The Relationship between Mental Disorder and Recidivism in Sexual Offenders

Abstract

The importance of mental illness as a risk factor for violence has been debated with significant implications for mental health policy and clinical practice. In offender samples, mental health diagnoses tend to be unrelated to recidivism, although this effect has been questioned recently in sexual offenders. In the present, prospective investigation, the relevance of several mental health diagnoses and relevant co-morbidity is examined as predictors of various types of recidivism in two distinct samples of sexual offenders who were followed up to 27 years in the community. Results indicated that mental health diagnoses were not predictive of recidivism on their own or in multivariate categories, although comorbid substance-use disorders and some personality disorders showed some predictive validity. Results are discussed in the context of a social learning model of crime and in terms of the treatment of sexual offenders.

The relationship between mental illness and violence in a mentally disordered offender sample: evaluating criminogenic and psychopathological predictors

“…Consistent with the results of the most recent meta-analyses (Bonta, Blais, & Wilson, 2014) and subsequent studies (Kingston et al, 2015;Rezansoff et al, 2013), the best predictors of criminal recidivism were consistent with the central eight risk factors identified within the GPCSL.…”

“…In an updated meta-analysis, Bonta, Blais, and Wilson (2013) reported that the central eight risk factors were important predictors of general and violent recidivism among mentally disordered offenders, whereas clinical variables, such as schizophrenia were not significant predictors. Since the publication of this latest quantitative review, several studies have been conducted that continue to support the notion that mental illness fails to reliably predict recidivism in offender samples and that the best predictors are consistent with the GPCSL model (Kingston, Olver, Harris, Wong, & Bradford, 2015;Rezansoff, Moniruzzaman, Gress, & Somers, 2013;Skeem, Winter, Kennealy, Louden, & Tatar, 2014).…”

The Predictive Properties of Psychiatric Diagnoses, Dynamic Risk and Dynamic Risk Change Assessed by the VRS-SO in Forensically Admitted and Released Sexual Offenders

“…Of those diagnoses, only exhibitionistic disorder predicted sexual reoffending while a history of alcohol misuse predicted any new prison term or psychiatric placement. These findings corroborate the marginal associations found elsewhere between categorial diagnoses and reoffense in sexual offenders (4). Furthermore, the criminological variables of the Static-99, usually robustly linked to reoffense, did not significantly predict either recidivism outcome in our sample.…”

“…Although empirical findings support the association between increased offending in general and diagnoses such as schizophrenia or affective illness, particularly when mediated by substance misuse (2), the extant literature has not demonstrated a robust association between a major mental illness per se and sexual offending (3). The existing literature has demonstrated sexual violence to be associated with learning disabilities, substance abuse, personality disorders, and sexual disorders (4,5). Indeed, research has demonstrated that up to 90% of incarcerated sexual offenders have at least one psychiatric disorder (for more details see 6).…”

A randomised controlled trial of a cognitive skills programme for offenders with mental illness

“…This follows on from several studies that have shown that some mental disorders have a higher than chance association with violent offending (e.g., Brennan, Mednick, & Hodgins, ) and should be considered as risk factors (Douglas, Guy, & Hart, ; Hodgins, ). In samples drawn from the criminal justice system, however, mental disorder or its symptoms have not generally been implicated in recidivism, or only weakly so (Bonta, Blais, & Wilson, ; Kingston et al, ; Kingston, Olver, Harris, Wong, & Bradford, ; Rezansoff, Moniruzzaman, Gress, & Somers, ; Skeem, Winter, Kennealy, Louden, & Tatar II, ). In such studies, however, the role of treatment is rarely explored, with Keers, Ullrich, DeStavola, and Coid () a notable exception.…”