Addressing offending risk in low secure mental health services for men: a descriptive review of available evidence

Abstract

The topic of offender rehabilitation has been subject to much research over the past decade. Numerous meta‐analytic reviews of offender treatment, particularly group treatment based on cognitive behavioural principles, have been reported. Together with the ‘triad of principles’ — risk, need and responsivity — they have formed the foundation upon which most offending behaviour interventions have developed. However, outcome data from existing programmes provides mixed evidence, and evidence for interventions for those in forensic mental health settings are still in their infancy. This paper critically considers the current evidence for the treatment of offending behaviour, and its application in forensic mental health settings, in order to inform development of such treatments in low secure mental health care. Most of the research focuses on non‐mental health settings, and is largely what will be considered here. The paper concludes that low secure interventions need to capitalise on the evidence of ‘what works’ while revisiting key concepts such as ‘dose’ and responsivity in order to design appropriate treatments. Individual outcome evaluation needs to form part of development in this area.

Citation

Nagi, C. and Davies, J. (2010), "Addressing offending risk in low secure mental health services for men: a descriptive review of available evidence", The British Journal of Forensic Practice, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 38-47. https://doi.org/10.5042/bjfp.2010.0037