Juvenile Firesetting Research Articles

Deliberate firesetting: hotspot schools as arenas and preventive actors

ABSTRACTFiresetting is one of the crime acts most representative of youth crime, and schools are among the buildings most often targeted, causing significant social, material and economic damage. This study examines schools as arenas with particular exposure to deliberate firesetting and as actors interpreting and utilizing their organizational scope to prevent school fires. The focus on school organizations is unique and urgently needed in research on juvenile firesetting, given their pivotal but under-researched role in crime prevention. The study is based on an in-depth analysis of data (interviews, documents and official registry data) related to 20 fire-exposed lower secondary schools in two major Swedish cities. These schools mobilized a broad repertoire of social, situational and structural measures. Interviewed school personnel perceived and responded to firesetting in relation to the institutional school setting, group dynamics, individual characteristics and local context. The schools were generally located in socio-economically disadvantaged areas and faced comprehensive educational and social challenges. The firesetting problem – and paradoxically some well-intentioned preventive efforts – risk adding further dimensions to school segregation and inequality, potentially increasing stigmatization and marginalization.

Education and Training for Clinical Forensic Psychological Work with Juvenile Firesetting and Bomb Making

Juvenile firesetting and bomb making (JFSB) represents an important international issue in several disciplines (e.g., education, law enforcement, fire service, social services, and clinical forensic psychology). An examination of policies, laws, and attitudes revolving around JFSB behaviors, reveals startling knowledge gaps that create significant detrimental impacts on public safety. These same concerns reinforce the primacy of broad general education and training for psychologists in this area. This article reviews critical training factors with respect to JFSB that should be included in the training of all psychologists working with youth, public safety, and community mental health and exposing trainees to interdisciplinary experiences that are vital to provision of clinical forensic services needed in these cases. One section speaks to the educational relevance of developing diagnostic (DSM-5 Quadrant) and culturally responsive intervention skills. Additionally, this article discusses the role of practicums and advanced practicums, through which exposure to the many clinical forensic contours of JFSB cases, function as a proficient training platform. Finally, the article draws conclusions and offers future directions for education and training.

Culturally Responsive Family Therapy with Post-Risk Assessment Juvenile Fire Setting and Bomb Making: A Forensic Psychology Paradigm

Internationally, research on juvenile fire setting and bomb making creates an empirically based rationale that supports at least two intervention practices. First, there is a forensic mental health justification for remaining attentive to the recurring public safety risks attached to these high profile cases. Second, there is a post-risk assessment preference for using culturally responsive family therapy within a JFSB context. Largely, JFSB does not occur in isolation from the family. The author argues that post-risk assessment family issues must be addressed as a means to mitigate recidivism. The major purpose of this article four-fold when it comes to exploring the current research literature and reviewing risk assessment methods. First, the articles discuss the prevalence of the JFSB problem and referral matters. Second, the article stresses the necessity for forensic mental health adaptations to be made during family therapy with respect to JFSB cases. Third, ethical and legal issues are examined along with culturally responsive post-risk assessment family therapy specific to JFSB. Finally, conclusions, implications for practice, research, training, and supervision are discussed.

Juvenile Firesetting.

Juvenile firesetting is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Male gender, substance use, history of maltreatment, interest in fire, and psychiatric illness are commonly reported risk factors. Interventions that have been shown to be effective in juveniles who set fires include cognitive behavior therapy and educational interventions, whereas satiation has not been shown to be an effective intervention. Forensic assessments can assist the legal community in adjudicating youth with effective interventions. Future studies should focus on consistent assessment and outcome measures to create more evidence for directing evaluation and treatment of juvenile firesetters.

Juvenile firesetting in schools

This article examines why, and under what circumstances, young people illegally set fire to schools. Utilizing court and police records from cases of illegal firesetting in Swedish schools where offenders were aged 21 or younger, a number of crime scene and offender characteristics are compiled and analysed using correspondence analysis. First, four main clusters of such characteristics are identified. Next, offenders’ accounts of their motives are examined and factored in, with a total of six different types of school fires identified as a result: obstructing school activities, destroying evidence of school burglary, play vandalism, vindictive vandalism, psychiatric problems and school fire as a side effect. The types of school fires obtained are then classified into two main groups: school fires related to education and school fires unrelated to education. The findings show illegal firesetting in schools to be a much more complex phenomenon than previously recognized, and that accounts of motives can help us better understand this complexity and to develop apropriate preventive measures.

Firesetting and Mental Health

Article Abstract Because this piece does not have an abstract, we have provided for your benefit the first 3 sentences of the full text. In the United States alone, 62,807 arson offenses were reported in 2008, and the average dollar loss per offense was $16,015. Arson is an easy crime to commit. Law and mental health invariably intersect in the examination of firesetting behavior. There is more literature on juvenile firesetting than adult firesetting. The book does justice in addressing this lacuna.

Juvenile school firesetting in Sweden: causes and countermeasures

Deliberately set school fires cause significant economic, material, and social damage to society. This article aims to contribute to a sociological understanding and explanation of school fires set by juveniles and to the development of effective prevention strategies based on the results obtained. The study draws upon comprehensive empirical data from qualitative and quantitative research consisting of a questionnaire survey, substantive interviews, and document analysis. The findings show firesetting to be a complex, multifaceted phenomenon, which calls for a diversified approach to prevention relying on structural, situational, and social interventions. While juveniles setting schools on fire appear in many respects to be similar to other youths engaged in delinquent behaviours in society, the fires they set can be internally categorized according to firesetting motive, offender characteristics, and modus operandi. The implications of the resulting typology of six main types of school fires for prevention work are discussed, with practical suggestions for effective countermeasures offered.

Firesetting Patterns, Symptoms and Motivations of Insanity Acquittees Charged with Arson Offences

The relationship between mental illness and firesetting remains poorly understood, with limited guidance available for clinicians required to assess mentally ill firesetters. The aim of this study was to describe firesetting behaviour, psychiatric symptoms and motivations at the time of firesetting and identify firesetter sub-groups. Arson offences referred to a Mental Health Court over a 10-year period were reviewed. Data were collected from files of 59 individuals using a structured proforma. Persecutory delusions were found to be prevalent (68%) and 58% of fires were at the patient's residence. Motivations for firesetting primarily revolved around psychosis (88%), revenge/anger (34%) and suicide (20%). Only three persons were recorded as having juvenile firesetting histories. Cluster analysis identified three sub-groups labelled “angry–antisocial,” “spree firesetters” and “persecuted–suicidal.”The research highlights the importance of considering multiple factors during assessment in addition to the underlying function of the firesetting.

“A Rose Is a Rose Is a Rose”?

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Communications and UpdatesFull Access“A Rose Is a Rose Is a Rose”?Peter Barglow, M.D.Peter BarglowSearch for more papers by this author, M.D.Published Online:1 Jun 2013https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2013.13010087AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail To the Editor: I challenge the assertion in the January editorial by Freedman et al. (1) on DSM-5 reliability statistics that posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) “is another historic accomplishment, with a kappa of 0.67.” Since the majority of the 960 adult PTSD patients who were sampled for DSM-5 were interviewed at Veterans Affairs facilities, high rater concordance is not surprising (2). The notoriety and secondary gain associated with this disorder at these treatment locations probably concretized patients’ diagnostic self-identifications, which were most likely communicated to and adopted by the research interviewers.The editorial quotes the statement by Robins and Guze that reliability is the “first test of validity for diagnosis” (3). But “first” refers to time sequence only, not to the word “foremost.” Validity, estimating the truth or falsity of scientific propositions, requires meeting three additional criteria. First, distinct boundaries must separate a disorder from other disorders. But the comorbidity of PTSD with generalized anxiety disorder, depression, and substance dependence (4) fails this requirement. Second, genetic aggregation should characterize family members of individuals diagnosed. Genetic association studies of PTSD have identified promising candidates such as the serotonin transporter gene (SLC6A4) (5). But robust confirmation requires extensive research efforts devoted to this gene and other suspects, requiring sample sizes possibly in the thousands. And third, the diagnosis must be substantiated by quantitative evidence (i.e., biological assays, brain imaging, or psychological tests). But pervasive contradictions and conflicting claims bedevil PTSD studies examining the morphology of the hippocampus and measures of substances such as catecholamines, cortisol, or glutamates.Kendler (6) proposed a fifth widely accepted validity criterion: a diagnosis must generate relevant treatment benefits. But the 2008 Institute of Medicine evaluation of 53 medication interventions and 37 psychotherapy studies concluded that there was insufficient evidence of beneficial long-term treatment effects from any PTSD intervention with the exception of prolonged exposure therapy (7). Little has changed since then.Applying the above five criteria for the validity of a psychiatric diagnosis to PTSD gives it a weak position in DSM-5 nosology.From the Department of Psychiatry and Medicine, University of California Davis Medical School, Sacramento, Calif.The author reports no financial relationships with commercial interests.References1 Freedman R, Lewis DA, Michels R, Pine DS, Schultz SK, Tamminga CA, Gabbard GO, Gau SS, Javitt DC, Oquendo MA, Shrout PE, Vieta E, Yager J: The initial field trials of DSM-5: new blooms and old thorns. Am J Psychiatry 2013; 170:1–5Link, Google Scholar2 Clarke DE, Narrow WE, Regier DA, Kuramoto SJ, Kupfer DJ, Kuhl EA, Greiner L: DSM-5 field trials in the United States and Canada, part I: study design, sampling strategy, implementation, and analytic approaches. Am J Psychiatry 2013; 170:43–58Link, Google Scholar3 Robins E, Guze SB: Establishment of diagnostic validity in psychiatric illness: its application to schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 1970; 126:983–987Link, Google Scholar4 Regier DA, Narrow WE, Clarke DE, Kraemer HC, Kuramoto SJ, Kuhl EA, Kupfer DJ: DSM-5 field trials in the United States and Canada, part II: test-retest reliability of selected categorical diagnoses. Am J Psychiatry 2013; 170:59–70Link, Google Scholar5 Cornelis MC, Nugent NR, Amstadter AB, Koenen KC: Genetics of post-traumatic stress disorder: review and recommendations for genome-wide association studies. Curr Psychiatry Rep 2010; 12:313–326Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar6 Kendler KS: Toward a scientific nosology: strengths and limitations. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1990; 47:969–973Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar7 Committee on Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Institute of Medicine: Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: An Assessment of the Evidence. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2008Google Scholar FiguresReferencesCited byDetailsCited ByClinical Forensic Issues in Child Trauma Stemming from Juvenile Fire Setting and Bomb Making Volume 170Issue 6 June 2013Pages 680-680 Metrics PDF download History Accepted 1 March 2013 Published online 1 June 2013 Published in print 1 June 2013

Forensic psychological public safety risk assessment integrated with culturally responsive treatment for juvenile fire setters: DSM‐5 implications

PurposeThis paper aims to present an overview of a variety of risk assessment issues that are of particular relevance for work with juvenile fire setters in clinical and forensic settings. The paper seeks to consider Juvenile Fire Setting (JFS)‐Youthful Misuse of Fire (YMF) across a broad array of clinical domains, including developmental, prognostic, and the diagnostic utility anticipated by using the DSM‐5. National standards and risk assessment levels are to be examined.Design/methodology/approachThe paper includes a comprehensive review of the research and practices related to juvenile fire setters. This review included assessment and intervention resources that are used in diverse practice environments. The authors reviewed the literature to establish a nexus between risk assessment and community‐based interventions which were illustrated by a nationally recognized YMF mental health program (FATJAM).FindingsThe paper provides empirically‐based insights into key issues for working with these forensic cases. It offers discussion regarding diagnostic issues that are relevant to the DSM‐5.Research limitations/implicationsBecause of the conceptual or theoretical approach used, the research basis for generalizations is restricted to the practice‐based analyses provided by the authors. Therefore, practitioners and researchers are urged to further test the observations and conclusions presented.Originality/valueThis paper is unique in that it increases the knowledge base related to the diagnostic applications with the DSM‐5, as well as evidence‐based interventions for JFS as it pertains to public safety.

Self-reported juvenile firesetting: results from two national survey datasets.

The main purpose of this study was to address gaps in existing research by examining the relationship between academic performance and attention problems with juvenile firesetting. Two datasets from the Achenbach System for Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) were used. The Factor Analysis Dataset (N = 975) was utilized and results indicated that adolescents who report lower academic performance are more likely to set fires. Additionally, adolescents who report a poor attitude toward school are even more likely to set fires. Results also indicated that attention problems are predictive of self-reported firesetting. The National Survey Dataset (N = 1158) was analyzed to determine the prevalence of firesetting in a normative sample and also examine whether these children reported higher levels of internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. It was found that 4.5% of adolescents in the generalized sample reported firesetting. Firesetters reported more internalizing, externalizing, and total problems than their non-firesetting peers. In this normative sample, firesetters were found to have lower academic performance and more attention problems. Limitations include the low overall number of firesetters in each dataset (Factor Analysis n = 123 and National Survey n = 53) and the inclusion of children who had been referred for services in the Factor Analysis Dataset.

Do Burn Centers Provide Juvenile Firesetter Intervention?

Juvenile firesetting activity accounts for a significant number of annual injuries and property damage, yet there is sparse information on intervention in the burn literature. To quantify juvenile firesetting intervention (JFSI) in burn centers, a 23-question survey was sent to all directors listed in the American Burn Association Burn Care Facilities Directory.Sixty-four out of 112 (57%) surveys were returned. This represents responses from 79% of currently verified burn centers. When queried on interventions provided to a juvenile firesetter admitted to their unit, 38% report having their own JFSI program and 38% refer the child to fire services. Two thirds of units without a JFSI program treat pediatric patients. Units that previously had a JFSI program report lack of staffing and funding as most common reasons for program discontinuation. Almost all (95%) stated that a visual tool demonstrating legal, financial, social, future, and career ramifications associated with juvenile firesetting would be beneficial to their unit. Many burn units that treat pediatric patients do not have JFSI and rely on external programs operated by fire services. Existing JFSI programs vary greatly in structure and method of delivery. Burn centers should be involved in JFSI, and most units would benefit from a new video toolkit to assist in providing appropriate JFSI. Study results highlight a need for burn centers to collaborate on evaluating effectiveness of JFSI programs and providing consistent intervention materials based on outcomes research.

Juvenile Fire-Setting: A Review of Treatment Programs

The current paper provides a review of the literature on juvenile fire-setting, focusing on psychological contributions to the assessment and treatment of this population. The paper discusses research on the actions associated with deliberately lit fires by juveniles, as well as the psychological characteristics of the perpetrators. International perspectives on intervention are reviewed, and in conclusion the paper highlights the need to develop standardised protocols for intervention, which include a systematic assessment strategy for identifying high risk individuals, as well as a structured evidence-based approach to treatment incorporating psychological and fire-educational components.

Risk Factors and Risk Assessment in Juvenile Fire-Setting

This article provides an overview of the literature on risk issues in juvenile fire-setting behaviour. In particular, we highlight the importance of acknowledging the differences in terminology used in current studies and outline the importance of developmental issues in understanding when fire-related activities should be considered pathological. The estimated prevalence of fire interest, fire play, fire-setting and arson are discussed. The key sociodemographic, individual and environmental factors that are associated with pathological fire-setting are discussed in the context of general delinquency. The limited findings, to date, suggest that fire-setting in the main is similar to non-fire-setting delinquent behaviour in juveniles as the majority have conduct disorder rather than major mental illness. There is some very limited evidence that attentional problems may have a specific association with fire-setting but this requires replication on a larger scale. Risk assessment for those who have engaged in fire-setting behaviour is contextualised within the model outlined in the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as this is one of the leading international agencies conducting work in this field. A variety of available risk assessment tools are outlined and the utility of FEMA models and screening tools for assigning cases to appropriate risk assessment-based interventions is outlined. Additional clinically based tools are discussed and their value in treatment/management assignment decisions is highlighted. Using a risk model for fire-setting, it is clear that multiagency working is crucial in designating cases to higher levels of multi-disciplinary assessment and treatment. At present, current international and Australian interventions for juveniles largely focus on educational and fire safety awareness programmes and there is a lack of structured clinically based programmes that meet the needs of those higher-risk juveniles who have unmet mental health and social needs.

Retail availability of fire-starting materials and their misuse by children and adolescents

Reducing access to ignition materials such as matches and lighters is a standard part of most interventions to reduce juvenile firesetting, but children of all ages are still permitted to purchase ignition materials, such as matches and lighters, from retail outlets. This brief research report describes the costs and consequences of the misuse of retail-obtained ignition materials by children and youth. This study shows that almost a fifth (18%) of children and adolescents referred to a specialized juvenile fire-starting program had used ignition materials that they obtained from retail outlets in their fire-starting. Moreover, their fire-starting was extensive and had caused or had the potential to cause significant injuries. In addition, their fire incidents were costly in terms of damage and community resources. Implications for fire safety education for retailers, further research, and legislative action are discussed.

Juvenile firesetting in Italy: relationship to aggression, psychopathology, personality, self-efficacy, and school functioning

Despite the fact that juvenile fire involvement is associated with significant injuries and is highly correlated with diverse maladjustment characteristics, firesetting has never been empirically evaluated in Italy. Participants included 567 youth between 11 and 18 years of age. This investigation attempted to address four gaps in the literature. The first objective was to examine how common firesetting behavior is among Italian youth. The second goal was to explore whether in Italy firesetting is associated with other types of psychopathology and later maladjustment. Thirdly, this study sought to extend our knowledge of the personal characteristics of firesetters. Finally, the relationship between firesetting and aggression remains an empirical question. Results suggested that almost one in three Italian youth reported engaging in fire involvement. Moreover, firesetting in Italian youth is associated with significant levels of antisocial behavior and psychopathology. In fact, firesetters-only demonstrated higher levels of most measures of maladjustment than did aggressive-only youth. Finally, the findings of this study suggest that aggressive firesetters are not at higher risk than nonaggressive firesetters. Instead, fire involvement appears to be the most important variable when predicting serious behavioral difficulties and anti-sociality. This highlights the importance of fire involvement in both the assessment and prediction of antisocial behavior and psychosocial adjustment in adolescence.

The link between maltreatment and juvenile firesetting: Correlates and underlying mechanisms

Objective Despite the widely held belief that abuse is a risk factor for childhood firesetting, the role of maltreatment in firesetting is largely unexplored. This study reports on a sample of children and adolescents referred to a brief assessment and intervention program for juvenile firesetters. Firesetting histories of maltreated youth were compared to a group of firesetting youth with no maltreatment history. Methods Participants included 205 children and youth aged 4–17 years and their caregivers. Assessments were completed with a standardized protocol. Forty-eight percent of the sample had a history of maltreatment as reported by caregivers; 26% of the sample had experienced more than one type of maltreatment. Results When compared to the non-maltreated group, children with histories of maltreatment demonstrated more frequent fire involvement, more versatility regarding ignition sources and targets, and a greater likelihood of an immediate family stressor as a motive for firesetting (all p < .05). Maltreated children were more likely to become involved with fire out of anger ( p = .001), and there was also a trend towards higher rates of recidivism ( p = .07). Children's externalizing behavior partially mediated the influence of maltreatment on specific fire-related outcomes of children (OR = 1.10; 95% CI = 1.04–1.17; p = .001). Conclusions Within a juvenile firesetting population, the presence of maltreatment is a risk factor for a more severe course of firesetting. The findings also suggest that the link between maltreatment and firesetting is operating partially through heightened emotional and behavioral difficulties. Practice implications This study demonstrates that maltreatment is a risk factor that contributes to a more severe course of juvenile fire involvement, and that the link between maltreatment and firesetting operates largely through heightened behavioral and emotional difficulties. These findings highlight the need for mental health clinicians to (a) be aware that these two serious clinical issues frequently co-occur, (b) screen for fire-related behaviors and maltreatment during general assessments, and (c) consider maltreatment status when thinking about the risk of firesetting.

Fire Interest and Antisociality as Risk Factors in the Severity and Persistence of Juvenile Firesetting

In the DSM-IV-TR, firesetting is included as a criterion for the diagnoses of conduct disorder and pyromania. The link between firesetting and antisocial behavior is well established in the empirical literature. Although theoretical models of firesetting often include fire interest as a putative risk factor, there is little research on the role of fire interest in firesetting or on the construct of pyromania. The present study evaluated a sample of children and adolescents referred to an outpatient specialty program for juvenile firesetters with firesetting as the primary presenting problem. By assessing fire interest and antisocial behavior concurrently, the contribution of fire interest to firesetting after controlling for the role of conduct problems was evaluated. Results revealed that fire interest and antisocial behavior were significantly and positively correlated. Moreover, variations in fire interest added to the prediction of firesetting severity at assessment and firesetting recidivism at 18-month follow-up above and beyond what was predicted by antisociality alone. These findings have implications for an empirically derived taxonomy of pathological firesetting.

Table of Contents

AbstractExperts Speak Out. Juvenile Firesetting Interventions: What Works for Children and Families?Bills Address National Shortage of Children's Mental Health Professionals…alarms Reduce Nighttime Bedwetting…post 9/11 Psychiatric Disorders…depression May Increase Risk of Type 2 DiabetesER Physician Expectations of Stress/Anxiety in ChildrenPower Sports Increases Antisocial Behavior in BoysSurvey: One‐in‐five Teens Abuse Prescription DrugsLet's Have an Honest Fight Against Child Sex Abuse

Domains of risk in the developmental continuity of fire setting

Juvenile fire setting is a serious, dangerous, and costly behavior. The majority of research examining youth fire setting has been cross-sectional. We sought to examine early risk attributes that could differentiate fire setters from non-fire setters, in addition to examining their association with the developmental continuity of fire-setting behavior into late childhood. Using a sample of 361 youth drawn from 4 different U.S. communities, this study examined the association between a broad array of risk variables from the child, parent, and family domains, and fire-setting behavior over the course of 2 developmental periods: prior to 4th grade, and between 4th and 6th grade. Youth were classified into I of 4 groups (non-fire setters, desisters, later-onset fire setters, and persisters) based on their reported fire-setting behavior during these periods. Children who set fires had higher levels of risk on most of the variables assessed. Persistence of fire setting was associated with elevated parental depressive symptoms and more interparental conflict and ineffective discipline. The findings highlight the need for multi-component preventive interventions to address the breadth of risk experienced by fire-setting youth and their families.