Editorial

Citation

Gredecki, N. and Ireland, C. (2015), "Editorial", The Journal of Forensic Practice, Vol. 17 No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFP-02-2015-0019

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: Journal of Forensic Practice, Volume 17, Issue 2.

Welcome to the second issue of the Journal of Forensic Practice for 2015. This is an exciting issue with a number of papers documenting research and practice-based issues from an international perspective. This issue starts with two invited papers.

The first invited paper is by Audrey Gordon and Professor Stephen Wong. Here they outline the challenges caused to risk assessment as a result of offenders inhibiting offence-linked behaviours in custodial settings. As a result of institutional dynamics, they outline how it can be difficult for staff to capture idiosyncratic evidence of change, or lack thereof, over time or with treatment. Their paper describes an assessment and measurement framework that can be used to assist treatment and correctional staff to collectively focus attention on relevant characteristics and behaviours idiosyncratically linked to offending. In doing so, the authors discuss the application and practical utility of their framework, and an associated assessment and measurement tool: The Offence Analogue and Offence Replacement Behaviour Guide. Using this framework, they claim that the information generated can be used to evaluate changes in risk through treatment and/or over time. Using two case studies, the authors further outline how the framework may enhance the efficacy of multi-disciplinary treatment and management teams, thus offering an alternative approach to assessment.

Next, Vera Klinoff, Vincent van Hasselt and Ryan Black’s invited paper presents a study on homicide-suicide in law enforcement families in the USA. This is based on the fact that there is a growing body of evidence showing that police officers are at a higher risk of committing homicide-suicide than civilian counterparts in the USA. The authors review 43 police-perpetrated homicide-suicides for the presence/absence of variables that include: demographic information of victims and perpetrators, primary weapons, motivations, history of marital discord and intimate partner violence. As their data were obtained from an online forum, this may not be regulated for accuracy and may contain biased data. However, the findings of their study indicate a significantly smaller proportion of homicide-suicide incidents perpetrated by State officers compared to those at Local and Federal levels. Of particular importance, domestic violence and divorce/estrangement were salient precursors in these cases. In terms of practice implications, the authors outline how these findings, combined with the prior research, highlight the need for prevention programmes and departmental policies, with some further suggestion of the need to implement training at a peer level where risk factors may be better identified.

The next paper by Sonia Shagufta and colleagues at the University of Huddersfield (UK) examines the number and nature of latent classes of delinquency that exist among male juvenile offenders incarcerated in prisons in Pakistan. Using their sample of 415 young male offenders, latent class analysis was employed to determine the number and nature of delinquency latent classes. Multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate the associations between latent classes and the three factors of criminal social identity, whilst controlling for criminal friends, period of confinement, addiction, age and location. The findings outline how considerable diversity exists among male juveniles offenders incarcerated in Pakistan meaning that they differ in their delinquent behaviour profiles and associated risk profiles. As such, they argue that programmes combining normative education and skills building might be most effective. The authors discuss the findings in relation to refining current taxonomic arguments regarding the structure of delinquency and implications for prevention of juvenile delinquent behaviour.

The final three papers in this issue are linked to forensic practice and legal issues. The first of these papers by Dr Alberto Yohananoff is written from the perspective of working in the USA. It provides a review of the literature in the area of judging the quality of child custody evaluations and whether the criteria developed by practitioners match those of the legal consumers. Dr Yohananoff outlines how whilst there is a degree of congruence with respect to the overall format of child custody evaluations between mental health professionals and members of the legal community, there is limited research on a qualitative analysis of each component of a custody report. The implications of these findings suggests that where the criteria used by practitioners match those of the legal consumers, then value can be added to these assessments which are then tailored to meet the needs of legal consumers. This would also likely insure a uniformity of practices.

The next paper is the first of two papers in this issue by Dr Dube-Mawerewere that are based on research conducted in Zimbabwe. This paper outlines a study aimed at developing a medico-judicial framework for rehabilitation of forensic psychiatric patients in Zimbabwe. Using grounded theory, an exploratory qualitative design was utilised. In total, 32 participants were purposefully and theoretically sampled and included the judiciary, patients, patients’ families, psychiatrists, nurses, social workers and experts in forensic psychiatric practice. The paper outlines a need for policy makers to re-enfranchise or rebrand forensic psychiatric rehabilitation services in Zimbabwe. This could positively involve the marketing of forensic psychiatric rehabilitation to the stakeholders and to the public. The author notes how this is projected to counter the stigma, disinterest and disillusionment that runs through both professionals and the public alike. In turn, it is argued that this will foster a therapeutic jurisprudence that upholds the dignity and rights of forensic psychiatric patients. A number of additional considerations are outlined based on the model outlined.

The final paper explores the lived experiences of nurses involved in the rehabilitation of forensic psychiatric patients in special institutions in Zimbabwe. Using mixed methods, the paper first uses qualitative interviews with nurses and the family members of forensic patients, before reviewing patient documents. The results show a power differential between the nurses and the prison system that negatively affected rehabilitation and practice outcomes. Here, the author notes that in this Zimbabwean sample, nurses were powerless to make a difference in the forensic psychiatric rehabilitation system in the same way that might be expected in other international jurisdictions. The powerlessness of the nurse is reported to prevent the key-worker role from translating into patients having care-plans and coordinated care. Peer support from relatives was absent owing to inaccessibility of patients. As this paper presents one of the first descriptions of the position of nurses’ seconded to special institutions in Zimbabwe, it raises awareness on conflicting policy documents guiding the care of forensic psychiatric patients in special institutions.

Neil Gredecki and Carol Ireland