Forensic Psychology

Lecture 7: Risk Assessment (risk assessments always have potential errors)

1. What is Risk Assessment? (Used to be viewed as a dichotomy; you are either dangerous or not.)a. Risk is viewed as a range (now risk is viewed as a range; continuum; moderate low or

high; idea is people don’t generally fit in all categories)i. Probabilities change across time

1. People change; people who are low risk might become high risk 2. The older the people get, the lower their risk becomes. Good predictor

for men. ii. Interaction among offender characteristics and situation

1. Situations can impact; her thesis2. Men who are more at risk in engaging in sexual coercion 3. Guys predicted to be high enages in more sexual coercion 4. But for the low-risk guys, the situation can make them highly coercive

too. 5. Very difficult to do though; hard to be accurate.

b. Risk Assessment has 2 components: (typically where it has been lost; normally we use these assessments to come up with labels; low risk vs high risk. But what’s the purpose of risk assessment? To label someone? No. We want to be able to do something about it. So if they are continually coming into your office to with all these problems, you want to treat them)

i. Prediction1. probability that an individual will commit future criminal or violent acts. 2. Based on identifying the risk factors that are associated with future

criminal or violent acts. ii. Management (How do we manage the people who are considered at risk?)

1. We spend more time on this aspect than prediction. 2. Interventions to manage or reduce the likelihood of future violence 3. Focus is on identifying what treatment(s) might reduce the individual’s

level of risk or what conditions need to be implemented to manage the individual’s risk.

4. Most of the manuals are devoted to thinking about alternative scenario 5. What is the most likely scenario that will happen if this person

reoffends. 2. Risk Assessment: Civil Settings (private rights of individuals and the legal proceedings

connected with such right)a. Civil commitment

i. Not always in forensic. To decide whether to admit people in the hospital or not. What is based on? Threat to society and threat to self.

b. Child protection

i. Is this parent harming their child? Taking away rights of being a parent if high risk.

c. Immigration laws i. Laws prohibit the admission of individuals into Canada if there are reasonable

grounds for believing they will engage in acts of violence or if they pose a risk to the social, cultural or economic functioning of Canadian society

d. School and labour regulations i. To evaluate how safe a particular environment is.

e. Duty to warn and limits of confidentiality (decisions in when can we breach confidentiality)

i. W.v. Egdell (1990) UK 1. Paranoid schizo who shot 7 people. His lawyer called a psychologist to

do an assessment. And said he has high risk. The lawyer did not submit in the report because it was not in favor of his client. But psychologist found out, got pissed and submit it into court anyway. However, job of a lawyer is to ensure confidentiality. In this case, the psychologist violated the confidentiality.

ii. Tarasoff case (1974) US 1. Landmark case in the state. Has to do with what happens if client

discloses to us that they are going to harm someone else. What steps do we need to do to protect the individuals involved.

2. A men who got rejected by a women. He goes in school psychologist and told him that he is planning to harm this girl. So the psychologist reports the school and told the school officers to look after him. However, later when the girl moved in which his brother, he went to the house and killed her. So the girl’s family sue the psychologist for not taking measures to stop him. The psychologist did take measure, but it was the officers who didn’t fully do their job. As a result, psychologist now has a right to breach client’s confidentiality if the client mentions harming anyone. If they know someone is at risk, they have to take reasonable steps to let that person knows.

3. Risk Assessments: Criminal Settings (risk assessments are requested at numerous points)a. Risk Assessments conducted at major decision points:

i. Pretrial ii. Sentencing

1. Get a referrer. Should they receive treatment should they be locked up? What level of security should this person be in?

iii. Release 1. Should this person be let out completely or stay in jail?

b. Public safety outweighs solicitor-client privilege (very similar to the above case) i. Smith v. Jones

1. It’s important for a psychiatrist to inform the law enforcers if they know a client in risk and the defence lawyer hides it.

4. Textbook: A History of Risk Assessments a. Debate about the credibility of psychologists risk assessments

5. Predictions: Decisions Versus Outcomes (written question probably: identify whether the following scenario is false positive, false negative, consequences of that, what society values more, and base rates)

a. They are dependent on each other: Minimizing the number of false positive errors results in an increase in the number of false negative errors (page 265)

b. False-positive can deny the individual of freedom c. False-negative can put society at risk d. The law tolerates False positive more than the others

i. However, also depends on the context ii. If we are looking at violence, then high false positive is ok.. but if we are

looking at juror votes, then it might not be.. cause you can put someone innocent in jail.

OutcomeDecision Reoffends Does not reoffendPredicted to Reoffend True Positive (Correct) False Positive (Incorrect)Predicted to NOT reoffend False Negative (incorrect) True Negative (correct)

6. Base Rates (Types of errors) a. Represents the % of people within a given population who commit a criminal or

violent act (i.e what is the base risk of schizophrenia, depression? Schizo is 1%, depression is 10%) so if someone sits in front of you, would you predict them to have schizo or depression?

i. ACCURATE prediction difficult when base rates are too high or low 1. If we are in a situation, where base rate is really high, our best bet is to

say they are going to revoke their original statements or reoffend. 2. If base rate is too high or too low, we can not further use it.. we base

our answer on base rate) 3. Q: so how is it difficult with a high base rate? What sort of problems can

it cause? What is a good base rate then? Q: what is base rate when we talk about reoffending?

ii. False positives tend to occur with low base rates 1. When we have low base rate, we have higher false positives (which is

predicting that people will commit a crime when they won’t) b. Easier to predict frequent vs infrequent events

i. Violence is not as frequent as the media portrays 7. Methodological Issues (what are the risk factors for reoffence)

a. Assumptions of risk assessment and measurement (score an idnvidiual on each of the factors; they are low moderate or high. If we do an ideal assessment what would this look like? We would take all of them, and put them back in society and see what happens. What’s the problem? Ethical concerns. We can’t really release the high risk people, because they are already put on a full term jail sentence.

i. Ideal evaluation vs reality b. The weaknesses of research (Monahan & Steadman, 1994):

i. Limited number of risk factors (we need more predictor variables) 1. Sometimes, 30 different factors. Problem? We look at their records, but

the person has to be caught. ii. How criterion variable (variable you are trying to measure) is measured

1. Official criminal records 2. However, many crimes may not be reported to police

a. i.e violent sexual crimes might just be reported as simply violent in nature

3. records underestimates a. using official agency records, the base rate for violence was

4.5% (cause it goes unreported) b. but when patient and collateral reports were added, the base

rate increased to 27.5%, a rate of violence six times higher than the original base rate

iii. How criterion variable is defined 1. Coding should include severity of violence (severe to less severe)

8. Other Methodological Challenges (not mentioned in textbook?)a. Measuring Recidivism

i. Problems with outcome measures 1. Some people will rely on arrest, or conviction. Each study is different.

ii. Length of outcome period 1. Each study also differs in the amount of time they follow an offender.

What would the results from 1 year suggest? Low. iii. Categories of offenders

9. Judgment Error and Biases a. Heuristics*

i. Illusory correlation 1. Definition: two things appear to be related but they are not 2. i.e hot weather and crime goes up 3. i.e violence and psychosis or violence and drug use4. but violence and psychosis is not related.

ii. Ignore base rates 1. Whether than figuring out the base rate of homicide rate, people might

just look at how brutal it is…

iii. Reliance on salient or unique cues 1. i.e relying on whether people have delusion or not rather than asking

whether the delusion makes people at risk at harming people b. Overconfidence in judgements (used to be thought of as a source of error; people who

are more confident are actually more accurate. Different from the 50’s though. This is a current finding) (link between confidence and accuracy was minimal) : overconfidence bias.

i. Role of gender 1. Woman psychologist tends to judge men as being more dangerous2. Both men and women underestimates the dangerousness of women of

risk assessments. 10. Unstructured clinical judgement

a. Decisions characterized by professional discretion and lack of guidelines b. Subjective

i. Criteria are very subjective. Each professional have their own judgementc. No specific risk factors d. No rules about how risk decisions should be made

i. Really, we are just going in there. Getting a gut report and deciding. 11. Dr. James Grigson

a. Nicknamed “Dr. Death” or “the hanging shrink” (a higher gun. If a lawyer wanted a death sentence of someone, they higher him)

b. Forensic psychiatrist in Dallas i. Used unstructured clinical judgment

ii. Expelled from professional association for claims of 100% accuracy in predicting violence

1. Because of unstructured clinical judgement, we actually took a long break in our assessments. Our chances were like flipping coins.

12. Measuring Accuracy of Dangerousness predictions

a. Ultimate OutcomeClinician’s predictions Homicide No HomicideHomicide 8 True Positives 1998 False PositivesNo Homicide 2 False Negatives 7992 True Negatives

-let say a professional is really good at predicting homicide. Want to see whether someone is likely to commit homicide . Say base rate is 10 for every 1000 people. 0.1 %. . We had people being locked up … 1998. Our false positive rate is very high… In order to try to off set this, we use actuarial prediction . Takes out the human aspect out of it. Take a whole bunch of cases. Determine the statistical probability. That prints out, high risk, low risk.

13. Actuarial Prediction a. Decisions based on risk factors that are selected and combined based on empirical or

statistical evidence

i. Takes a couple of known factors and determine the factors that determine risk assessments

b. Evidence favours actuarial assessments over unstructured clinical judgments i. So now we are not using gut judgements

c. Weakness (textbook) i. Do not permit measuring changes in risk over time (very static), or provide

information relevant for intervention ( individual information) ii. Did not allow for individualized risk appraisal or for consideration of the impact

of situational factors to modify risk level 14. Static-99-R- An Actuarial Measure (you score them on each of these factors) Written? Identify a

type of actuarial measure. And apply it to the following case. a. Young (if you are older, it actually takes points away so that’s lowering risk factors) b. Have not lived with a lover for 2+ years (more points you have, higher risk) at the end

you have a chart that measures their total percentage. Why is this a high risk factor? People who stay longer than 2 years are (pertaining to lovers) more likely to not be offenders because they are more likely to be able to solve problems that occurs in the rleationships and hence generalizes.

c. Index-non-sexual violence i. Why is this a risk factor? What do you have to do, variations of sexual crimes, if

it is aggravated sexual assaults. d. Previous nonsexual violence e. Number of previous sentencing datesf. Previous sexual offencesg. Physical harm to victim during sex offences, or use of weapon or threats. h. Any non-contact sex offences (i.e exhibitionisms, viewing child porn)

i. Why? Indicative of an internal urge. Paraphilia. One of the main things that guys tell her is that they didn’t harm anyone, didn’t touch anyone, what’s wrong with that?

i. Any unrelated victim i. Stronger desire on outside family

j. Any stranger victim k. Any male victims

i. If you have a victim who is male, that automatically gets you a point. ii. Take whole bunch of factors and see the ones that consistently predicts. But

does not look at idea why. l. Do you see any problems with this?

i. It’s not looking at the invidual… but numbers. You are an individual, but here’s their number. Takes away clinician abilities to use intuition.

15. Actuarial vs Clinical Judgment

Source # of Studies Variables Predicted

Clinical Better

Statistical Better

Tie

Grove et al. (2000)

136 Success in school/military; recidivism; recovery from psychosis; personality; tx outcome; dx; job success and satisfaction; medical dx; marital satisfaction

8 63 65

Egisdottir et al

51 Brain impairment; personality; length of stay; dx; adjustment or prognosis; violence; IQ; academic performance; suicide risk; sexual orientation; MMPI – real or fake

5 25 18

16. Acturial > unstructural. From study above. We just breezed through the study without looking at it.

17. Structured Professional Judgment (now we use all the risk factors; structured and acturials) a. Decisions guided by predetermined list of risk factors derived from research literatureb. Judgement of risk level is based on professional judgement

i. So the untimate decision c. Diverse group of professionals

i. The term professional means even law enforcers, probation officers, and social workers can do this.

18. Types of Predictors ( traditionally risk factors were divided into two main types: static and dynamic)

a. Static Risk Factors (unchangeable or fixed) i.e. things on the actuarial factors i. Historical (i.e never living with a partner for 2 years)

ii. Factors that cannot be changed 1. i.e age at first arrest.

b. Dynamic Risk Factors (also been called criminogenic needs) i. Fluctuate over time (i.e substance abuse)

1. i.e antisocial attitude

ii. Factors that can be changed iii. Acute vs Stable Dynamic Risk Factors

1. Things that happen right the moment that can increase risk. Like drinking alcohol.

2. Negative mood 19. Important Risk Factors (can be classified into 4 categories) Q: only the clinical and historical are

part of the HCR-20. What’s the other 2 for (contextual and dispositional)? a. Dispositional

i. Are those that reflect the person’s traits, tendencies, or style and include demographic (where the person lives), attitudinal, and personality variables, such as gender, age, criminal attitudes, and psychopathy (antisocial ?)

ii. Age, gender (research shows that men tends to commit more violent crime than women )

iii. Demographics 1. Young age and age of first offence 2. Mares > Females (more serious offence)

a. But some studies suggest that females > M in less serious offence

iv. Personality Characteristics 1. Psychopaths and impulsiveness are linked to higher risk factors

b. Historica l (Sometimes called static risk factors) i. Events experienced in the past and include general social history of violenceii. Looking at the static things (were they abused as kids)

iii. Past Behavior 1. Offenders who have a history of break and enter offences are at a n

increased risk of future violence iv. Age of Onset

1. Individuals who start their antisocial behaviors at an earlier age are more chronic and serious offenders

v. Childhood History Of Maltreatment 1. Victims of sexual abuse were no more likely to commit criminal acts

than non-abused2. But physical abused is.

c. Clinical i. Symptoms of mental disorders that contribute to violence, such as substance

abuse or major psychosis ii. Do they have substance abuse issues. Do they have mental illness. There are

some psychotic disorders where rate of violence is higher. iii. Substance use

1. Both direction; less cleara. People offend to get drug and people who use drug maybe

offend

2. Alcohol has been linked to general violenceiv. Mental Disorder

1. Although most people with mental disorders are not violent, a diagnosis of affective disorders and schizophrenia has been linked to high rates of violence

2. Patients who were suicidal and have self-harm behaviors were more likely to engage in verbal and physical aggression than were other patients

3. Threat/control override (TCO) a. Feeling if your mind is being dominated by forces beyond your

control or thinking that someone is planning to hurt you b. Is a significant predictor of violence

d. Contextual (situational risk factors) i. Aspects of individual current environment that can elevate the risk, such as

access to victims or weapons, lack of social supports, and perceived stress. ii. Things that happen at the moment. Like the environment.

e. Some of these factors can be treated whereas others are in past or fixed. f. Meta-analysis: (Q: page 271)

i. First, factors that predict general recidivism also predict violent or sexual recidivism

ii. Second, predictors if recidivism in offenders who do not have a mental overlap considerably with predicotrs found among offenders who do not have a mental disorder

iii. The strongest predictors were age of first police contact, nonsevere pathology (i.e stress or anxiety), family problems, conduct problems (i.e presence of conduct disordered symptoms), ineffective use of leisure time, and delinquent peers.

g. Lack Of Social Factors i. Instrumental “to provide the necessities of life’

ii. Emotional ‘to give strength to’ iii. Appraisal ‘to give aid or courage to’ iv. Information ‘ by providing new facts’

h. Access to weapons or victims

20. Risk Assessments Instruments: HCR-20 (Most frequently used structured judgment) (written question)

a. Ie. A teenager who was involved with gang. Drugs. Became a hitman for gang. Went to jail. While in jail, became psychotic. Refused treatment. First degree murder over 6year+. Gets released back into home with wife and kids. Started to think that he was part of an experiment that a probe was talking to him. That if he does everything the probe tells him, the probe would be released. So he comes home to his wife and kids.

The voices start to tell him that the children aren’t really his. So before they thought he was not a harm to community, so they let him out. But now they put him back in hospital. Refused treatment. So he walks back home. So then he gets send to us. Before he did that, he used risk assessments. Decided that he was high risk. Where would you put his risk? High.. why? He ended up spending 3 months at the locked yard. He was psychotic that it was impossible for him to have a plan.

b. Historical Items Q: do you expect us to remember all these factors? Page 278 i. Previous Violence

1. 2 ii. Young age at first violent incident

1. 2iii. Relationship problems

1. 1iv. Employment problems (2) was part of gang v. Substance use problems 1 (used cocaine)

vi. Major mental illness 2vii. Psychopathy (1) he was more antisocial and psychopathic

viii. Early maladjustmentix. Personality disorder x. Prior Supervision Failure

xi. Based on these factors would you give him low, moderate or high? High. c. Clinical Items

i. Lack of insight (all he thought was that it was a probe and that there was probe in his brain and that one day it would be remove)

ii. Negative attitudes (he had previously endorsed violence; does he still endorse these)

iii. Active symptoms of major mental illness (2)iv. Impulsivity (0) gave him a pass and takes out his wife. Very predictable. v. Unresponsive to treatment (especially responsive to treatment; didn’t want to

take it) d. Risk Management Items (what do we do with them?)

i. Plans lack feasibility (he was going to live in the basement sweep that his parents has prepared for him?

ii. Exposure to destabliizers (wasn’t using drugs anymoreiii. Lack of personal support (his family was really taking care of himiv. Noncompliance with remediation attempts (he’s still out in community without

any problemsv. Stress (

e. This is different from the actuarial measures. Allows us to look more at the individual; like how they would be if we let them out.

f. Q: how is the HCR – 20 an example of a structured risk assessment? Which part of it contains the actuarial?

21. Video: a. Police officer was killed. b. Adams random is false positive c. David harris is false negative. He got executed.

22. Paper is due on the 17th. Setting up office hours on the 10th. 23. Current Issues

a. Protective factors i. Factors that reduce or mitigate the likelihood of violence

b. Use of scientific research i. Practitioners not using instruments

c. Where is the theory? i. More attention on WHY is needed

Possible written:

Something that involves defining: unstructured clinical judgement, autirual prediction, and structured professional judgement. So know the definition of each. Something that involves reading a case situation and using the HCR-20 to assess whether the person is at risk. So be able to list the 4 major types of risk factors and use the HCR-20. Then make your judgement. And identify one possible problem with the HCR-20.

Chapter 12 Juvenile Offenders

1. Outline History Assessment of Young Offenders Theories of Antisocial Behavior Risk and Protective Factors Prevention and Treatment Video

History

o Legal Act – Initially, all young offenders were treated exactly like adults 7 year olds could be tried as a 21 year old Over time, young offenders were distinguished from older offenders

o 1908 – Juvenile Delinquents Act o 1984 – Young Offenders Act o 2003 – Youth Criminal Justice Act

1. Juvenile Delinquents Act (JDA) (written, compared and contrast the acts) a. Youth between 7 and 16 (A minimum age was set) b. Separate court system

i. Treated differently

ii. More informal proceedings 1. A separate court system for youth was established, and it was suggestd

that court proceedings be as informal as possible in that delinquents were seen as misguided children in need of guidance and support

iii. Used different language (terminology)1. Youth could not be charged with theft but delinquency 2. Called delinquents rather than offenders

c. Sentencing options increased (i.e foster care, fines, and institutionalization)i. No real rules at this time; no set and stone

d. Parents encouraged to participate e. In serious cases, the JDA made it possible for delinquents to be transferred to adult

court. f. Punishments for delinquents were to be consistent with how a parent would discipline a

childg. Problems?

i. Given the informal proceedings, children were denied their rights, such as the right to counsel and the right to appeal, and judges could impose open-ended sentences

ii. Not all service were available for youth (i.e rehabilitation programs for youth) iii. No set and stone rules iv. Not punitive enough, because they have their own separate system v. Acts not legal for adults but legal for youth

1. i.e even if a youth is deemed innocent they are still required to go to rehabilitation program.

2. Young Offenders Act (YOA) a. Accountability for actions (however not to the full extent that adults are)

i. Tried to make sentencing match the crime better, but did not do a very good job b. Protection of the public c. Legal rights

i. Children have rights to appeal and counsel d. Minimum age for criminal offence is 12

i. Children younger than 12 would be dealt with through child and family services e. Problems?

i. Serious violent offence were short sentencing 1. i.e a crime that could give life sentencing were only 3 years

ii. not punitive enough iii. disagreement over raising the minimum age of responsibility from age 7 to 12 iv. discrepencies in the factors leading to ransfer to adult court that suggested an

arbitrariness in how cases were handled 3. Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA)

a. Less serious crime out of the court b. Extrajudicial measures increase

i. anything other than court as a form of punishment ii. term applied to measures taken to keep young offenders out of court and out of

custody (i.e giving a warning or making a referral for treatment) iii. Q: we want to make the punishment stronger for youth, yet we try to find more

alternatives for them. Aren’t these goals opposites of eachother?c. Prevention and reintegration

i. Only under special circumstances, are the offender made public d. No transfers*

i. Youth court can include adult punishments e. Victims’ needs recognized

i. Could be notified if offender is released ii. Victim is more informed

4. Objectives a. Prevention youth crime

i. Prevent crime in general b. By giving more meaningful consequences and encourages responsibly of behavior

i. Children and youth could be held for more than 3 years if necessary c. To improve rehabilitation and reintegration of youth into the community

Youth Crime Rates

o All criminal code violations (excluding traffic) Y axis: all causes that have been reported for youth Rates are going down for both violent and non-violent crimes But traffic and federal violation have been increasing Federal

Trafficking of drugs Traffic

Impaired driving and traffic violations 1. Youth Crime Rates and the YCJA

a. Has the YCJA been effective? i. Yes

Assessment of Young Offenders (those under 12)

Issue of consent Consent Assent : not necessary by law but consent is

1. Behavioral Problems a. Two categories

i. Internalizing problems 1. Emotional problem (i.e anxiety, depression, obsessions) 2. Easier to treat than externalizing problems 3. More typically displayed by females

ii. Externalizing 1. Behavioral problems (i.e fighting, bullying, lying)2. More difficult to treat and persistent than internalizing 3. Symptoms peaks in teens 4. More common in males 5. Multiple informants

2. Common Diagnoses in Young Offenders (written question; I would be given a scenario and asked to diagnosed )

a. Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) b. Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) c. Conduct Disorder (CD)

3. ADHD a. Inattention features

i. Lack of attention to detail, failure to listen, loses items, forgetful b. Hyperactivity features

i. Fidgets, leaves seat, talks excessively c. Impulsivity features

i. Difficulty waiting, interrupts, blurts out responses d. Inattention features is more like internalizing symptoms while hyperactivity and

impulsivity are more externalizing. e. http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=hC0idyBnMaM

4. ODD (MORE INTERNALZIE) not so much about physical harmsa. Loses temper b. Argues with adults c. Deliberately annoys others d. Angry and resentful e. Vindictive

5. Rates of Behavior Disordersa. 5-15% have severe behavior problems b. 2-50% have both ADHD and ODD or CD c. Children with ODD, 40% will develop CD d. Children with CD, 50% develop AP(antisocial personality disorder) as adults

6. CD (more servere0 more physical acts a. Lots of people being diagnosed with this b. Has to persist for atleast 12 months* c. 4 main categories

i. Aggression (cruelty to animals, forced sexual acts) ii. Property damage

1. Arson, breaking into homes iii. Deceit and theft

1. Cons, breaking into homes iv. Serious violations

1. Breaking rules set by parents or laws d. ODD-> CD -> AP

7. APa. Consistently irresponsible (not showing up to court) b. Not likely to be label as a psychopath c. Psychopaths are intelligent whereas AP tends to act on impulse d. If you saw a crime scene, a psychopath less likely to be caught

Trajectories of Youth Offenders

o Critical factor = Age of Onset o Child Onset Trajectory

More serious and persistent * Many other difficulties

ADHA, learning disabilities, academic trouble Most do not become offenders

o Adolescent onset trajectory Many commit social transgressions Most desist committing antisocial acts in adulthood

More so than those with childhood onset 1. Brame, Nagin & Tremblay (2001)

a. Followed boys from kindergarten to age 20 b. Measured levels of aggression c. Categorized boys as low, medium and high levels of aggression (based on initial

measurement) d. Results:

i. All levels decreasedii. All levels decreased to about the same level of aggression

iii. Few of the high remains high

Theories of antisocial behavior

Biological Theories

1. Biological – Neurological a. Frontal lobe

i. Key role in planning and inhibiting behavior ii. Lower activation in frontal lobe

iii. Increased likelihood of antisocial acts

2. Biological – Physiological a. Lower heart rate

i. Antisocial shows level heart rate even when stress were present ii. If you have a slower heart rate as a child, you are more likely to become

antisocial in the future 3. Biological - genetic

a. Paternal antisocial behavior related to offspring antisocial behavior b. Twin studies

Cognitive Theories

o Attention in social interactions (2 problems) Attending to social cues Use cues/thoughts about cues to choose behavior

o Process fewer cues (environment) o Misattribute hostile intent (thoughts) o Produce fewer more aggressive solutions (thoughts/behavior choices) o Cognitive deficits o Reactive and Proactive aggression

Reactive: response to perceived threat Cognitive deficiency in processing/attending to social cues

Proactive: directed at achieving a goal Deficiency in generating alternative solutions

o Reactive tend to have earlier onset

Social Theories

1. Social a. Social Learning Theory

i. Learn behavior from others ii. Imitate

iii. Antisocial children have antisocial examples

Risk Factors

1. Individual Risk Factors a. Individual

i. Genetic/biological (i.e., ADHD) ii. Uterine environment (i.e., fetal alcohol syndrome)

iii. Temperament 2. Familial Risk Factors

a. Familial i. Neglect

ii. Family conflict iii. Parenting style (some parents can be very inconsistent and confuse the child)iv. Child Abuse

3. School and Social Risk Factors a. School and social

i. Lower IQ ii. Aggressive play with peers

iii. Deviant peers

Protective Factors

1. Protective Factors (30%) a. Similar children have different outcomes

1. Resilience (not being affected in the face of the risk) 1. Characteristics of a child who has multiple risk factors but who does not

develop problem behaviors or negative symptoms b. Protective factors…

1. Change the level of risk associated with a risk factor 2. Change the negative chain reaction

1. I.e if a mother was abused as a child, that will remind the parent not to abuse their child because they understand how it feels like.

3. Help develop and maintain self-esteem 1. Children with higher self-esteem less likely to engage with deviant peer

4. Provide opportunities 2. Can be divided into three kinds: Individual, familial, and social/external factors

a. Individual Protective factors 1. Individual

Resilient temperaments include exceptional social skills, child competencies, confident perceptions, values, attitudes, and beliefs within the child

b. Familial 1. Positive and supportive environment 2. Good parent-child relationship

c. School and Social Protective Factors 1. School and Social

1. Associating with prosocial children

Prevention and Treatment

1. Prevention and Treatment a. Primary

1. Prior to violence 2. Decrease likelihood of future violence

3. i.e family oriented, school oriented, community wide b. Secondary

1. Directed at young offenders 2. Reduce frequency of violence 3. i.e diversion programs

c. Tertiary 1. For youth who have gone through formal court proceedings2. Prevent violence from reoccurring 3. i.e, in patient treatment

2. Primary Intevention Strategies a. Family Oriented Strategies

1. Parent-Focused Interventions: interventions directed at assisting parents to recognize warning signs for later youth violence and/or training parents to effectively manage any behavioral problems that arise.

2. Faimily-suportive interventions: interventions that connect at-risk families to various support services

b. School Oriented Strategies c. Community-wide strategies

3. Secondary Intevention Strategies 4. Tertiary Intervention Strategies

Possible Written: Can’t really tell, but a lot of identifying and listing in this chapter. I.e list the factors associated with ADHD, OD, CD, or list the theories of juvenile delinquency?

Chapter 11: Homicidal and Psychopathic Offenders (Nov 10,2011)

Psychology of Violence

Violence has a major impact on victims and society a. Homicide rates dropping in Canada over the past decadeb. Substantial fear continues to exist

Types of Homicide

Canadian law recognizes four types: a. First-degree murder (planned, meditated)b. Second-degree murder (shoots the wrong person)c. Manslaughter (kills right on the spot; so angry and overcome with emotions) d. Infanticide (individuals who kill 1 year old children)

Characteristics of Homicide

Characteristics in Canada: a. Most likely to be killed by someone you know b. Females more likely to be killed by an intimate partner than are males c. Gang and gun related homicides are on the rise d. Regional differences (Western vs Eastern Provinces)

1. Homicide higher in West, because of gangs Crime rate by Province, 2007

a. Saskatoon higest, Manitoba, .. b. Related to what was going on at these provinces at the time c. Relates to the oil, people started drilling here. d. People started drinking here and taking drugs; lead to gang war.

Homicidal Offenders

Filicide: * o Killing of children by parents

Neonaticide (first 24 hour the baby is born) Infanticide (within the first year)

3 types of maternal filicide (Stanton & Simpson, 2002): o Neonaticide (high school girl who covers that she has a baby and kills the moment the

baby is borned)o Battering mothers (a women who is abusive towards her children, intense anger and

stress; financial or relationship stress, history of abuse towards children) o Mental illness* (psychotic mother who ate the babies)

Familicide: o Spouse and children killed (taking out the entirefamily) o Perpetrator most often male

Two categories Non-hostile

o Generally not abusive towards their spouse, but sometimes if they get depressed, then it may be sudden

Hostile o Jealousy; fear the wife would leave them, so kills out of rage

Parricide o Killing parents (child sees biological mother kills biological father, black belt step father

comes in, child kills the step father out of amesia) o Youth perpetrator often abused

Spousal Killers o Husbands more likely to kill their wives than wives are to kill husbands

Though gap is getting smaller

Women are actually more violent than we originally thought

Biomodal Classification of Homicide

Reactive (affective) o Impulsive; unplanned; response to perceived provocation (Victor comes home finds wife

in bed some other guy; kills right on the spot) o Victims are most often relatives

Instrumental (predatory ) o Proactive: premeditated; motivated by a goal (Victor finds a gun, plans the kill)o Victims are most often strangers

Multiple Murder: Types

Serial murder (i.e, Ted Bundy) o Minimum of three victims; cooling off period between unrelated killings

Mass murder (i.e, Seung-Hui Cho) o Minimum of three victims; no cooling off period between killings; committed at same

location o He was bullied throughout highschool. One day, at Virginia Tech, he kills 32 people.

Spree murder (i.e., Andrew Cunanan) o Minimum of three victims; no cooling off period between killings; committed at more

than two locations Q: how to tell apart the cooling off period?

Characteristics of Serial Murderers

Most serial murderers are male (only 17% are females) Most serial murderers do not operate with an accomplice (more true for men than women) Most serial murderers are Caucasian Victims of serial murderers are usually young females with no relation to the murderer (usually

true for men)

The Face of a Female Serial Killer – Dorothea Puente

Had a very long lengthy criminal history. Her parents died at a very young age. Got pregnant early. Opened up a brothel at one point. Finally give up on men, after one abused her. She kept poisoning the men. 7 Died. 1 escaped and reported her.

Male vs. Female Serial Murderers

Males more likely to have a criminal history Females more likely to work with accomplice* Males tend to use firearms, strangle or stab victims – females use poison Males kill more for sexual gratification or control, women kill for money

Males are more likely to kill strangers Males are more geographically mobile

Psychopathy : A personality disorder defined by a collection of interpersonal, affective, and behavioral characteristics, including manipulation, lack of remorse or empathy, impulsivity, and antisocial behavior.

Can be very successful human predators Unguided by conscience Complete lack of empathy No loyalty* Not psychotic or cognitively impaired * ~1% of general population vs 10-25% in offender populations

Psychopathic Traits: Examples

1. Interpersonal characteristics a. Grandiosity (seeing themselves as better than others) b. Manipulativeness (for personal gain, see something tangible they want, will go for it)

2. Affective characteristics a. Lack of remorse or guilt (don’t give a shit about other people)b. Callous/lack of empathy (don’t care if people scream, fight, bleed)

3. Behavioral Characteristics * a. Impulsivity (engaging in risky sexual behaviors, drug use) b. Criminal versatility (will have theft, fraud, many different kinds of assaults)

Psychopathy and Antisocial Personality Disorder *(written?)

1. Antisocial personality disorder (APD) places more emphasis on behavioral features (Criminal history, supervision failure..) rather than affective and interpersonal features *

2. Asymmetrical relation between psychopathy and APD: a. Nearly all psychopathic offenders meet criteria for APD but most offenders with APD are

not psychopaths (the reverse is not true)*b. Association between DSM-IV APD and PCL-R Psychopathy*

1. APD 60-80%, 10-25% psychopathy

Hare psychopathy-checklist-revised: The most popular method of assessing psychopathy in adults.

PCL-R-Items

Factor 1 (Interpersonal/Affective)

Glibness/superficial charm Grandiose sense of self-worth Pathological lying (duping delight; likes messing with people) Conning/manipulative

Lack of remorse/guilt (reduced range of emotion with the exception of anger) Shallow affect Callous lack of empathy Failure to accept responsibility (lots of speeding tickets) SLAR

Factor 2 (Lifestyle)

Need for stimulation (yes, he needed to bed and kill people) Parasitic lifestyle (likes to use other people for money, no. He supported and care for himself) Poor behavioral controls (inability to control anger, no , he kept his cool) Early behavioral problems (yes, theft) Lack of realistic long-term plans (If you ask them where they see themselves in 5 years,

psychopaths will not give a clear answer; they might even say something like I will be a lawyer when it’s not even true) , no.

Impulsivity . no, he was very planful in his behavior. Irresponsibility . No, he was not leaving his job. Juvenile delinquency . 1 he didn’t really have a criminal history. Revocation of conditional release (they will not stick to the conditions) , he escaped from prison

twice.

+ promiscuity, many short term relationships (if you ask them how many sexual partners they have had, they will say over 100)(no) , criminal versatility (involved in many different types of crime) (no, he was pretty specific in his crime)

Problem for this: Is developed for the offender’s population. So it would be hard to detect people who are craftier. What is about him that makes us convince that he is a psychopath? He scored really high on factor 1. If I write a report on Ted Bundy, I would mention his factor 1 scores that makes him really dangerous. Based on this, he scored only 23, which does not score him as a psychopath (>30)

PCL-R: Components (created by Bob Harris)

1. Factor 1: Interpersonal and affective traitsa. Strongly related to predatory violence, emotional deficits, and poor treatment response

2. Factor 2: unstable and socially deviant traits (antisocials more likely to score higher on this one) a. Strongly related to reoffending, substance abuse, lack of education and poor family

background 3. Research supports the use of the PCL-R across a range of samples (Hare, 2003)

a. The textbook talks about the SV- which is used when you don’t have a lot of background information

b. They also come out with surveys

PCL-R-Scoring

1. 20 items – Maximum score = 40 2. Mean in criminal populations = 22 3. Mean in general population = 6 4. Clinical settings: PLC >= 30 5. Research settings: PCL >= 25

Psychopathy and Motives for violence

1. Psychopaths engage in instrumental violence 2. Motives for homicide (woodworth and Porder, 2002):

a. Primarily instrumental (planned, motivated by external goal) 1. Low PCL-R Scores (28%) 2. Medium PCL-R scores (67%) 3. High PCL-R score (93%)

Psychopathy and Sexual Violence

1. Psychopathy is highly associated with violence, but only weakly associated with sexual violence (Brown & Forth, 1997)*(because they are so charming, they thought why necessary?)

2. Psychopathy and types of sexual offenders: Q: ? a. High PCL-R scores: sexual homicide offenders b. Moderate PCL-R scores: mixed sex offenders and rapists c. Low PCL-R scores: child molesters

3. Most psychopathic rapists are opportunistic or vindictive a. Opportunistic will take the opportunityb. Vindictive is general anger towards women

Psychopahty and Treatment *** written on this

1. Few treatment outcome studies 2. Effects of intensive treatment on violent psychopathic and nonpsychopathic forensic patients

(rick et al., 1992) a. Violent recidivism rates

1. Untreated nonpsychopaths (39%) 2. Treated nonpsyuchopaths (22%) 3. Untreated psychopaths (55%) 4. Treated psychopaths (77%)

b. Conclusion: research suggests that treating psychopaths actually makes it worst 3. Follow-up study on 224 sexual offenders treated in a prison based program

a. Treat them for 1 year release them into community and se what happens 4. Supprisingly, good treatment behavior was associated with higher recidivism rates among

psychopaths

a. Men with PCL-R scores > 15 and who behave well were 4 times more likely to commit a serious new offense

5. Hill (2003) – psychopaths…

Treating the psychopaths (maybe one of the question will require me to recall one of the studies)

Early work (e.g., Rice) – psychopathy is untreatable Also, not good candidates for treatment due to their disruptive and negative behavior D’Silva et al. (2004) (k=24) : There is insufficient evidence to support the view that treating

psychopaths makes them worse. a. This kinda started the research up again.

Salekin (2002) (k=42)

Psychopaths could be amenable to treatment – 60% of studies reported some treatment success

Success was associated with considerable direct contact between the psychopath and the MH professional

Intensive long-term treatments were more effective o 1 year = 91% success rate vs 6 months = 61%

Biggest methodolocial challenge: only 15% use recidivism rates as an outcome measure o Most used subjective judgement which is obviously a problem

Seto & Barbaree (1999)

Follow – up study on 224 sexual offenders treated in a prison based program Surprisingly, good treatment behavior was associated with higher recidivism rates among

psychopaths o Men with PCL-R scores > 15 and who behaved well were 4 times more likely to commit a

serious new offense Hill (2003) – psychopaths can “learn the words but not the music”

Barbaree Follow Up (2005)

Methodocially more sophisticated o Follow up increased from 2.5 years to 5. o National database used to assess charges and convictions

Men high in psychopathy were more likely to reoffend. o One of the reason wrong, ??

Treatment behavior had no relationship to general recidivism Bottom line: people were premature in latching onto the Seto & Barbaree’s findings

Langton (2003)

476 offenders, using a pcl score of >= 25

Follow up: almost 6 years using national database Look at relationship between response to treatment and psychopathy Psychopaths have higher recidivism rates Non-significant trend for men with higher PCL scores and good treatment response to reoffend

at a slightly faster rate Premature to conclude that good behavior among psychopaths is associated with higher

recidivism rates

So… Is Treatment Harmful or Not?

Barbaree, Langton & Peacock (2006) o Using research from actuarial measures to determine expected recidivism rates for

psychopaths vs non, it is predicted that ~ 16% of psychopaths would re-offend in 5-6 years.

o This is exactly what the researchers found (15% recidivism rate among treated psychopaths)

No support for the notion that newer therapies cause an increase in recidivism among psychopaths.

Psychopathy: Nature versus Nurture?

Research has found scores on a measure of psychopathy are more similar for identical than fraternal twins (Blonigen et al., 2003)

Concerning family background, the best predictors of psychopathy include: having a criminal parent, low family income, and physical neglect (Farrington, 2006)

Domestic Violence Nov 17, 2011

Ted Bundy

Domestic violence: any violence occurring between family memberso Physical o Sexual o Emotional o Financialo Legal

The abusive male with go after the female with as many suits and files as possible to control the finance or custody of the child.

o Neglect (elderly and children) o Exposure to parental violence (children)

Spousal violence (intimate partner violence)

The Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS/CTS2)

Most commonly used scale to measure domestic violence o Community/university samples : males and females commit equal amounts of violence

Females tend to engage in minor violence Males tend to engage in more serious violence Men less likely to report than woman

o Treatment samples : men engage in much higher rates of violence than the other samples Q?

Statistics Canada Violence against women survey (2006)

Used modified CTS to measure physical, psychological, and sexual violence in intimate relationships

o Both men and women experience violence o Women experience more severe formso Violence against women a more likely to reported to police

How do we know that not all women are reporting to police? Anonymous surveys compared to reports to police Police reports underestimates the rate

Types of Relationship Violence Experienced

Q: I’m not sure how to interpret this table.

Males Victims of Intimate Violence

Long-held belief that males are the primary instigators is false, at lest for some forms of IV Personality & behaviors in 15 y.o. girls predicts violence at 21 (Moffitt et al., 2001)

o Females and men who are more likely to get anger or sad quickly o Hyperactive

Gender bias is present in police and psychologists responses o Police tends to take violence against females more seriously than males

While women are more likely to be injured than males, the incidence of men being injured is surprisingly high.

Males Victims of Spousal Violence

Mechem et al. (1999) – Philadelphia o 13% of males admitted to hospital over 13 week period were victims of SV o 47% punched kicked, bitten or choked o 37% involved weapon

Vasquez and Falcone (1997) –Ohio o 72% of men admitted with injuries from SV had been stabbed

o Burns were as common in men as in women

Victimization Rates by Region (adapted from Chan et al. 2008)

What do you notice in any assaults % ? o Consistent across cultures o Canada is significantly less than other countries

What do you notice about the sexual assaults? o Lower in Asia and Middle East

Not being classified as sexual assaults because of society view o US and Canada is pretty high

Spousal Violence in Canada (Ogrodnik, 2008)

In 2006, spousal violence represented 15% of all police –reported violence Females account for 83% of victims vrsus 17% for males More common among current partners than former partners Common assault the most frequent (61%) followed by major assault (14%), uttering threats

(11%) and criminal harassment (8%)

Spousal Violence in Canada

Male victims were nearly twice as likely as female victims to report incidents of major assault (23% vs. 13% for female victims).

o Why? Men were more likely to be assaulted with a weapon (i.e phone, iron, ) Charges laid by police in 77% of all police reported incidents of spousal violence in 2006 Incidents involving female victims were more likely to result in a charge being laid than those

involving male victims Most common in Nunavut, PEI, Quebec and Alberta Least common in B.C., New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia Risk factors: Social isolation, younger couples, higher levels of unemployment, higher rates of

alcohol consumptiono Q: why quebec when quebec is quite dense?

Perhaps social norms…

Exam question: probably to describe the PCL-Test. Read a scenario and say if he is a psychopath or not. Identify a problem. Maybe, we will have to talk about ted bundy.

Maybe we have to differentiate between a psychopath, antisocial, and sociopath.

Theories of Spousal Violence ***

1. Patriarchy (written; describe the two theories of spousal violence and say which ones you think applies more?)

a. Broad set of cultural beliefs and values that support male dominance of women

1. Social patriarchy2. Familial patriarchy 3. States with higher patriarchial value have higer rates of violence but not

everone in that state become vione4. Lesbian evidence against 5.

2. Social Learning Theory a. Origins of aggression

1. Observational learning (learning from seeing what happens to your mother) b. Instigators of aggression (In social learning theory, these are events in the environment

that act as a stimulus for acquired behaviors) 1. Aversive instigators (calling him a lazy bum) 2. Incentive instigators (nagging him not doing the dishes, not being a good father,

he smacks her, and she becomes quiet, positive reinforment) c. Regulators of aggression (In social learning theory, these are consequences of

behaviors) 1. External punishment (i.e if a person was arrested for engaging in violence) 2. Self-punishment (i.e if person felt remorse for engaging in violence)

Triggers for Violence

Not obeying or arguing with the man Not having food ready on time Not caring adequately for the children or home Questioning the man about money or girlfriends Going somewhere without the man’s permission The man suspecting the woman of infidelity Refusing the men sex* In some countries, men perceive themselves as ‘ownders’ of wives and children

o Egypt – 57% (urban) & 81% (rural): OK to beat wife if refused sex New Zealand : Under no circumstances should you physically abuse a woman

o 5% OK if wife found in bed with another man Across countries , most widely accepted justification?

o female infidelity

Triggers for Violence (this time women)

Women’s right to refuse sex o Most acceptable reason – illness o Least – if she does not want to o In countries such as Ethiopia and Tanzania: 20% felt they did not have the right to refuse

Ecological Model

Societal level (like patriarchy) Community level ( what are the beliefs of the community) Relationship (relationship dynamic) Individual (much more comprehensive model being proposed here) Allows us to see how these factors interact as well individually.

Risk Factors for IV

1. Individual a. Young age (less likely to be able to handle conflict) b. Alcohol problems c. PDs (difficulty managing negative emotions; difficulty interacting with people) d. Depression e. Fear of rejection ( fearful attachment style) f. Exposure to violenc eg. Anger and hostility

2. Relationship a. Relationship conflict b. Dominance imbalance (when both disagrees about who should have more power) c. Economic stress (being poor)

3. Community a. Weak sanctions b. Povertyc. Low social capital

4. Society a. Traditional gender normsb. Social norms supportive of violence

Men WHO Perpetrate spousal Violence

Attachment styles***

1. Secure (ok with being apart from partner) ; less risk at assaulting partner ; very few people are 100% securely attached

2. Anxious/preoccupied (partner is chasing after intimate partner to make themselves feel worthwhile)

3. Fearful (shut down in relationship altogether; never to want to be in relationships again) typical batterer falls in this category* fear of abandonment.

4. Dismissive (feels negatively towards other; usually about what they can get out of from the ; relationship) the other person doesn’t mean much to them

Typologies of Male Batterers (Tested) Memorize the characteristics and the two dimensional model

Holtworth-Munroe and Stuart*

o Family-only batterer Don’t have lengthy criminal history, might only become violent when lose job or

drinks (situational) Textbook:

Of all types of batterers, engages in the least amount of violence Typically neither is violent outside the home nor engages in other

criminal behaviors Does not show much psychopathology, and if a personality disorder is

present, it would most likely be passive-dependent personality Does not report negative attitudes supportive of violence and has

moderate impulse control problems Typically displays no disturbance in attachment to his partner

o Disphoric/borderline batterer Substance use issue, might be depressed or borderline, typically triggered by

some threat of abandonment Textbook:

Engages in moderate to severe violence Exhibits some extra-familial violence and criminal behavior Of all types of batterers, displays the most depression and borderline

personality traits, and has problems with jealousy Has moderate problems with impulsivity and alcohol and drug use Has an attachment style that would best described as preoccupied

o Generally violent/antisocial batterer Generally violent guys / antisocial Textbook:

Engages in moderate to severe violence Of all types of batterers, engages in the most violence outside of the

home and in criminal behavior Has antisocial and narcissistic personality features Likely has drug and alcohol problems Has high levels of impulse-control problems and many violence-

supported beliefs Shows a dismissive attachment style

o In real practice, it is hard to fit them in these categories 2 Dimensional represtnation of intimate abusiveness

o Took a large sample of incarcerated men. Wanted to think of things as dimension. Found most men could be classified in these dimension.

o Doing a clustered analysis. o Found that men either fall in borderline, psychopathic, or avoidant.

Characteristics of Impulsive /under controlled

(a) Cyclical phases (b) High levels of jealousy (c) Violence predominantly in intimate relationship (d) Preoccupied attachment style *(e) High levels of depression, hysphoria, anxiety –based rage

Characteristics of Instrumental/Under Controlled

(a) Violent inside and outside the home (b) History of antisocial behavior (c) High acceptance of violence (d) Negative attitude towards women (e) Low empathy (f) Associated with criminal marginal subculture (g) Dismissive attachment style *

Characteristics of Over Controlled

(a) Flat Affect or constantly cheerful persona(b) Tries to avoid conflict (c) Fearful attachment style (high masked dependency) *(d) High social desirability scores (e) Overlap of violence and alcohol(f) Chronic resentment (g) Dutton – over-represented amongst incarcerated men convicted of spousal homicide

Exam questions: themes of abandonment

Studying Intimate Violence in the Lab

Dutton & Browning (1988) o Influence of abandonment themes on men’s emotions o Video or audio clips: “I’m joinging a women’s group and spending the weekend away” o Men who had engaged in intimate partner violence had much higher rates of anxiety

and anger Costa & Babock (2008)

o Men asked to imagine two scenarios Female flirting with another man Female criticizing them to a female friend

o Verbalize how they felt o No difference for # 1 o For # 2

Intimately violent men – anger Non-violent men – sadness

Treatment of Male Batterers

Feminist psychoeducatonal group therapy – Duluth model o Focus on patriarchal ideology (challenges man’s perceived right to control partner.)

Cognitive-behavioral group therapyo Focus on costs and alternatives to violence

Small to moderate treatment effects have been found for both types of therapies o Motivation is a big factor (very high drop out rates)

Battered Women

A typology of Battered Women

5 different types Level 1: short term

o Mild/moderate violence o 1 to 3 types o <1 year in relationship o Leave shortly after violence o Middle classs, educatedo Caring sypport system

Level 2 –intermediate o Mod-severe violence o 3 to 15 times o Cohabiting/recently married o Leaves when violence escalateso Middle classo Caring support system

Level 3 – intermittent long term o Severe intermittent violence o 4-30x o Married with children o Leaves when children are grown o Middle to upper class, reliant on husbando No alternative support system

Level 4 – chronic and predictableo Severe and frequent o 200-300+x o Married with children o Violence precipitated by substance abuse

o Abuse continues until husband is arrested, hospitalized, or dies o Lower to middle classo No social support

Level 5 – homicidal group o Severe and frequent violence o 200-300+ x o Long –term marriage or separatedo Lower class with limited education o Abuse ends when woman kills her partnero Suffers from depression, suicidal ideation, PTSD, and BWs

Why do Battered Women stay?

1. Financial dependency a. What does it mean to get a divorce from your husband? What happens to yoru

children? 2. Fears of retaliation3. Doubts about ability to function 4. Hopes/promises tha the will change *** number 1 factor

a. Showers you with gift, tells you that he wil change 5. Traumatically induced attachment 6. Societal pressures to keep family together 7. Identity tied to marriage (being a mother, being a wife) 8. Guilt –she is the problem 9. Learned helplessness (if you abuse enough, they ll just let you abuse them) 10. Belief : family/friends cannot support her 11. Frame of reference if battered child (only thing she knows, mom or dad also beats her so it’s the

only way she knew of life) 12. Stigma of divorce

Stopped here.

BWS – A Form of PTSD

PTSD o Exposure to a traumatic stressor evokes: intense fear, helplessness, or horror; persistent

re-experiencing of trauma; avoidance; numbing; and, increased arousal BWS

o Primary complex Trauma symptoms

o Secondary complex Idealization of abuser Denial of danger

Suppression of anger (normally, PTSD individuals normally have outbursts) When Battered Women kill:

o Courts must decide – was it self-defence? o Difficult to establish “clear and imminent danger” (e.g., if killed while sleeping) o Key are beliefs that the perpetrator is omnipotent, that he is still alive and that he is

coming after her * o Syndrome must likely to arise when abuse is severe, intermittent and accompanied by

emotional abuse o R.v. Lavalee (1990) – considered a victory

3 Types of Evidence for Abuse

Primary (hosipital visits, reports from friends, given the most weight) Secondary (trauma symptoms like missed work, report from boss) Tertiary (children traumatized for witnessing)

BWS – Case study 1

911 call from woman Husband alive with a knife in his heart

o ‘Family dispute’ Dies on way to hospital Wife charged with 2nd degree murder Evidence

o 1 prior callo Doctor’s reporto Therapist’s reporto Friend’s spontaneous

BWS- Case Study 2

Wife moved 5 times to avoid ex-husband Ex-husband shows up angry She tries to leave with brother He follows her She gets scared and tries to drive away with him on the hood Loses control and smashed into parked car- he loses both legs She’s convicted of drunk driving and reckless endangerment 6 months later he jumps out of wheelchair and attacks her

Battered Person Self-Defence – Case Study 3

Step-father killed by eldest stepson (son saw biological father killed by mother) Bio- Dad shot by mom in front of boy

Boy went to kill himself and instead emptied gun on step-father Runs and hides thinking he’s after him Charged with murder Main point: is whether than being a pre-mediated act, he still ends up doing so time. Just to give

us a sense .. to let us see the symptoms woman show.. hard to argue the cases.

Chapter 14 : Sexual Violence

23 000 sexual assaults in 2005 (Statistics Canada, 2006) Rate has been stable for the past 5 years Majority of victims do not report the crime to police High victimization of children and women Negative psychological and physical conseuqnces Not tested.

Sexual Assault – General Definition (16 can consent , 14 years old can consent as long as the age difference is no more than 5 years, 12 years old too… as long as not 2 years older)

Any non-consensual sexual act by either a male or female person to either male or female persons, regardless of the relationship between the people involved

Sexual Offences – Crimincal Code Definitions

Offences against adults:

Sexual Assault o Level 1: Simple sexual assault (not a lot of force use, i.e date rape) o Level 2: Sexual assault with a weapon(to threat) or causing bodily harm o Level 3 : aggravated sexual assault

Offences against children:

Sexual interference (touching of individuals under 16) Invitation to sexual touching (convincing the child to touch them) Sexual exploitation (a teacher, coach, priest, ) Incest (offending within the family) Bestiality (having sex with an animal) Child pornography (accessing it, to distributing it to creating it) Luring a child (using internet to meet up with a child) Exposure (exposing oneself to children) Procuring (parents or guardian getting a child involved in sexual activity ; i.e making them

prostitute) Child sex tourism (high profile cases where man were going to Thailand and having sex with

boys there; now the law is if you are caught having sex there, you will be charged here)

Related offences not included under definition of sexual offences:

Indecent acts (exposing oneself to adults; have to be intentional) Corrupting morals (pornography)

Distribution of reported violent offences

Assault Level 1 62% (Go over, confused)

Trends in Rates of Police – Reported Sexual Offences

Level 1 peaks why? Women’s movement so more acceptable to report. Then why did it fall?

Higher in rural areas- argue that this has to do with attitude in these area. Sexual assault occurs in higher rate in first nation population (residential school; tends to be less resources available)

Perpetrator characteristics: Police Statistics

97% male (vs 82% for other violent offences) Mean age: 33 years (vs 31 years for other violence offences) For level 1 sexual assaults : rates of sexual offending highest among males aged 13-17 For levels 2 & 3: no discernible age pattern Alcohol often a factor (48%) Not tested

Perpetrator Characteristics: Police Statistiscs

Adults/youth victimized by: o 10% friendo 41% acquaintanceo 28% family membero 20% stranger

Children under 12 victimized by: o Family member (esp. in case of girls; 51%) o Parents (20%) less likely than other relatives (29%)

Perpetrator Characteristics: Police Statistics

Where do the majority of sexual offences reported to police occur?

Residence (64%) Public and open places (26%) Commercial places (11%) Level 2 more likely to occur in public (using weapon as a threat ; more necessary to use in

public)

Rape Myth – Fact or Fiction?

Sexual assault is not a common problem Sexual assault is most often committed by strangers Women ‘ask for it’ by the way they dress Avoid being alone in dark, deserted places (is a myth)? Women derive pleasure from being a victim Women lie about sexual assault

Classification of Sexual Offenders

Voyeurs (sexual arousal to watching people undress or engage in sexual activity) Exhibitionits (exposing yourself or masturbating to an audience out in public) Rapists (idnivdiuals who offend against adults) Pedophile (primary sexual orientation is towards children) Child molester (not all child molester are pedophile

o Intra-familial (incest offender) o Extra-familial

Rapists Typologies

The Revised Rapist Tyhpology, version 3 o Opporunistic (opportunity to sexually offend, not necessarily fantasing, but opportunity

exposure itself so they take it) *o Pervasively angry ( generally angry) o Sexual (might have paraphilia, infrequent, do exist, fuel by sexual fatansy) o Sadistic (very similarly to the sexual but likes to watch the victim suffer) o Vindictive (Almost the same as the pervasively angry ) ; will have difficulty focusing on

anything else? o *Subdivided on the basis of social competence*

Koss The one in the textbook FBI model extension of the kross model

o Not fixed (situational)

Non-fixated

Psychopath

-not really inclined to sexually offending. Whent they do, it’s really about opportunity. As we talked about, no treatment. If a psychopath is sexually offending against achild, more cmplex case

-sexualized

-individuals who have a paraphilia of some kind. They decide it is not very enough. There is a child around so includes the child.

Treatment – difficult (without motivation is difficult)

Once you include the child into activity, it’s hard to get them out.

Fixated kind

Seductive guys (really the pedofiles)

-idea is the guys will have age preference, gender preference, motives is typically they identify more with children than with adults. . can be extremely successful, find their way to professions, can be very organized.

Moral (who feels it is wrong ) vs social (who looks as history as proof that it is acceptable)

Their techniques are grooming. Will fill w/e need.

Treatment: difficult. (not impossible though if they are in the moral category)

Fixated Inadequate (stereotypical old guy at park)

-dementia or psychotic problem. Inviting people to touch at the park. A lot is just lacking skills or having dififculties controlling impulse. Treatment is difficult , just use supervision. And medication.

Sadistic ( age and gender preference, driven by desire to see people suffer. Technique is kidnap and rape. Treatment is impossible)

Any questions about the adult males? Q: what do you expect us to know about thes child molester typologies?

Adolescent sexual offenders

Adolescents commit

20% of rapes Between 30-50% of child sexual abuse History of sexual abuse is common Victims tend to be young females

Only 1 type

Curiousity

Female Sexual Offenders

Only 2-5% of incarcerated sex offenders are female o Men not likely to report

Sexual abuse by females is likely underestimated ( a team of women in austrilia picking up men and violently assaulting them)

Types: Tested (give a scenario and ask us what type of rapist she is) o Teacher/lover

(seductive) very similar : will have gender and age preference Involves seduction or teaching. Does not recognize. Males not likely to report this because they don’t see it as abuse

o Male-coerced Offends at the request of the partner. Treatment: treated them as victim

o Male-accompanied Not included because we just became aware of them

o Predisposed/normalized Raise with sexual abuse as part of upbringing

o Mentally Disorded/delayed Psychotic or depressed Offends within family No real technique (very likely to use violence) Common for them to be involve in some abusive relationship as well Any questions about this?

Video: what would paul benerdo be? Premediated. Most likely vindictive because he assaults a lot of women. What about tammy? Evidence points to male-accompanied.

Marshall & Barbaree’s Integrated Theory * tested o Vulnerability factor (one of the major one is attachment style and use of women) o Attachment styles: when looking at any violent offending we have to look at this.

Secure: unconditional love S

Developmental of vulnerability: attachment o Short term: insecure attachment is often related to: very real difficulties relating to

other people, poor emotional coping, a sense of personal ineffectiveness and a lack of autonomy

o Long term: problems with emotional regulation, low self –esteem, impaired problem solving, poor judgement, impulsivity and low self-efficacy

Development of Vulnerability: Antisocial/ Misogynist Attitudes o Seeing a mother physically abused and denigrated

Females may be viewed as inferior and merely objects to satisfy needs Alternatively intimate relationships become associated with fear and anger and

avoidance of intimacy in the future o Being sexually abused as a child

Child begins to view sex between adults and children as normal and beneficial Vulnerability and the Challenge of Adolescence

o Puberty: critical period for sexual scripts, attitudes and interests

o Increase in sex hormones increases salience of sexual cues o Aware of urges but is unsure how to deal with them o Indivudals who lack effective self-regulation and interpersonal skills are more likely to be

confused defeated by biological challenges o Chances are greater of being rejected and meeting sexual needs in a maladaptive

manner Sexually abusive behavior Using unhealthy sexual fantasies during masturbation to regulate mood and

desire Situational factors

o Vulnerabilities interact dynamically with situational factors (i.e loss of a relationship, social rejection, extreme loneliness, intoxication)

o The more vulnerable an individual is, the less intense stressors need to be o The role of learning

i.e., Classical conditioning: use of masturbation when lonely reslts in sexual arousal to cues signalling loneliness

i.e., operant conditioning, if unpleasant feelings are replaced with pleasnt ones, positive reforcement will occur

implications for sexual offending?

Treatment of Sexual Offenders

recognizing denial, minimizations, and cognitive distortions empathy training enhancing social skills treating substance abuse problems modifying unhealthy sexual interests relapse prevention* Treatments* possibly tested. Might have to provide 2 kinds.

Relapse Prevention

Program designed to prevent the occurrence of undesired behavior Sequence of events leading to relapse in a child molester Two man parts of program:

o Identify risk factorso Develop plans to cope with high-risk situations

Effectiveness of Psychological Treatment

Lack of consensus about whether treatment is effective Difficult to do an ideal controlled study Relatively low base rate of sexual recidivism

o 15% after 5 yearso 20% after 10 years

Effectiveness of Sex Offender Treatment

Treatment refusers and dropouts have highest sexual recidivism rates Treatment effective with both adolescent and adult sex offenders Both institutional and community treatment effective Cognitive –behavioral treatment associated with stronger effects than behavioral or traditional

psychotherapy.

Adult Female Offenders (last lecture)

Female Offenders

Little research conducted on female offenders Lower rates of offending compared to men

o 5.8% - 7% federal offenders are women Females are more likely to be tried at a provincial than federal court (2

years + sentencing on top of what ever you get) Prison sentences for men tend to be longer than for women

o Cost more to put women in jail because of the fewer resources to house them

Types of Offences Committed by Federal Offenders

Females higher for Schedule Type 2 Offences

Females versus Male Offenders

Gender-specific risk factors may exist; research has found more similarities than differences

Females more likely to: o Have less extensive criminal historieso Be victims of physical and sexual abuse o Engage in suicidal and self-injurious behaviour o Have elevated rates of mental disorders o Last three factors are not mutually exclusive.

Childhood Abuse & Female Offenders

Childhood abuse is risk factor for 3 outcomes: Psychopathyology, recidivism, and sucide related behavior

o Psychopathology: Internalizing vs externalizing disorders

o Recidivism: ~ 58% of women re-arrested in 3 years vs. 68% of men o SRB >50% report a lifetime history of suicidal ideation/behaviour & 20-50%

report at least 1 prior suicide attempt 8688710