Violence Risk Assessment: Current Status And Contemporary Issues

Despite the increased use of violence risk assessment instruments in the criminal justice system, they remain the topic of continued discussion and debate. This Article will discuss the state of science and practice as it relates to assessing risk for violent recidivism, highlighting current issues of concern and empirical investigation. We first provide an overview of violence risk assessment and describe the role of violence risk assessments instruments in this process. We then discuss their current status in science and practice, including the accuracy with which violence risk assessment instruments forecast violent recidivism, their impact on criminal justice decisions, and their effectiveness as a strategy to reduce violent recidivism. Finally, we turn our attention to contemporary issues in violence risk assessment, including the notion of fairness and the potential benefits, as well as concerns related to the application of technological and statistical advances in violence risk assessment—most notably, artificial intelligence. We conclude that the use of violence risk assessment instruments represents the state-of-the-art approach, but that there remain critical avenues for continued research and discussion

Recommendations To Reduce Frequent Jail Contact

Although most jail admissions represent the only contact a person will have with the criminal legal system, there is a small group of people who experience more frequent jail contact and who represent a disproportionate number of both jail admissions and expenditures. People with frequent jail contact experience complex, interconnected social, economic, and behavioral health needs that may exacerbate (or be exacerbated by) their frequent jail contact. This group also experiences frequent contact with other services in the community, such as emergency rooms, homeless shelters, and treatment facilities. Strategies to implement services that meet complex needs and address structural barriers are critical to meaningfully and sustainably reduce system involvement among the population of people who experience frequent jail contact.Effective change for people with frequent jail contact must proceed simultaneously on a systemic, policy level and on the individual services level. The population discussed in this policy brief typically has complicated behavioral and medical health needs, extensive criminal legal encounters, and significant social deficits such as poverty, isolation, and elevated risk of being unhoused. Many of their needs can be addressed with intensive, person-centered treatment in a coordinated continuum of care

Violence Risk Assessment: Current Status And Contemporary Issues

Despite the increased use of violence risk assessment instruments in the criminal justice system, they remain the topic of continued discussion and debate. This Article will discuss the state of science and practice as it relates to assessing risk for violent recidivism, highlighting current issues of concern and empirical investigation. We first provide an overview of violence risk assessment and describe the role of violence risk assessments instruments in this process. We then discuss their current status in science and practice, including the accuracy with which violence risk assessment instruments forecast violent recidivism, their impact on criminal justice decisions, and their effectiveness as a strategy to reduce violent recidivism. Finally, we turn our attention to contemporary issues in violence risk assessment, including the notion of fairness and the potential benefits, as well as concerns related to the application of technological and statistical advances in violence risk assessment—most notably, artificial intelligence. We conclude that the use of violence risk assessment instruments represents the state-of-the-art approach, but that there remain critical avenues for continued research and discussion

Prevalence Rates, Reporting, And Psychosocial Correlates Of Stalking Victimization: Results From A Three-Sample Cross-Sectional Study

Purpose: Public health and criminal justice stalking victimization data collection efforts are plagued by subjective definitions and lack of known psychosocial correlates. The present study assesses the question of stalking victimization prevalence among three groups. Psychosocial risk and protective factors associated with stalking victimization experiences were assessed. Methods: Archival data (n = 2159) were drawn from a three-sample (i.e., U.S. nationwide sexual diversity special interest group, college student, and general population adult) cross-sectional survey of victimization, sexuality, and health. Results: The range of endorsement of stalking-related victimization experiences was 13.0–47.9%. Reported perpetrators were both commonly known and unknown persons to the victim. Participants disclosed the victimization primarily to nobody or a family member/friend. Bivariate correlates of stalking victimization were female gender, Associates/Bachelor-level education, bisexual or other sexual orientation minority status, hypertension, diabetes, older age, higher weekly drug use, elevated trait aggression, higher cognitive reappraisal skills, lower rape myth acceptance, and elevated psychiatric symptoms. Logistic regression results showed the strongest factors in identifying elevated stalking victimization risk were: older age, elevated aggression, higher cognitive reappraisal skills, lesser low self-control, increased symptoms of suicidality and PTSD re-experiencing, and female and other gender minority status. Conclusions: Behavioral approaches to epidemiological and criminal justice stalking victimization are recommended. Victimization under reporting to healthcare and legal professionals were observed. Further research and prevention programming is needed to capitalize on data concerning personality and coping skills, sexual diversity, and trauma-related psychiatric symptoms