This compact reference makes the case for a middle ground between
clinical and actuarial methods in predicting future violence, domestic
violence, and sexual offending. It critiques widely used measures such
as the PCL-R, VRAG, SORAG, and Static-99 in terms of clarity of scoring,
need for clinical interpretation, and potential weight in assessing
individuals. Appropriate standards of practice are illustrated--and
questioned--based on significant legal cases, among them Tarasoff
v.Regents of the State of California and Lipari v. Sears, that have
long defined the field. This expert coverage helps make sense of the
pertinent issues and controversies surrounding risk assessment as it
provides readers with invaluable information in these and other key
areas:
- The history of violence prediction.
- Commonly used assessment instruments with their strengths and
limitations.
- Psychological risk factors, both actual and questionable.
- Clinical lessons learned from instructive court cases, from Tarasoff
forward.
- Implications for treatment providers.
- How more specialized risk assessment measures may be developed.
Risk Assessment offers its readers--professionals working with sex
offenders as well as those working with the Violence Risk Appraisal
Guide and Sex Offender Appraisal Guide--new possibilities for rethinking
the assessment strategies of their trade toward predicting and
preventing violent criminal incidents.