Court sentences to forensic-psychiatric treatment and imprisonment in Germany: Types of crimes and changes from 1995 to 2009

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 ◽  
pp. 101577
Author(s):  
Hans-Joachim Traub ◽  
Jack Tomlin ◽  
Gerd Weithmann ◽  
Erich Flammer ◽  
Birgit Völlm
Keyword(s):  
Psychiatric Treatment ◽  
Forensic Psychiatric

Clinical Appraisals of Individual Differences in Treatment Responsivity Among Patients With Psychopathy: A Consensual Qualitative Research Study

2020 ◽  
pp. 009385482097059
Author(s):  
Evelyn Klein Haneveld ◽  
Wineke Smid ◽  
Kelsey Timmer ◽  
Jan H. Kamphuis
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Psychiatric Treatment ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Consensual Qualitative Research ◽  
Treatment Team ◽  
Psychopathy Checklist Revised ◽  
Forensic Psychiatric ◽  
Treatment Responsivity

This study addressed which factors expert clinicians consider crucial in successful completion versus dropout in the mandatory forensic psychiatric treatment of psychopathic patients in the Netherlands. Eleven clinicians were interviewed about patient characteristics, treatment (provider) characteristics, and other factors they deemed associated with failure (transfer to another facility) or completion. The interviews were coded using the guidelines of Consensual Qualitative Research (CQR). Overall, extremely high scores on Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL-R) Facets 1 (Deceitful Interpersonal Style) and 2 (Defective Affective Experience) were thought to impede treatment retention, particularly by its negative impact on motivation and therapeutic relationship. Older patients, those with a prosocial network, and/or patients with comorbid borderline traits appeared to fare better. Treatment success was deemed more likely when treatment goals and expectations are stipulated in a concrete fashion, when an extended and gradual resocialization trajectory is offered, and the treatment team is expert, cohesive, and stable.

scholarly journals Criminal Recidivism After Forensic Psychiatric Treatment. A Multicenter Study on the Role of Pretreatment, Treatment‐Related, and Follow‐Up Variables

2020 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 1221-1224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Probst ◽  
Adelheid Bezzel ◽  
Michaela Hochstadt ◽  
Christoph Pieh ◽  
Wolfgang Mache
Keyword(s):  
Multicenter Study ◽  
Psychiatric Treatment ◽  
Criminal Recidivism ◽  
Forensic Psychiatric

Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) in Belgian and Dutch forensic patients

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S2) ◽  
pp. 2063-2063
Author(s):  
K. Goethals
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Sex Offenders ◽  
Forensic Psychiatry ◽  
Psychiatric Treatment ◽  
Forensic Patients ◽  
Preliminary Results ◽  
Outcome Monitoring ◽  
Forensic Psychiatric ◽  
The University

IntroductionBy means of ROM, the efficacy of forensic psychiatric treatment can be measured in domains of risk of recidivism, level of psychopathology, and quality of life. Although, research of the efficacy of this treatment has several methodological pitfalls.ObjectivesTo review the literature of ROM in forensic psychiatry; to consider the way of implementing ROM; to present relevant instruments in the domains as mentioned above.AimsTo investigate whether forensic psychiatric treatment leads to less symptoms, and a decrease of reoffending; to investigate the correlation between degrees of psychopathology and quality of life.MethodsPatients are recruited from the University Forensic Center (UFC), Antwerp, Belgium, which is a outpatient facility for treatment of sex offenders. In the future patients from other facilities will be included. Several instruments are used to measure the degree of psychopathology, risk of recidivism, and quality of life.ResultsPreliminary results are presented and discussed in this paper.

scholarly journals Forensic-Psychiatric Risk Evaluations: Perspectives of Forensic Psychiatric Experts and Older Incarcerated Persons From Switzerland

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tenzin Wangmo ◽  
Helene Seaward ◽  
Felix Pageau ◽  
Lutz-Peter Hiersemenzel ◽  
Bernice S. Elger
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Psychiatric Treatment ◽  
Negative Evaluation ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Court Order ◽  
Forensic Institutions ◽  
Forensic Psychiatric ◽  
Predictive Risk ◽  
Study Participants ◽  
Purposive Sample

Background: Forensic-psychiatric risk assessments of persons in prisons aim to provide treatment for their mental health disorders to prevent risk of recidivism. Based on the outcomes of such evaluations, it is decided, for instance, whether the person can be released or be assigned to further treatment with or without privileges. A negative evaluation would mean that the assessed person must remain in prison or in a forensic institution until his or her mental health has improved to live safely in the community. This paper highlights the process of forensic-psychiatric evaluations and the challenges faced by the two parties directly involved in this process in Switzerland.Methods: Data for this manuscript are gathered using semi-structured one-to-one interviews. The study participants included a purposive sample of 41 older incarcerated persons under measures (i.e., mandated by court order to psychotherapeutic and psychiatric treatment), and 23 expert participants working in Swiss prisons or forensic institutions. We analyzed data using thematic analysis.Results: Study findings within four themes are reported. First we describe the standards and procedures that expert participants use to carry out adequate risk assessments and conditions under which they refuse to perform such assessments. Thereafter, we present expert participants' concerns associated with predictive risk assessments and highlight the need to be cautious in drawing conclusion from them. We then reveal older incarcerated participants' reports on the inconsistencies with the forensic expertise and their belief that these reports tend to be negative toward them. The final theme concerns older participants' experiences of how these evaluations negatively impact their lives and their perspectives of a different future.Conclusion: The study findings about forensic-psychiatric risk assessments point to the need for a clearer communication on how these evaluations take place and how decisions are taken based on them. As incarceration under measures denotes the necessity to continue therapy and reduce dangerousness, it is important that accused person understands his or her real progress, feel that the decisions are objective and justified, and are aware of the progress needed to achieve the goal of eventual release. Such clarity will not only be valuable for those under measures, but also the justice system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document