Assessing Risk for Violent, General, and Sexual Offending in Adolescents

Viljoen, Jodi L.; Jonnson, Melissa R.; Shepherd, Stephane M.

doi:10.1002/9781119315933.ch11

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 138 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…What becomes critical to deliberate are the caveats and challenges when conducting a risk assessment, regardless of which tool is chosen. First, one must be cognizant that risk evaluations, in general, have temporal limits to their validity, and for youths, this 'shelf-life' may be even further shortened (Viljoen et al, 2020). Circumstances for youths are dynamic, and their development is ongoing, so reassessment of risk should expectedly be more frequent than risk assessments completed on adults who sexually offend.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In fact, treatment services provided to low-risk youths should be kept to a minimum, as intensive treat ment to low-risk youths is not only an inefficient use of resources, but it may even increase their chances of re-offending (see Lovins et al, 2009). There remain many cav eats to overcome in the general field of assessing risk (Helmus, 2018), and with regards to youths specifically, Viljoen et al (2020) highlight that we are still striving to achieve a culturally-informed, developmentally-informed, and gender-appropriate approach to assessing risk among youths. We have a number of tools at our disposal, but it is necessary for us to be aware of these resources and stay abreast of the challenges in their uses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…to youths (Viljoen et al, 2020). Despite the relatively limited empirical literature on risk assessment of youths who have been charged for sexual offending, there is a number of tools available, and there have been many published studies examining these tools (see Viljoen et al, 2020, for an overview of general, violence, and sexual risk assessment for youths). However, reviews of youth-applied tools specific to sexually abusive behaviors have been in short supply, including a summary of these tools, where practitioners may access these tools, and any relevant training in using these tools.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A compendium of risk and needs tools for assessing male youths at-risk to and/or who have engaged in sexually abusive behaviors

Jung

Thomas

2022

Sex. Offending

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a standardized, validated risk assessment tool is an integral part of risk management and should be employed to evaluate a youth who is at risk to and/or has engaged in sexually abusive behaviors. Risk and needs tools are needed to inform critical decisions about the allocation of services and the areas that should be targeted in treatment and supervision. Although practitioners have a number of published tools to their avail, it is often less practical to discover the type of tool, where to access the tool, information regarding its psychometric properties, and how to access relevant training. This paper offers a brief compendium of youth-applied risk tools specific to male youths who are at risk to and/or who have engaged in sexually abusive behaviors; specifically, a description of the tool and its psychometric properties, along with where practitioners may access these tools and any relevant training in using these tools, are summarized. In light of the challenges that exist when assessing risk among youths, caveats and considerations are also explored.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A compendium of risk and needs tools for assessing male youths at-risk to and/or who have engaged in sexually abusive behaviors

Jung

Thomas

2022

Sex. Offending

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The age-crime curve posits that adolescents and young adults are more likely than any other age group to engage in offending and delinquent behavior (Farrington et al, 2008;Viljoen et al, 2016). A key task for the juvenile justice system is to classify young offenders based on their level of risk of reoffending in order to make important decisions regarding the type and level of intervention required (Hoge, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the YLS/CMI on an Australian Juvenile Offending Population

Dellar

Roberts

Bullen

et al. 2022

Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a wealth of research that shows juvenile justice systems that utilize structured and validated assessment tools, such as the YLS/CMI, are far more effective at reducing rates of recidivism than those who do not. In line with this research, the Department of Justice (DoJ) in Western Australia adopted the YLS/CMI as the standard risk assessment tool for evaluating the criminogenic risk and needs of youth entering the justice system. While there is evidence supporting the utility of the YLS/CMI in predicting recidivism, there is little research demonstrating its effectiveness in Australian juvenile populations and no such research in a West Australian population. There is also a lack of research on the utility of the tool with young Indigenous offenders, which is particularly concerning given the significant overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the Australian criminal justice system. Our study was the first to examine the reliability and predictive validity of the YLS/CMI on a sample of West Australian juvenile offenders. In this paper, we present the results of two analyses. The first examines the properties of the YLS/CMI in a cohort of 4,653 juvenile offenders in Western Australia, including factor structure, internal consistency, and differences between male and female youth and between Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth. Consistent with our hypotheses, the tool demonstrated excellent internal consistency (α = .91) and cross-validation analyses identified significant differences between groups on total YLS scores and risk domains. The second analysis examines the predictive validity of the YLS/CMI in a subsample of 921 youth with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. The overall recidivism rate was 74.8% and there were differences in scores and recidivism rates for Indigenous compared to non-Indigenous youth, although the predictive accuracies in terms of AUC were similar ( c. = 0.65 and 0.66, respectively).

show abstract