The Characteristics and Treatment Needs of Adult Male Imprisoned Firesetters

Deliberate firesetting is an international problem which has devastating financial and human consequences. However, the area has received little attention from researchers and practicing professionals compared to other types of offending, thus hindering our ability to recommend how firesetters should be detected, assessment, managed, and treated. In particular, very little is understood about firesetting in imprisoned offenders, particularly in terms of their characteristics and treatment needs, and whether these differ between subtypes of imprisoned firesetter. Theoretical efforts explaining firesetting in imprisoned offenders have also been poor, especially in terms of their empirical adequacy and understanding how the offence process might unfold. The purpose of this thesis was to extend current knowledge of firesetting in adult male imprisoned offenders by examining the characteristics, treatment needs, and offence processes associated with different types of imprisoned firesetter. Four studies were conducted in this thesis. Study one examined whether specialist treatment is required for all imprisoned firesetters or whether more generic treatment approaches might be sufficient for some types of imprisoned firesetters. Study two evaluated the existence of different types of imprisoned firesetter based on the most comprehensive firesetting theory to date, the Multi-Trajectory Theory of Adult Firesetting (Gannon, Ó Ciardha, Doley, & Alleyne, 2012). Finally, studies three and four examined the offence process and the potential pathways imprisoned firesetters follow to offending. The studies in this thesis highlight there are important differences between subtypes of adult male imprisoned firesetters. Three key conclusions were drawn from the combined findings: (i) different types of imprisoned firesetter have different fire-related deficits; (ii) different types of imprisoned firesetter have different treatment needs; and (iii) the findings highlight the importance of considering different target populations and different types of firesetter in theory development and evaluation. Limitations and future research directions are considered

A descriptive model of the offence chain for imprisoned adult male firesetters (descriptive model of adult male firesetting)

Purpose: Firesetting has devastating consequences. Although some theoretical efforts have been made to explain firesetting (i.e., a small number of multi- and single-factor theories), little effort has been devoted to understand how deliberate firesetting unfolds across time (i.e., micro or offence chain theories). This research aimed to produce the first descriptive offence chain theory for incarcerated adult male firesetters.Methods: Thirty-eight adult male firesetters—recruited from prison establishments in England and Wales—were interviewed about the events, thoughts and feelings leading up to, surrounding, and immediately following a deliberate incident of firesetting. Results: Using Grounded Theory analysis, the Descriptive Model of Adult male Firesetting (DMAF) was developed documenting the cognitive, behavioural, affective and contextual factors leading to a single incident of deliberate firesetting. Conclusions: New information generated from the DMAF is presented and its contributions to the current evidence base are highlighted. Clinical implications, limitations and future research directions are also discussed

A preliminary firesetting offence chain for adults with intellectual and other developmental disabilities

Background: The theoretical understanding of firesetting behaviour has predominantly been developed with men in prisons or psychiatric hospitals without neurodevelopmental disabilities. Consequently, there is a lack of evidence regarding the validity of current theory when applied to adults with intellectual disabilities and/or autism. Method: Thirteen adults in England with intellectual and other developmental disabilities were interviewed about the affective, cognitive, behavioural, and contextual factors leading up to and surrounding a recorded firesetting incident. Interviews were analysed using a Grounded Theory approach. Results: The resulting model consists of four phases: (1) background, (2) early adulthood, (3) preoffence period, and (4) offence, and post offence period. Conclusion: The model accounts for unique precursors to firesetting including mental health deterioration, poor problem solving, and new motivations for firesetting. Unlike other offence chain theories, the significance of post-offence behaviour and cognitions are highlighted

A Systematic Review of Autistic People and the Criminal Justice System: An Update of King and Murphy (2014)

The purpose of this paper was to determine whether recommendations made by King & Murphy (Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 44:2717–2733, 2014) in their review of the evidence on autistic people in contact with the criminal justice system (CJS) have been addressed. Research published since 2013 was systematically examined and synthesised. The quality of 47 papers was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Findings suggest a limited amount of good quality research has been conducted that has focused on improving our understanding of autistic people in contact with the CJS since 2013. Methodological limitations make direct comparisons between autistic and non-autistic offenders difficult. Autistic people commit a range of crimes and appear to have unique characteristics that warrant further exploration (i.e., vulnerabilities, motivations for offending)

An Evaluation of Mandatory Polygraph Testing for Sexual Offenders in the United Kingdom

Objective: This research examined whether a government-initiated pilot project of mandatory polygraph testing would increase the disclosures made by community-supervised sexual offenders in the UK. Method: The Offender Managers of 332 pilot polygraph sexual offenders and 303 sexual offenders who were receiving usual community supervision were telephoned quarterly, over a 21 month period, to collect information about numbers of clinically relevant disclosures, the seriousness of disclosures made, and actions taken as a result of disclosures. Perceptions of polygraph usefulness were also collected. Results: Offender Managers in the pilot polygraph group—compared to comparison Offender Managers—reported (1) a higher proportion of offenders making at least one disclosure (i.e., 76.5% versus 51.2% respectively), and (2) that their offenders made more total disclosures overall (Ms = 2.60 versus 1.25 respectively). The majority of disclosures made by sexual offenders in the polygraph group were associated with the polygraph session itself. Polygraph Offender Managers reported being more likely to take an action that involved increasing supervision, informing a third party, informing MAPPA, changing supervision focus, or issuing a warning to the offender. However, the relative seriousness of disclosures did not appear to differ across groups. In terms of polygraph test results, one third of offenders (most notably those who were higher in risk) failed their first test with ‘Deception Indicated’. This outcome—received on a first test—was most likely to elicit clinically relevant disclosures. Offender Managers described the polygraph as aiding supervision strategies. Conclusions: This research and its associated caveats are discussed

Examining the Psychopathology of Incarcerated Male Firesetters using the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III

Research to date has been equivocal on the relationship between firesetting and psychopathology, and has been impeded by studies lacking adequate control samples. The present study examined psychopathology in a sample of incarcerated adult male firesetters (n = 112) and prison controls (n = 113) using the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III. Firesetters demonstrated multiple elevated scores on personality and clinical syndrome scales. Logistic regression showed that the borderline personality scale was the strongest personality scale discriminator between firesetters and controls. Major depression and drug dependence were the strongest clinical syndrome scale predictors. However, both clinical syndrome scale predictors appeared to be mediated by borderline personality scores indicating that firesetters are best characterized by responding indicative of borderline personality traits rather than other psychopathological deficits. The results suggest that, relative to other offenders, firesetters face challenges with impulse control, affect regulation, stability of interpersonal relationships, and self-image