Hjalmar J. C. van Marle

Risk Factors for Overall Recidivism and Severity of Recidivism in Serious Juvenile Offenders

This study was aimed at finding risk factors that predict both overall recidivism and severity of recidivism in serious juvenile offenders. Seventy static and dynamic risk factors associated with family characteristics, peers, psychopathology, substance abuse, psychological factors, and behavior during treatment were assessed with the Juvenile Forensic Profile in a sample of 728 juvenile offenders. Official reconviction data were used to register recidivism with a minimum time at risk of 2 years. Severity of offending was categorized according to the maximum sentence for the offense committed combined with expert opinion. Several risk factors for recidivism were found: past criminal behavior (number of past offenses, young age at first offense, unknown victim of past offenses), conduct disorder, family risk factors (poor parenting skills, criminal behavior in the family, a history of physical and emotional abuse), involvement with criminal peers, and lack of treatment adherence (aggression during treatment, lack of coping strategies). Having an unknown victim in past offenses, criminal behavior in the family, lack of treatment adherence, and lack of positive coping strategies were predictive of serious (violent) recidivism. The results are discussed in terms of their use for risk assessment and in improving treatment effect. Targeting poor parenting skills, involvement in criminal environment, lack of treatment adherence, and problematic coping strategies should reduce the severity of recidivism.

A classification of risk factors in serious juvenile offenders and the relation between patterns of risk factors and recidivism

BACKGROUND There has been a lot of research on risk factors for recidivism among juvenile offenders, in general, and on individual risk factors, but less focus on subgroups of serious juvenile offenders and prediction of recidivism within these. OBJECTIVE To find an optimal classification of risk items and to test the predictive value of the resultant factors with respect to severity of recidivism among serious juvenile offenders. METHOD Seventy static and dynamic risk factors in 1154 juvenile offenders were registered with the Juvenile Forensic Profile. Recidivism data were collected on 728 of these offenders with a time at risk of at least 2 years. After factor analysis, independent sample t-tests were used to indicate differences between recidivists and non-recidivists. Logistic multiple linear regression analyses were used to test the potential predictive value of the factors for violent or serious recidivism. RESULTS A nine-factor solution best accounted for the data. The factors were: antisocial behaviour during treatment, sexual problems, family problems, axis-1 psychopathology, offence characteristics, conscience and empathy, intellectual and social capacities, social network, and substance abuse. Regression analysis showed that the factors antisocial behaviour during treatment, family problems and axis-1 psychopathology were associated with seriousness of recidivism. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE The significance of family problems and antisocial behaviour during treatments suggest that specific attention to these factors may be important in reducing recidivism. The fact that antisocial behaviour during treatment consists mainly of dynamic risk factors is hopeful as these can be influenced by treatment. Consideration of young offenders by subgroup rather than as a homogenous population is likely to yield the best information about risk of serious re-offending and the management of that risk.

Recidivism in subgroups of serious juvenile offenders: Different profiles, different risks?

BACKGROUND Research has shown that the treatment of juvenile offenders is most effective when it takes into account the possible risk factors for re-offending. It may be asked whether juvenile offenders can be treated as one homogeneous group, or, if they are divisible into subgroups, whether different risk factors are predictive of recidivism. AIMS AND HYPOTHESES: Our aims were to find out whether serious juvenile offenders may be subdivided into clearly defined subgroups and whether such subgroups might differ in terms of the risk factors that predict recidivism. METHODS In a sample of 1111 serious juvenile offenders, latent class analysis was used to identify subgroups. For each juvenile offender, 70 risk factors were registered. Severity of recidivism was measured on a 12-point scale. Analysis was then conducted to identify the risk factors that best predicted the different patterns of recidivism. RESULTS Four distinct subgroups of juvenile offenders were identified: serious violent offenders, violent property offenders, property offenders, and sex offenders. Violent property offenders were the most serious recidivists and had the highest number of risk factors. Serious violent offenders and property offenders were characterised by overt and covert behaviour, respectively. Sex offenders differed from the other three groups in the rarity of their recidivism and in the risk factors that are present. For each of these four subgroups, a different set of risk factors was found to predict severity of recidivism. CONCLUSIONS Differences in recidivism rates occurred in spite of the fact that most of these youngsters had been in the standard treatment programme offered to serious juvenile offenders in the Netherlands. This was not a treatment outcome study, but the indication that two of the groups identified in our study appeared to be worse after going through this programme, whereas the other two did quite well in terms of recidivism lends weight to our idea that such classification of juvenile offenders may lead to more targeted treatment programmes that would better serve both the general public and the youths concerned.

The impact of craving and impulsivity on aggression in detoxified cocaine-dependent patients

Patients with substance use disorders are frequently associated with impulsivity that may underlie elevated levels life-threatening types of behavior, including aggression. In addition, craving is a prominent feature of addiction and appears to be closely related to impulsivity. This study assessed the unique contribution of cocaine craving and impulsivity in predicting aggression by means of correlational and mediational analyses. Forty inpatient detoxified cocaine-dependent patients and 40 matched healthy controls were enrolled. These participants filled out the Obsessive Compulsive Drug Use Scale, the Dickman Impulsivity Inventory, and the Aggression Questionnaire. The patient group showed elevated levels of impulsivity and aggression as compared with the control group. Although cocaine craving is positively correlated with both impulsivity and aggression, craving did not mediate the relationship between both constructs. It is concluded that craving does not have an impact on the relationship between impulsivity and trait aggression in this patient sample.

Explaining the Relationship Between Insecure Attachment and Partner Abuse: The Role of Personality Characteristics

Studies have found that male batterers are more often insecurely attached as compared with nonbatterers. However, it is still not clear how insecure attachment is related to domestic violence. Many studies compared batterers and nonbatterers regarding pathological personality characteristics that are related to attachment (e.g., dependency, jealousy) and generally found that batterers report more personality characteristics. However, these studies did not investigate which role these characteristics played in the relationship between insecure attachment and battering. The first aim of this study is to test which personality characteristics are good candidates to explain the relationship between insecure attachment and domestic violence. The second aim is to test whether personality characteristics are predictive of battering over and above attachment. Seventy-two mainly court-mandated family-only males who were in group treatment for battering are allocated to a securely and an insecurely attached group and compared with 62 nonbatterers. Using questionnaires, self-esteem, dependency, general distrust, distrust in partner, jealousy, lack of empathy, separation anxiety, desire for control, and impulsivity were assessed. This was the first study that examined distrust, separation anxiety, and desire for control in relation to battering. The results show that the relationship between insecure attachment and domestic violence can be explained by separation anxiety and partner distrust. Moreover, only partner distrust increased the risk for battering over and above insecure attachment. The findings suggest the presence of two subtypes among batterers based on attachment style, which has similarities to the family-only and dysphoric-borderline subtypes suggested by Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart. Implications of the present findings for therapy are discussed.

The four-factor model of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised: Validation in a Dutch forensic inpatient sample

In The Netherlands, the Ministry of Security and Justice requires the assessment of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 1991; Hare, 2003) in all forensic psychiatric inpatients. To examine the four-factor structure of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using a Dutch sample of forensic psychiatric inpatients (N=411) and the results indicated acceptable fit. Also, using multiple group CFA, the four-factor model provided an acceptable fit in both patients with a personality disorder and patients with a psychotic disorder, and there was reasonably good evidence of measurement invariance between these two subgroups. Furthermore, correlations with external measures of aggression and personality traits provided additional support for the validity of the four-factor model in patients with a personality disorder. In patients with a psychotic disorder fewer significant correlations with external measures were found. Taken together, the results support the use of the four-factor structure in Dutch offenders who are detained under hospital order.

Delusional distress partly explains the relation between persecutory ideations and inpatient aggression on the ward

Previous research showed that there is an association between persecutory delusions and inpatient aggression. However, it is not clear why some persons act upon their delusions with aggression. Research showed that persons with persecutory delusions have higher levels of delusional distress resulting from these delusions. This may explain why some persons act upon their delusions. Persecutory ideations lead to ideational distress which in turn can lead to aggression. The main aim of the present study was to test whether persecutory ideations have an indirect effect on inpatient aggression through delusional distress. The sample of the study consisted of 44 male inpatients from different general psychiatric inpatient wards. Results showed that the effect of persecutory ideations on inpatient aggression was partly explained by the level of delusional distress. Insight in the theory of acting upon delusions can be obtained by acknowledging this role of delusional distress in the relation between persecutory ideation and inpatient aggression. Early diagnosis of persecutory ideations and experienced delusional distress can be used in risk assessment of inpatients. Early interventions to reduce delusional distress, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, may prevent inpatient aggression.

Mental health care in prison: How to manage our care.

In the prison system there are high percentages of mentally disordered offenders, often with co‐morbid psychiatric disorders. In addition, the setting and ward atmosphere in prisons are not designed to care for psychiatric patients and places a burden on vulnerable inmates. Management of care of the different subgroups in the prison population is therefore necessary on four different levels, from basic health care to forensic psychiatric treatment. A fifth level is forensic care, which is directed towards re‐integration into the community rather than treatment at the symptom‐level of disease. Continuity of care, evidence‐based care and coercion within mental health care are discussed with regard to their forensic ethical meaning towards both patients and the community. Drawing on the Dutch situation a case is made for the promotion of voluntary treatment for those prisoners

Revenge An Analysis of Its Psychological Underpinnings

An overview of the literature and theories concerning revenge is presented in this study. The aim is to clarify the boundaries between a healthy and pathological way of dealing with revenge to improve diagnostics, with regard to both theory and clinical practice. Revenge is an intrapersonal phenomenon and the extent to which people need revenge has a certain degree of stability. A healthy way of dealing with revenge may restore the psychological balance that has previously been disturbed. However, the desire for revenge can be long-lasting and dysfunctional due to, among other things, early problems in development and specific personality traits. Consequently, a pathological way of dealing with revenge can be part of a disorder and can lead to destructive acts such as homicide and even mass murder. Some clinical examples are presented and points of attention regarding diagnostics and treatment are discussed.An overview of the literature and theories concerning revenge is presented in this study. The aim is to clarify the boundaries between a healthy and pathological way of dealing with revenge to improve diagnostics, with regard to both theory and clinical practice. Revenge is an intrapersonal phenomenon and the extent to which people need revenge has a certain degree of stability. A healthy way of dealing with revenge may restore the psychological balance that has previously been disturbed. However, the desire for revenge can be long-lasting and dysfunctional due to, among other things, early problems in development and specific personality traits. Consequently, a pathological way of dealing with revenge can be part of a disorder and can lead to destructive acts such as homicide and even mass murder. Some clinical examples are presented and points of attention regarding diagnostics and treatment are discussed.

Diagnostic Comorbidity in Psychotic Offenders and Their Criminal History: A Review of the Literature

There is growing evidence that there is a relationship between a psychotic disorder and violent behavior. Diagnostic comorbidity of a psychotic disorder with substance abuse, a personality disorder or psychopathy increases the likelihood of violence. The aim of this review is to examine the literature about the relationship between a psychotic disorder and violence, and about comorbidity of a psychotic disorder with substance abuse, a personality disorder and/or psychopathy. A search of www.PubMed.com and www.PsychInfo.com for the period 1990–2006 yielded 1942 articles. Ultimately, however, only 73 articles remained after eliminating those on irrelevant topics. Results showed that the roles of substance abuse, the presence of a personality disorder, or a high score on the revised psychopathy checklist are confirmed as important risk factors by many authors. This review revealed a high degree of agreement that possible comorbidity in schizophrenic offenders should be mentioned routinely in scientific research as it has an essential effect on the development of the offenders illness.