The study of human factors in forensic science informs our understanding of the interaction between humans and the systems they use. The Expert Working Group (EWG) on Human Factors in Forensic DNA Interpretation used a systems approach to conduct a scientific assessment of the effects of human factors on forensic DNA interpretation with the goal of recommending approaches to improve practice and reduce the likelihood and consequence of errors. This effort resulted in 44 recommendations. The EWG designed many of these recommendations to improve the production, interpretation, evaluation, documentation, and communication of DNA comparison results.
MULTIFILE
Aggressive incidents occur frequently in health care facilities, such as psychiatric care and forensic psychiatric hospitals. Previous research suggests that civil psychiatric inpatients may display more aggression than forensic inpatients. However, there is a lack of research comparing these groups on the incident severity, even though both frequency and severity of aggression influence the impact on staff members. The purpose of this study is to compare the frequency and severity of inpatient aggression caused by forensic and civil psychiatric inpatients in the same Dutch forensic psychiatric hospital. Data on aggressive incidents occurring between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2017, were gathered from hospital files and analyzed using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale, including sexual aggression (MOAS+). Multilevel random intercept models were used to analyze differences between forensic and civil psychiatric patients in severity of aggressive incidents. In all, 3,603 aggressive incidents were recorded, caused by 344 different patients. Civil psychiatric patients caused more aggressive incidents than forensic patients and female patients caused more inpatient aggression compared with male patients. Female forensic patients were found to cause the most severe incidents, followed by female civil psychiatric patients. Male forensic patients caused the least severe incidents. The findings have important clinical implications, such as corroborating the need for an intensive treatment program for aggressive and disruptive civil psychiatric patients, as well as emphasizing the importance of gender-responsive treatment
MULTIFILE
"Background: Victimization is highly prevalent in individuals with mild intellectual disability (MID) or borderline intellectual functioning (BIF) and is an important risk factor for mental health problems and violent behavior. Not much is known, however, about victimization history in women with MID-BIF admitted to forensic mental health care. Aims: The aim of this multicenter study is to gain insight into victimization histories and mental health problems of female forensic psychiatric patients with MID-BIF. Methods: File data were analyzed of 126 women with MID-BIF who have been admitted to one of five Dutch forensic psychiatric hospitals between 1990 and 2014 and compared to data of 76 female patients with average or above intellectual functioning and to a matched sample of 31 male patients with MID-BIF. Results: All forensic paients had high rates of victimization, but women with MID-BIF showed an even higher prevalence of victimization during both childhood and adulthood and more complex psychopathology compared to female patients without MID-BIF. Compared to male forensic patients with MID-BIF, women with MID-BIF were more often victim of sexual abuse during childhood. During adulthood, the victimization rate in these women was more than three times higher than in men. Conclusions: Victimization is a salient factor in female forensic patients with MID-BIF and more gender-responsive trauma-focused treatment is needed."
DOCUMENT
The past two decades, a disproportionate growth of females entering the criminal justice system and forensic mental health services has been observed worldwide. However, there is a lack of knowledge on the background of women who are convicted for violent offenses. What is their criminal history, what are their motives for offending and in which way do they differ from men convicted for violent offenses? In this study, criminal histories and the offenses for which they were admitted to forensic care were analyzed of 218 women and 218 men who have been treated between 1984 and 2014 with a mandatory treatment order in one of four Dutch forensic psychiatric settings admitting both men and women. It is concluded that there are important differences in violent offending between male and female patients. Most importantly, female violence was more often directed towards their close environment, like their children, and driven by relational frustration. Furthermore, female patients received lower punishments compared to male patients and were more often considered to be diminished accountable for their offenses due to a mental illness.
MULTIFILE
Most violence risk assessment tools have been validated predominantly in males. In this multicenter study, the Historical, Clinical, Risk Management–20 (HCR-20), Historical, Clinical, Risk Management–20 Version 3 (HCR-20V3), Female Additional Manual (FAM), Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START), Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for violence risk (SAPROF), and Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL-R) were coded on file information of 78 female forensic psychiatric patients discharged between 1993 and 2012 with a mean follow-up period of 11.8 years from one of four Dutch forensic psychiatric hospitals. Notable was the high rate of mortality (17.9%) and readmission to psychiatric settings (11.5%) after discharge. Official reconviction data could be retrieved from the Ministry of Justice and Security for 71 women. Twenty-four women (33.8%) were reconvicted after discharge, including 13 for violent offenses (18.3%). Overall, predictive validity was moderate for all types of recidivism, but low for violence. The START Vulnerability scores, HCR-20V3, and FAM showed the highest predictive accuracy for all recidivism. With respect to violent recidivism, only the START Vulnerability scores and the Clinical scale of the HCR-20V3 demonstrated significant predictive accuracy.
MULTIFILE
Research shows that victimization rates in forensic mental health care are high for both female and male patients. However, gender differences have been found in types and patterns of victimization (more sexual abuse and more complex trauma for women), cognitive appraisal, and response to traumatic events. Gender-responsive treatments focusing on trauma have been designed to adhere to these gender differences; however, despite promising research results, these interventions are yet to be introduced in many settings. This study examined how trauma is addressed in current clinical practice in Dutch forensic mental health care, whether professionals are knowledgeable of gender differences in trauma, and how gender-responsive factors such as self-esteem, self-efficacy, social relations, and coping skills are considered in treatment for female patients. We used a mixed-method design consisting of an online survey and 33 semi-structured interviews with professionals and patients. The results suggested that Dutch forensic mental health care could address trauma more structurally, and professionals could be more aware of gender differences and gender-responsive factors. Early start of trauma treatment was deemed important but was not current practice according to patients. Based on this study, guidelines were developed for gender-responsive, trauma-informed work in forensic mental health care.
DOCUMENT
Victim-offender contact has been studied extensively in prisons, but research on contact between victims and mentally disordered offenders in forensic mental health settings is lacking. Therefore, an exploratory study was conducted on contact between victims and offenders in four Dutch forensic psychiatric hospitals. These offenders have committed serious (sexually) violent offenses, for which they could not be held fully responsible due to severe psychopathology. During the mandatory treatment, it is possible for offenders and their victims to engage in contact with each other if both parties agree to this. To explore the conditions under which this contact is suitable, we interviewed 35 social workers about their experiences in 57 cases from four Dutch forensic psychiatric hospitals. Findings demonstrated that, according to the social workers, no type of offense or psychopathology were obvious exclusion criteria for victim-offender contact. Social workers described offenders' problem awareness, stable psychiatric condition, and ability to keep to agreements as important factors that enable victim-offender contact. Implications and suggestions for future research are provided.
DOCUMENT
“Early warning signs of aggression” refers to recurring changes in behaviors, thoughts, perceptions, and feelings of the patient that are considered to be precursors of aggressive behavior. The early recognition of these signs offers possibilities for early intervention and prevention of aggressive behaviors in forensic patients. The Forensic Early warning Signs of Aggression Inventory (FESAI) was developed to assist nurses and patients in identifying and monitoring these early warning signs of aggression.
DOCUMENT
Although girls and women represent only a minority of the forensic mental health and prison populations, studies worldwide suggest that there has been a steady increase in the number of females being convicted for committing offenses, especially violent offenses. In this chapter, an overview will be provided on the specific risks and needs of female offenders and the relevance of gender-responsive treatment in forensic mental health services. First, the literature into the prevalence and nature of offending by females will be reviewed, with a focus on violent offending. Next, the most recent knowledge in the field will be summarized with respect to gender-sensitive risk assessment and gender-responsive treatment in forensic mental health care. Finally, some recommendations will be provided for mental health professionals working with females in forensic mental health services and for future research.
LINK
In case of a major cyber incident, organizations usually rely on external providers of Cyber Incident Response (CIR) services. CIR consultants operate in a dynamic and constantly changing environment in which they must actively engage in information management and problem solving while adapting to complex circumstances. In this challenging environment CIR consultants need to make critical decisions about what to advise clients that are impacted by a major cyber incident. Despite its relevance, CIR decision making is an understudied topic. The objective of this preliminary investigation is therefore to understand what decision-making strategies experienced CIR consultants use during challenging incidents and to offer suggestions for training and decision-aiding. A general understanding of operational decision making under pressure, uncertainty, and high stakes was established by reviewing the body of knowledge known as Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM). The general conclusion of NDM research is that experts usually make adequate decisions based on (fast) recognition of the situation and applying the most obvious (default) response pattern that has worked in similar situations in the past. In exceptional situations, however, this way of recognition-primed decision-making results in suboptimal decisions as experts are likely to miss conflicting cues once the situation is quickly recognized under pressure. Understanding the default response pattern and the rare occasions in which this response pattern could be ineffective is therefore key for improving and aiding cyber incident response decision making. Therefore, we interviewed six experienced CIR consultants and used the critical decision method (CDM) to learn how they made decisions under challenging conditions. The main conclusion is that the default response pattern for CIR consultants during cyber breaches is to reduce uncertainty as much as possible by gathering and investigating data and thus delay decision making about eradication until the investigation is completed. According to the respondents, this strategy usually works well and provides the most assurance that the threat actor can be completely removed from the network. However, the majority of respondents could recall at least one case in which this strategy (in hindsight) resulted in unnecessary theft of data or damage. Interestingly, this finding is strikingly different from other operational decision-making domains such as the military, police and fire service in which there is a general tendency to act rapidly instead of searching for more information. The main advice is that training and decision aiding of (novice) cyber incident responders should be aimed at the following: (a) make cyber incident responders aware of how recognition-primed decision making works; (b) discuss the default response strategy that typically works well in several scenarios; (c) explain the exception and how the exception can be recognized; (d) provide alternative response strategies that work better in exceptional situations.
DOCUMENT
