervision response

-Stress or coping

37
Q

What is Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist?

A

-The Psychopathy Checklist - Revised (PCL-R) was published by Robert Hare in 1991

-This is a 20-item checklist that purports to measure Psychopathy

-It requires the administration of a semi-structured interview that can last between 90 and 120 minutes

-Assesses a range of demographic, criminological, social and psychological information in a systematic manner

-The PCL-R has been shown to be a strong predictor of recidivism and violence in offenders and psychiatric individuals even though it is not a risk assessment device

-However, it is heavily oriented towards the forensic context and tells us nothing about risk to self, mental instability or vulnerability

38
Q

What did Oganah, Seyedsalehi & Fazel (2023) find in their systematic review and meta analysis of structured clinical tools?

A

-Systematic review of 50 articles, 36 tools, 10, 460 participants, 12 countries

-94% of studies used post release convictions or recidivism

-Overall predictive power was mixed

-98% of studies had high risk of bias mainly due to poor analytical approaches

-Meta-analysis on violence recidivism from 19 studies with at least 100 participants

-Outcomes ranged from 0.72 for H10, 0.69 for HCR-20 and VRAG to 0.64 for Static 99

-Mixed evidence for predictive power, so important practitioners select the correct tool

39
Q

How is the risk assessment tool chosen?

A

What is the tools predictive power/evidence base

Is the tool theoretically driven or atheoretical?

Does the procedure gather information concerning multiple domains of the individual’s functioning? (means it recognises static and dynamic factors in an individual)

Static and dynamic risk factors considered?

Multiple methods and sources to gather information?

Allow you to evaluate explicitly the accuracy of information?

Allow re-assessments to evaluate changes in risk over time

Is it comprehensive (considers major risk factors / case-specific risk / protective factors)?

Is it acceptable to decision makers?

Training to achieve consistency across professionals?

Assist decisions regarding client care?

40
Q

What are the overall issues with risk assessments?

A

-The assessment of risk is different from the assessment of dangerousness

-Can be high risk but low dangerousness or low risk but high dangerousness

-Risk and dangerousness are not fixed parameters but will change with context and over time

-Different risk factors have different levels of influence

-The rate of reoffending is determined by the criteria employed

Grentekord (2003) sample of mentally disordered violent/sexual offenders:
-Over 8 year period from release; 44% committed an offence, 30% returned to prison or forensic hospital, 13% committed a violent or sexual offence.

-Also consider application to different groups, such as indigenous and non-indigenous groups and male/female offenders