A descriptive evaluation of patients and prisoners assessed for dangerous and severe personality disorder

Working with Psychopathic Offenders: Lessons from the Chromis Program

“…The most common personality disorder diagnoses excluding antisocial personality disorder were borderline and paranoid. The Chromis Downloaded by [University of Regina] at 09:36 18 November 2014 population is largely consistent with the wider DSPD population as reported by Kirkpatrick et al (2009) although Chromis appears to work with significantly more indeterminate sentenced prisoners, with the wider DSPD population being reported to consist of 54% indeterminate sentenced prisoners (Kirkpatrick et al, 2009). This is a population who present a range of challenges to the criminal justice system and to the staff responsible for working with them.…”

Dangerous Severe Personality Disordered (DSPD) Patients: Characteristics and Comparison with Other High-Risk Offenders

“…The IPDE personality disorder assessment results confirmed what would be expected, namely, the majority in Cluster B had personality disorders (dramatic-erraticemotional) but there were also some with Cluster A and Cluster C personality disorders. The distribution of personality disorders was very similar to that reported by Kirkpatrick et al (2010). The proportion with Cluster A and C disorders was substantially greater at 30% than the 17% reported by Coid in a representative sample of all personality disorder admissions to medium-and high-secure hospitals in England and Wales (Coid, Kahtan, Gault, & Jarman, 1999).…”

“…The final decisions about admission were guided by the agreed DSPD criteria (Kirkpatrick et al, 2010). More than three-quarters met these rigorous criteria at intake and more than half had this clearly recorded in their notes.…”

Nothing left to lose? Freedom and compulsion in the treatment of dangerous offenders

“…According to a recent analysis of admissions, 91% had committed violent offences (homicide in over a third of cases) and 61% sexual offences; many had multiple previous convictions (Kirkpatrick et al, 2010). Although some basic operating criteria were laid down by the (then) Home Office, clinicians at each site were given the latitude to choose, which treatment model to adopt, provided -in this era of 'what works' in the reduction of reoffending -it had some evidence base.…”