Abstract

The paper presents an analysis of possibilities of performing recidivism risk assessment under the Act of 22 November 2013 on the treatment of people with mental disorders posing a threat to life, health or sexual freedom of others. The Act allows, among others, the post-penitentiary isolation of persons posing a threat. The risk assessment at "very high" level is one of the key elements taken into account in adjudication of this procedure.The first part presents basic information on the recidivism risk assessment procedure: types of risk factors and different approaches to recidivism risk assessment. Then, three main limitations related to the assessment under the Act were discussed. These are: (1) the problem of the scope of the predicted events, (2) the problem of differentiation between the upper sub-categories of recidivism risk, (3) the problem of the lack of full Polish adaptations of recidivism risk assessment instruments. In consequence of these limitations, the risk assessment under the Act has lower precision. The problem of the lack of Polish adaptations can be solved with validation of the appropriate instruments. However, the other two challenges result directly from the provisions of the Act and cannot be faced with its current form. Therefore main conclusion of the paper focuses on the need to take into account the discussed limitations by experts, officials participating in the proceedings and the institutions issuing decisions. Risk assessment should be based on the measurement of all types of recidivism risk factors, including primarily static and then stable dynamic ones.

Highlights

  • According to the so-called ‘risk principle’ [1], penitentiary and isolation measures should be based on risk assessment in order to be effective

  • Janus [5] points out the significant similarity between civil commitment and German preventive detention which is decided upon as a result of penal proceedings and results in indefinite isolation after time has been served, it is not limited to sex offenders [6]

  • Structured professional judgement (SPJ) It is based on structuring the clinical assessment so that it can reach high predictive accuracy and at the same time be more useful – the results of using such methods are amenable to change and yield information not limited to the risk level; they indicate the range and type of treatment needed in a given situation

Read more

Summary

Summary

The paper presents an analysis of possibilities of performing recidivism risk assessment under the Act of 22 November 2013 on the treatment of people with mental disorders posing a threat to life, health or sexual freedom of others. The first part presents basic information on the recidivism risk assessment procedure: types of risk factors and different approaches to recidivism risk assessment. Three main limitations related to the assessment under the Act were discussed. These are: (1) the problem of the scope of the predicted events, (2) the problem of differentiation between the upper sub-categories of recidivism risk, (3) the problem of the lack of full Polish adaptations of recidivism risk assessment instruments. In consequence of these limitations, the risk assessment under the Act has lower precision. Risk assessment should be based on the measurement of all types of recidivism risk factors, including primarily static and stable dynamic ones

Introduction
Recidivism risk assessment
Scope of events covered by prediction outside clinical definitions
Lack of complete Polish adaptations of RRAIs
Conclusions and recommendations
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call