A multi‐centre study of adults with learning disabilities referred to services for antisocial or offending behaviour: demographic, individual, offending and service characteristics

Abstract

(2010) A multicentre study of adults with learning disabilities referred to services for antisocial or offending behaviour: demographic, individual, offending and service characteristics. Journal of Learning Disabilities and Offending Behaviour, 1 (2).

The Impact of Known Criminogenic Factors on Offenders with Intellectual Disability: Previous Findings and New Results onADHD

“…() and O'Brien et al . () noted that ADHD was the most frequently recorded developmental disorder in this large cohort. Those referred to secure services had a rate of 26%, while those referred to community services had rates of between 9 and 15% with an overall rate for the cohort of 15%.…”

“…ADHD has emerged as the most frequent diagnosed developmental disorder in this cohort (O'Brien et al . ; Lindsay et al . ,b,c).…”

“…In terms of general characteristics for the total cohort, O'Brien et al . () reported that 51% had mild intellectual disability, 17% borderline intelligence, 8% moderate intellectual disability and 7% severe intellectual disability. Level of cognitive ability was not known in 12%, and 5% had an IQ > 80.…”

Women with intellectual disability in secure settings and their mental health needs

“…Very little of this has focused on women. O'Brien et al (2010) collected data on a large number of people with intellectual disability referred to all levels of services due to their anti-social or offending behaviour. They found 26 per cent of the referrals were for women but did not analyse the female specific data separately.…”

Offending by People with Intellectual Disabilities in Community Settings: A Preliminary Examination of Contextual Factors

“…Similarly quantitative studies, such as that of O'Brien et al . (), which examined the lives of 477 people with ID referred to UK specialist secure hospitals or forensic community services as a result of anti‐social or criminal behaviour, reported 40% of the sample lacked both employment and alternative routine daytime activity and fewer than one person in five was found to have a ‘significant personal relationship’. Likewise, Wheeler et al .…”