The objective was to evaluate the relative efficacy of dialectical behavior therapy modified for stalking offenders (DBT-S) versus a cognitive–behavioral anger management intervention for the treatment of stalking offenders. We expected DBT to result in significantly lower rates of renewed stalking behavior and significantly greater improvements in impulsivity, aggression, anger, and empathy. We randomly assigned individuals charged with stalking-related offences (N = 109) to one of two study interventions: DBT-S and anger management. Recidivism (renewed stalking, violence, and other offences) was monitored for 1 year following the baseline assessment, and participants completed a battery of self-report questionnaires before and after treatment and at a 1-year follow-up assessment. We found relatively low rates of reoffence when compared to past studies of untreated stalking offenders in the U.S., but type of treatment had no impact on the likelihood of reoffence, nor did completion of the treatment program. Likewise, there was no between-groups difference in rates of treatment completion, or on changes in self-report measures. Intensive treatment focused on reducing problematic behaviors in stalking offenders may be effective regardless of treatment modality, but the mechanism by which treatment impacts criminal behavior is not yet clear.

Techniques to assess violence risk are increasingly common, but no systematic approach exists to help clinicians decide which psychiatric patients are most in need of a violence risk assessment. The Fordham Risk Screening Tool (FRST) was designed to fill this void, providing a structured, systematic approach to screening psychiatric patients and determining the need for further, more thorough violence risk assessment. The FRST was administered to a sample of 210 consecutive admissions to the civil psychiatric units of an urban medical center, 159 of whom were subsequently evaluated using the Historical Clinical Risk Management-20, version 3, to determine violence risk. The FRST showed a high degree of sensitivity (93%) in identifying patients subsequently deemed to be at high risk for violence (based on the Case Prioritization risk rating). The FRST also identified all of the patients (100%) rated high in potential for severe violence (based on the Serious Physical Harm Historical Clinical Risk Management-20, version 3, summary risk rating). Sensitivity was more modest when individuals rated as moderate risk were included as the criterion (rather than only those identified as high risk). Specificity was also moderate, screening out approximately half of all participants as not needing further risk assessment. A systematic approach to risk screening is clearly needed to prioritize psychiatric admissions for thorough risk assessment, and the FRST appears to be a potentially valuable step in that process. (PsycINFO Database Record

The Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-Revised (J-SOAP-II) is the most commonly used measure in the assessment of recidivism risk among juveniles who have committed sexual offenses (JSOs), but mixed support exists for its predictive validity. This study compared the predictive validity of the J-SOAP-II across two offender characteristics, age and sexual drive, in a sample of 156 JSOs who had been discharged from a correctional facility or a residential treatment program. The J-SOAP-II appeared to be a better predictor of sexual recidivism for younger JSOs (14-16 years old) than for older ones (17-19 years old), with significant differences found for the Dynamic Summary Scale and Scale III (Intervention). In addition, several of the measure's scales significantly predicted sexual recidivism for JSOs with a clear pattern of sexualized behavior but not for those without such a pattern, indicating that the J-SOAP-II may have greater clinical utility for JSOs with heightened sexual drive. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Assessment of sexual and nonsexual recidivism risk is important for juveniles who have offended sexually (JSOs). It is unclear whether clinicians who assess risk for both types of recidivism should use a JSO-specific measure alone or in combination with an assessment of other potential risk factors, such as psychopathy. Using a sample of 72 JSOs, this study examined the reliability and validity of a scale (Scale P) intended to assess psychopathic traits comprised of seven items from the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-Revised (J-SOAP-II). Scale P demonstrated adequate internal consistency and was significantly correlated with the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-youth Version (PCL:yV). In addition, Scale P significantly predicted nonsexual and sexual recidivism as well as the PCL:yV and was a significantly stronger predictor of nonsexual recidivism than several of the preexisting J-SOAP-II scales. These preliminary findings suggest that Scale P may enhance the clinical utility of the J-SOAP-II.

No abstract