Eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing for offence-related trauma in a mentally disordered sexual offender

Research demonstrates a high incidence of offence-related trauma in mentally disordered offenders convicted of violent and sexual offences. The adaptive information processing (AIP) model offers a theoretical framework for understanding the hypothesised relationship between offence-related trauma and reoffending. Evidence suggests that for a sub-population of offenders presenting with offence-related trauma: (1) therapy may retraumatise them, and (2) unresolved trauma severely blocks the positive benefits of talking therapies. Thus, it is postulated that traumatised violent and sexual offenders may be released into the community when they are still at risk of reoffending. A single case study is presented, which describes the application of eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR) for a sexual offender presenting with offence-related trauma, whose offences occurred in the context of serious mental disorder. The identification of offence-related trauma and subsequent resolution of trauma symptomatology are discussed in regard to effective offender rehabilitation. Furthermore, the idiosyncratic nature of offence-related trauma and the application of the standard EMDR protocol for a single traumatic event are considered

Adult Perpetrated Firesetting

Deliberate firesetting by adults, is increasingly recognised as a significant international issue that has a considerable impact on the physical, psychological, and economic wellbeing of society. This chapter will first introduce key terminology and then outline the prevalence and incidence of this behaviour. An overview of contemporary theoretical explanations for deliberate firesetting will be provided followed by a discussion of demographic, developmental, and clinical features of individuals who set deliberate fires. Consideration is given to the role of psychopathology in the aetiology of firesetting, including disorders where firesetting is detailed as a specific symptom (e.g., pyromania) and other psychopathological conditions identified as prevalent among those who set fires. Finally, the chapter will conclude with a discussion on current approaches to assessment and treatment

A practical guide to assessing adult firesetters’ fire-specific treatment needs using the Four Factor Fire Scales

Objective: Practitioners working with offenders who have set fires have access to very few measures examining fire-specific treatment needs (e.g., fire interest, fire attitudes). In this paper, we examine the new Four Factor Fire Scales (Ó Ciardha et al., 2014), which may be used by practitioners to examine fire-specific treatment needs for offenders who have set deliberate fires. We present a standardized scoring procedure when using these scales, as well as an associated scoring template for practitioner use. Method: Norm data are based on male and female firesetters (n=378) and non-firesetters (n=187) recruited from 19 prison establishments (including 6 female establishments, 1 Young Offender Institutions) and 12 secure mixed gender mental health settings. Results: We present a full overview of all data we have collected to date relating to the Four Factor Fire Scales across prison, mental health and young offending participants. For each population, we present mean scores as well as associated cut off scores and reliable change indices to aid practitioners in their interpretation of scores. Conclusions: The Four Factor Fire Scale provides professionals working in the area with a robust template for administering, scoring, and interpreting the fire-specific factors currently identified as playing a role in deliberate firesetting behavior. Strengths and limitations of the measure are discussed

The classification of deliberate firesetting

The construction of typologies and classification systems has proved highly popular in the area of deliberate firesetting, particularly for developing units of explanation for this behaviour. However, the methods and approaches applied to the classification of firesetting have arguably stunted academic and clinical understanding of this behaviour. As a result, firesetting remains poorly understood and meaningful classification systems to guide assessment and treatment are in their infancy. This article aims to review and critique existing classification systems for deliberate firesetting. The strengths and weaknesses of classificatory approaches in the extant literature are considered and suggestions as to how future research may approach classification of firesetting, so as to advance knowledge of this behaviour, are presented

Firesetting among 18-23 year old un-apprehended adults: A UK community study

This study assesses the prevalence of firesetting in a sample of young UK adults age 18 to 23 years and compares their characteristics with non-firesetting individuals. Two-hundred and forty male (n = 119, 49.6%) and female (n = 121, 50.4%) participants were recruited through Prolific Academic. Comparisons were made between self-reported firesetting and non-firesetting participants on a range of demographic, fire-related, and personality measures. Factors predictive of firesetting status were examined using hierarchical logistic regression. Twenty-five percent of participants (n = 60) reported igniting a deliberate fire. Logistic regression was used to examine the ability of parental supervision and behavioural issues (e.g., witnessing domestic violence, experimenting with fire before age 10, and family history of firesetting), antisocial behaviours (e.g., having criminal friends, impulsivity, teenage access to fire paraphernalia, skipping class more than once per week, taken any illegal drugs, participation in criminal behaviour), and fire-related interests, attitudes, and propensities in predicting firesetting status. Factors found to distinguish firesetting and non-firesetting participants included: experimented with fire before 10 years of age, family history of firesetting, impulsivity, teenage access to fire paraphernalia, participation in criminal behaviour, and the Fire Setting Scale. The results provide key information about potential risk factors relating to un-apprehended firesetting in the general population. This research adds to the small body of literature examining firesetting in the general population. It refines previously used methodologies, presents the first research study to examine the prevalence of firesetting behaviour in emerging adults, and enhances our understanding of un-apprehended firesetting

Evaluation of treatment programmes for adult perpetrated deliberate firesetting

An academic poster displayed at the Centre of Research & Education in Forensic Psychology's (CORE-FP) seminal impact event on Thursday 06th September 2019, entitled "Offending Behaviour Treatment Programmes: Where do we go from here?" The poster describes a collaborative project between the CORE-FP and Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust (KMPT) evaluating the FIPP and FIP-MO treatment programmes for deliberate firesetters. (Poster created by Katie Sambrooks.

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

The Development and Validation of the Firesetting Questionnaire

This research developed and evaluated a measure to examine fire-specific constructs relevant to fire misuse. In the first study, using UK community members asked to disclose deliberate firesetting, we tested a large pool of theoretically informed questionnaire items. First, we found that 1 in 10 adults reported setting a deliberate fire that they had not been apprehended for. Then, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses suggested an eight-factor measure with broader coverage of theoretically-informed risk factors, relative to previous measures, and acceptable test item validity and robust internal consistencies. In the second study, we tested the Firesetting Questionnaire with imprisoned men who held a record of firesetting and imprisoned and community comparisons. The findings illustrated psychometric robustness. Our results suggest that the Firesetting Questionnaire has the potential to be a useful clinical tool for highlighting fire-specific treatment needs and informing clinical formulation and associated risk management

Male Imprisoned Firesetters Have Different Characteristics than Other Imprisoned Offenders and Require Specialist Treatment

Objective: This study investigated whether a group of firesetters (n = 68) could be distinguished, psychologically, from a matched group of non-firesetting offenders (n = 68). Method: Participants completed measures examining psychological variables relating to fire, emotional/ self-regulation, social competency, self-concept, boredom proneness, and impression management. Official prison records were also examined to record offending history and other offense-related variables. A series of MANOVAs were conducted with conceptually related measures identified as the dependent variables. Follow up discriminant function and clinical cut-off score analyses were also conducted to examine the best discriminating variables for firesetters. Results: Firesetters were clearly distinguishable, statistically, from non-firesetters on three groups of conceptually related measures relating to: fire, emotional/self-regulation, and self-concept. The most successful variables for the discrimination of firesetters determined via statistical and clinical significance testing were higher levels of anger-related cognition, interest in serious fires, and identification with fire and lower levels of perceived fire safety awareness, general self-esteem, and external locus of control. Conclusions: Firesetters appear to be a specialist group of offenders who hold unique psychological characteristics. Firesetters are likely to require specialist treatment to target these psychological needs as opposed to generic offending behavior programs