Eliciting an offence narrative: what types of questions do forensic mental health practitioners ask?

Maximising the accuracy and detail of information elicited through a clinical-forensic interview may increase the reliability and validity of an individual's assessment. Despite this, there is little empirical research on what questions forensic mental health practitioners employ, and whether these correspond with empirically established interviewing strategies. In this study, 22 forensic mental health practitioners participated in a mock interview of a young person referred for a sexual risk assessment. The results highlighted that participants asked very few 'open' questions, over-relied on 'specific' questions and an average of 13% of questions were leading. Finally, practitioners predominantly used 'yes/no' questions when exploring the young person's thoughts, feelings, and physiological responses. Overall, the study demonstrated that empirically supported interviewing techniques were not commonly employed and highlighted the need for further professional development and training around clinical forensic interviewing strategies that best elicit the information needed to inform risk assessment.

Forensic risk assessment interviews with youth: how do we elicit the most reliable and complete information?

When undertaking a forensic risk assessment with a young person, most evaluators complete an assessment interview to elicit autobiographical history as well as perspectives, thoughts and feelings about the individual's offending behaviour. While forensic risk assessment tools provide some suggestions on interview questions and techniques, there is no empirical research that explores the most effective strategies for eliciting detailed and reliable information in this context. This article reviews existing recommendations from the related fields of investigative interviewing and suicide risk assessment and integrates this with guidance from the forensic risk assessment literature to identify best practice recommendations for evaluators. It is hoped that this review will provide a starting point to explore how research from other fields may be integrated into risk assessment interviews to improve the quality and accuracy of forensic assessment.