Risk assessment in offenders with intellectual disability: a comparison across three levels of security.

In mainstream offender samples, several risk assessments have been evaluated for predictive validity. This study extends this work to male offenders with intellectual disabilities. Participants from high-, medium-, and low-security settings, as well as community settings, were compared on a range of risk assessments. The Violence Risk Appraisal Guide, HCR-20-Historical Scale, the Risk Matrix 2000-C (combined risk), and the Emotional Problems Scales-Internalising discriminated between groups, with participants from high security having higher scores than those in medium security, who had higher scores than those in the community. The Violence Risk Appraisal Guide, all HCR-20 scales, the Short Dynamic Risk Scale, and the Emotional Problems Scales (Internalising and Externalising) showed significant areas under the curve for the prediction of violence. The Static-99 showed a significant area under the curve for the prediction of sexual incidents. The discussion reviews the value of these various scales to intellectual disability services.

A comparison of offenders with intellectual disability across three levels of security.

BACKGROUND: A number of authors have described, with disparate results, the prevalence of people with intellectual disability and their characteristics, in a range of offender cohorts defined by service use. These have included high security, a range of criminal justice services and community services. There is a need for research comparing cohorts of offenders with intellectual disabilities across different settings. AIM AND HYPOTHESIS: To conduct such a comparison and test the hypothesis that severity of characteristics measured will be highest in highest levels of residential security. METHOD: A clinical-record-based comparison a offenders with intellectual disability in high security (n = 73), medium/low security (n = 70), and a community service (n = 69). RESULTS: Groups were similar in age and tested IQ levels. Early psychiatric service contact had been more likely in the lower security groups. In line with the hypothesis, more complex presentations, in particular comorbid personality disorder, was more likely in the highest security group. Both fatal and non-fatal interpersonal violence convictions were significantly related to group, with more in the high security group sustaining a conviction both at the index offence and prior to that. Over 50% of all groups had at least one conviction for a sexual offence. A regression model accounting for 78% of the variance was made up largely of disposal variables (Mental Health Act status and probation) and indications of antisocial traits (criminal damage, lifetime conviction for murder and ICD-10 personality disorder classification). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The authors show that context of sampling affects most relationships between intellectual disability (ID) and offending when the methods for measuring ID are held constant. The results also present several questions on the relationship between risk, services available in an area and referral to higher security.

Sexual and nonsexual offenders with intellectual and learning disabilities: a comparison of characteristics, referral patterns, and outcome.

This article reports an evaluation of a community intellectual disability offender service over the period from 1990 to 2001. Men who committed sex offenses or sexually abusive incidents (n = 106) and men who committed other types of offenses and serious incidents (n = 78) are compared on personal characteristics, referral sources, forensic details, and outcome up to 7 years after referral. The cohorts are older than one would expect from the criminology literature, and, at about 33%, the incidence of mental illness is consistent with some previous studies. A greater proportion of sex offenders had criminal justice involvement and a formal disposal from court. Fire raising was not overly represented as an offense. There was a higher rate of reoffending in the nonsexual cohort, which persisted up to 7 years. Investigating only reoffenders, there was a considerable amount of harm reduction recorded up to 7 years, statistically significant up to 5 years following initial referral.

Long-term treatment and management of violent tendencies of men with intellectual disabilities convicted of assault.

Success of anger management treatment with individuals who have intellectual disabilities convicted of assault-related offenses has not been verified. We employed a single case design with repeated measures with 6 such men. Recidivism is reported at least 4.5 years and up to 10 years. Modified anger management training incorporating cognitive restructuring and arousal reduction was employed. Participants showed no uniform reductions in emotional or behavioral systems of anger and aggression. Although several retained significant anger feelings, there were reductions in the extent to which they would act in an aggressive fashion. Five have not re-offended; 1 re-offended within 6 months but not in the subsequent 4 years. Anger management treatment seems effective for men with intellectual disabilities in the community who have committed socially and legally unacceptable acts.