Forensic assessment of juveniles.

Abstract

Psychological evaluations regarding adolescents under the jurisdiction of the juvenile system provide important information to the courts and attorneys about relevant issues such as reoffense risk, rehabilitation needs and amenability, and sophistication-maturity. In this chapter, we summarize important developments in the forensic assessment of juveniles, summarize relevant developments in law and science, provide an overview of the process with applicable foundational principles of forensic assessment, and describe the implications for research, policy, and practice.

Psychological pre‐sentence evaluations for sentencing young offenders in Australia

“…This knowledge allows the evaluator to know what data to collect (e.g., what areas to investigate in interviews, which tests and other assessment tools to use, what files and other records to examine) and conduct a more focussed evaluation (DeMatteo et al, 2013). Heilbrun and Locklair (2016) suggest that the two legal questions for juvenile FMHAs are: (a) Is diversion from the justice system appropriate? (b) If not, what is the appropriate sentence?…”

“…Grisso 2013and Heilbrun and Locklair (2016) recommend that evaluators conducting juvenile evaluations address specific areas. Grisso (2013) recommends that evaluations with a rehabilitation or treatment focus answer four questions: "what are the youth's important characteristics, what needs to change to reduce the likelihood of recidivism, what types of intervention could be used to achieve the required rehabilitation, and what is the likelihood that the relevant intervention would result in change?"…”

“…Heilbrun and Locklair (2016) recommend the same key areas be covered. They argue that when the court considers the appropriate sentence, three broad factors are critical: the individual characteristics of the young offender being sentenced, in particular the offender's maturity; the young person's treatment needs and amenability to treatment; and what risk the young person poses to the safety of the community (Heilbrun & Locklair, 2016). Each is addressed in turn below.…”

“…Amenability to treatment is an important question for pre-sentence evaluations (Grisso, 2013;Heilbrun & Locklair, 2016;Hoge, 2012;Melton et al, 2017). Sentencing officers want to know if the young offender is interested in treatment, is motivated to change, what type of treatment would best suit his or her individual characteristics and family situation (e.g., available supports), what treatment is available, and the duration of treatment required to effect the necessary change (Grisso, 2013).…”

“…Assessment of treatment amenability should include an evaluation of personality functioning, cognitive functioning, and identification of education or vocation needs (Melton et al, 2017). Addressing the intellectual, academic, and vocational skills of the young person will help to identify how to maximise the likely benefits of the sentence (Heilbrun & Locklair, 2016;Hoge & Andrews, 2010). How the young person has responded to previous treatment efforts should also be considered (Grisso, 2013;Kinscherff, 2016;Melton et al, 2017).…”