Reconsidering risk assessment with insanity acquittees

Michael J Vitacco, Elena Balduzzi, Kimberly Rideout, Shelly Banfe, Juliet Britton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

States continue to rely on conditional release (CR) as an effective and cost-effective way to manage individuals found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). Research has demonstrated that insanity acquittees returning to the community have low recidivism rates and moderately low revocation rates. This study followed 238 individuals found NGRI in Oregon who were evaluated with the Historical, Clinical, Risk-20 (HCR-20; Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, 1997) and placed in the community on CR. The majority of individuals on CR (n = 157, 66%) maintained their release throughout the entire follow-up period (between 4 and 9 years), but 81 (33.6%) had their release revoked during the follow up. In considering the efficacy of violence risk assessment in predicting CR outcome with NGRI acquittees, the HCR-20 was mostly unrelated to CR outcome. Only two items from the HCR-20, both from the Risk Management scale (exposure to destabilizers and stress) predicted revocation, but not imminence to CR revocation. This paper reconsiders how risk assessments are utilized with insanity acquittees and provides a roadmap for improving risk assessments with this unique population by relying on risk assessment results to plan effective interventions to reduce the likelihood of revocation and violence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)403-412
Number of pages10
JournalLaw and Human Behavior
Volume42
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2018

Fingerprint

risk assessment
Violence
violence
Risk Management
risk management
community
Costs and Cost Analysis
Risk Assessment
Insanity
costs
Research
Population

Keywords

  • Conditional release
  • Insanity acquittees
  • Violence risk assessment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Psychology(all)
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Law

Cite this

Reconsidering risk assessment with insanity acquittees. / Vitacco, Michael J; Balduzzi, Elena; Rideout, Kimberly; Banfe, Shelly; Britton, Juliet.

In: Law and Human Behavior, Vol. 42, No. 5, 01.10.2018, p. 403-412.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Vitacco, MJ, Balduzzi, E, Rideout, K, Banfe, S & Britton, J 2018, 'Reconsidering risk assessment with insanity acquittees', Law and Human Behavior, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 403-412. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000298
Vitacco, Michael J ; Balduzzi, Elena ; Rideout, Kimberly ; Banfe, Shelly ; Britton, Juliet. / Reconsidering risk assessment with insanity acquittees. In: Law and Human Behavior. 2018 ; Vol. 42, No. 5. pp. 403-412.
@article{6478e9e47886436dac53c6a1024b9131,
title = "Reconsidering risk assessment with insanity acquittees",
abstract = "States continue to rely on conditional release (CR) as an effective and cost-effective way to manage individuals found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). Research has demonstrated that insanity acquittees returning to the community have low recidivism rates and moderately low revocation rates. This study followed 238 individuals found NGRI in Oregon who were evaluated with the Historical, Clinical, Risk-20 (HCR-20; Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, 1997) and placed in the community on CR. The majority of individuals on CR (n = 157, 66{\%}) maintained their release throughout the entire follow-up period (between 4 and 9 years), but 81 (33.6{\%}) had their release revoked during the follow up. In considering the efficacy of violence risk assessment in predicting CR outcome with NGRI acquittees, the HCR-20 was mostly unrelated to CR outcome. Only two items from the HCR-20, both from the Risk Management scale (exposure to destabilizers and stress) predicted revocation, but not imminence to CR revocation. This paper reconsiders how risk assessments are utilized with insanity acquittees and provides a roadmap for improving risk assessments with this unique population by relying on risk assessment results to plan effective interventions to reduce the likelihood of revocation and violence.",
keywords = "Conditional release, Insanity acquittees, Violence risk assessment",
author = "Vitacco, {Michael J} and Elena Balduzzi and Kimberly Rideout and Shelly Banfe and Juliet Britton",
year = "2018",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/lhb0000298",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "403--412",
journal = "Law and Human Behavior",
issn = "0147-7307",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reconsidering risk assessment with insanity acquittees

AU - Vitacco, Michael J

AU - Balduzzi, Elena

AU - Rideout, Kimberly

AU - Banfe, Shelly

AU - Britton, Juliet

PY - 2018/10/1

Y1 - 2018/10/1

N2 - States continue to rely on conditional release (CR) as an effective and cost-effective way to manage individuals found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). Research has demonstrated that insanity acquittees returning to the community have low recidivism rates and moderately low revocation rates. This study followed 238 individuals found NGRI in Oregon who were evaluated with the Historical, Clinical, Risk-20 (HCR-20; Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, 1997) and placed in the community on CR. The majority of individuals on CR (n = 157, 66%) maintained their release throughout the entire follow-up period (between 4 and 9 years), but 81 (33.6%) had their release revoked during the follow up. In considering the efficacy of violence risk assessment in predicting CR outcome with NGRI acquittees, the HCR-20 was mostly unrelated to CR outcome. Only two items from the HCR-20, both from the Risk Management scale (exposure to destabilizers and stress) predicted revocation, but not imminence to CR revocation. This paper reconsiders how risk assessments are utilized with insanity acquittees and provides a roadmap for improving risk assessments with this unique population by relying on risk assessment results to plan effective interventions to reduce the likelihood of revocation and violence.

AB - States continue to rely on conditional release (CR) as an effective and cost-effective way to manage individuals found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). Research has demonstrated that insanity acquittees returning to the community have low recidivism rates and moderately low revocation rates. This study followed 238 individuals found NGRI in Oregon who were evaluated with the Historical, Clinical, Risk-20 (HCR-20; Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, 1997) and placed in the community on CR. The majority of individuals on CR (n = 157, 66%) maintained their release throughout the entire follow-up period (between 4 and 9 years), but 81 (33.6%) had their release revoked during the follow up. In considering the efficacy of violence risk assessment in predicting CR outcome with NGRI acquittees, the HCR-20 was mostly unrelated to CR outcome. Only two items from the HCR-20, both from the Risk Management scale (exposure to destabilizers and stress) predicted revocation, but not imminence to CR revocation. This paper reconsiders how risk assessments are utilized with insanity acquittees and provides a roadmap for improving risk assessments with this unique population by relying on risk assessment results to plan effective interventions to reduce the likelihood of revocation and violence.

KW - Conditional release

KW - Insanity acquittees

KW - Violence risk assessment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051377476&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051377476&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/lhb0000298

DO - 10.1037/lhb0000298

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 403

EP - 412

JO - Law and Human Behavior

JF - Law and Human Behavior

SN - 0147-7307

IS - 5

ER -