Abstract

BackgroundIn The Netherlands, police officers not only come into contact with juvenile offenders, but also with a large number of juveniles who were involved in a criminal offense, but not in the role of a suspect (i.e., juvenile non-offenders). Until now, no valid and reliable instrument was available that can be used by Dutch police officers for estimating the risk for future care needs of juvenile non-offenders. In the present study, the Youth Actuarial Care Needs Assessment Tool for Non-Offenders (Y-ACNAT-NO) was developed for predicting the risk for future care needs that consisted of (1) a future supervision order as imposed by a juvenile court judge and (2) future worrisome incidents involving child abuse, domestic violence/strife, and/or sexual offensive behavior at the juvenile’s living address (i.e., problems in the child-rearing environment).MethodsPolice records of 3,200 juveniles were retrieved from the Dutch police registration system after which the sample was randomly split in a construction (n = 1,549) and validation sample (n = 1,651). The Y-ACNAT-NO was developed by performing an Exhaustive CHAID analysis using the construction sample. The predictive validity of the instrument was examined in the validation sample by calculating several performance indicators that assess discrimination and calibration.ResultsThe CHAID output yielded an instrument that consisted of six variables and eleven different risk groups. The risk for future care needs ranged from 0.06 in the lowest risk group to 0.83 in the highest risk group. The AUC value in the validation sample was .764 (95% CI [.743, .784]) and Sander’s calibration score indicated an average assessment error of 3.74% in risk estimates per risk category.ConclusionsThe Y-ACNAT-NO is the first instrument that can be used by Dutch police officers for estimating the risk for future care needs of juvenile non-offenders. The predictive validity of the Y-ACNAT-NO in terms of discrimination and calibration was sufficient to justify its use as an initial screening instrument when a decision is needed about referring a juvenile for further assessment of care needs.

Highlights

  • In The Netherlands, police officers come into contact with juvenile offenders, and with a large number of juveniles who were involved in a criminal offense, but not in the role of a suspect

  • The results indicated that the prevalences of all types of care needs were significantly different between the two samples (p < .001, two-sided)

  • Comparing the predictive validity of the Y-ACNAT-NO and the YO-CNAT By comparing the predictive validity of the Y-ACNAT-NO to the predictive validity of the YO-CNAT we examined whether it is justified to maintain two different screening tools for the prediction of care needs, or that the YOCNAT will suffice for predicting care needs of both juvenile offenders and juvenile non-offenders

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In The Netherlands, police officers come into contact with juvenile offenders, and with a large number of juveniles who were involved in a criminal offense, but not in the role of a suspect (i.e., juvenile non-offenders). No valid and reliable instrument was available that can be used by Dutch police officers for estimating the risk for future care needs of juvenile non-offenders. In The Netherlands, a large number of organizations are involved in protecting children from maltreatment One of these organizations is the Dutch police, as police officers come into contact with large groups of both juvenile offenders as well as juvenile non-offenders (i.e., juveniles involved in an offense, but not in the role of a suspect). The purpose of the present study was to develop an instrument that can be integrated in the Dutch police system, so that an automatic screening process is possible within a limited time frame and with minimal cost As a consequence, this instrument had to be developed using only information available in operational police systems. A further aim was to consider the psychometric quality of this instrument by examining its predictive validity in terms of discrimination and calibration

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.