Risk assessment in offenders with intellectual disability: The evidence base
| dc.contributor.author | Johnston, Susan J. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-09-20T16:01:40Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-09-20T16:01:40Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2002 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Johnston, S. J. (2002). Risk assessment in offenders with intellectual disability: The evidence base. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 46 (S1), pp.47-56. | |
| dc.identifier.other | 10.1046/j.1365-2788.2002.00003.x | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12904/12995 | |
| dc.description.abstract | A review of the current literature on risk assessment and management in offenders with intellectual disability (ID) revealed little direct evidence for the specific population. Theoretical models and non-ID populations have been abstracted and adapted, but not validated, for those with ID. The varying conceptual frameworks of risk, and its assessment and management, must be considered in context. Difficulties remain with the consideration of offences versus offence-like behaviour, offender versus those with similar needs, and indeed, what is regarded as 'intellectual disability'. Mainstream forensic assessment has moved towards a more dynamic appreciation of risk and risk management, as opposed to risk elimination. This development is more in line with the normalization principles of 'risk-taking' in ID. Consideration is given to future research and development priorities.; | |
| dc.description.uri | http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2788.2002.00003.x/full | |
| dc.subject | Intellectual disability | |
| dc.subject | Criminals | |
| dc.subject | Risk assessment | |
| dc.title | Risk assessment in offenders with intellectual disability: The evidence base | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| html.description.abstract | A review of the current literature on risk assessment and management in offenders with intellectual disability (ID) revealed little direct evidence for the specific population. Theoretical models and non-ID populations have been abstracted and adapted, but not validated, for those with ID. The varying conceptual frameworks of risk, and its assessment and management, must be considered in context. Difficulties remain with the consideration of offences versus offence-like behaviour, offender versus those with similar needs, and indeed, what is regarded as 'intellectual disability'. Mainstream forensic assessment has moved towards a more dynamic appreciation of risk and risk management, as opposed to risk elimination. This development is more in line with the normalization principles of 'risk-taking' in ID. Consideration is given to future research and development priorities.; |