Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T22:39:28.059Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Use of risk assessment tools for people with intellectual disability: The latest evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2020

C. Morrissey*
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, School of Medicine, Nottingham, United Kingdom Lincolnshire Partnership NHS Trust, Clinical and Forensic Psychology, Lincoln, United Kingdom
*
* Corresponding author.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A relatively high proportion of people detained in forensic psychiatric hospitals have intellectual disabilities (up to 3000 people in the UK; Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2013), and people with intellectual disability are significantly over-represented among those psychiatric patients with long lengths of hospital stay (CQC, 2013; Vollm, 2015). People with mild to borderline intellectual disabilities are also prevalent in the UK prison system.

Although the relationship between intelligence and offending is complex, lower intelligence is a known actuarial risk factor for offending behaviour. Studies, which have investigated the prediction of re-offending risk in populations with intellectual disability, have nevertheless found lower rates of recorded re-offending compared to those in mainstream forensic populations (e.g. Gray et al., 2010). The relatively high rate of ‘offending-like’ behaviour, which is not processed through the criminal justice system in people with intellectual disability makes risk prediction a more complex exercise with this group of people. It also makes outcomes measurement more difficult.

This paper will give an overview of the current research evidence and clinical practice in the field of risk assessment, risk management and outcome measurement with offenders with intellectual disability. It will summarise the findings of a recent NIHR funded systematic review by the author, which pertains to this area, and will point to future developments in the field.

Disclosure of interest

The author has not supplied his declaration of competing interest.

Type
S63
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2016
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.