Search results for ‘Subject term:"learning disabilities"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Assessment of risk manageability of intellectually disabled Sex offenders
- Authors:
- BOER Douglas P., TOUGH Susan, HAAVEN James
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 17(4), December 2004, pp.275-283.
- Publisher:
- Wiley
There are no validated risk assessment tools for intellectually disabled (ID) sex offenders. Static-99 may overestimate risk in ID sex offenders and that the RRASOR seemed to be a more accurate tool for these offenders. These actuarial tools provide a 'risk baseline', which helps in determining treatment intensity and level of supervision, but do not provide much help in designing treatment plans or management strategies based on the needs of the individual client. The present paper outlines a convergent approach which uses the information provided by static actuarial instruments and relevant dynamic factors as an introduction to the formation of a risk management strategies instrument for ID sex offenders. Thirty suggested items, split into four categories (chronic dynamic and acute dynamic for staff and environment; chronic dynamic and acute dynamic for offenders) are listed along with brief explanations of these items.
Should actuarial risk assessments be used with sex offenders who are intellectually disabled?
- Authors:
- HAMS Andrew J. R., TOUGH Susan
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 17(4), December 2004, pp.235-241.
- Publisher:
- Wiley
Objective actuarial assessments are critical for making risk decisions, determining the necessary level of supervision and intensity of treatment. This paper reviews the history of organized risk assessment and discusses some issues in current attitudes towards sexual offenders with intellectual disabilities. The authors present two risk assessment tools (RRASOR and STABLE-2000) that appear to have practical utility with this population. Data are presented from a community sample of 81 sexual offenders who are intellectually disabled suggesting that the RRASOR may provide a useful metric of risk for this population. Dynamic risk is assessed using the STABLE-2000. This tool, based on 16 areas empirically associated with sexual recidivism, samples the individuals’ current behaviour, skill deficits and personality factors. Change in these factors serves to flag the supervisor to changing risk levels. In addressing the question of whether we should seek special risk measures normed on people with intellectually disabilities, given the current lack of alternative tools, the authors conclude that it is reasonable to make use of the risk assessments that have been validated on the general sex offender population.