Offenders With Intellectual Disability: Characteristics, Prevalence, and Issues in Forensic Assessment

Salekin, Karen L.; Olley, J. Gregory; Hedge, Krystal A.

doi:10.1080/19315861003695769

Cited by 57 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bjerregaard et al (2010) reported that alcohol related mitigating factors had no impact on the outcomes of North Carolina capital murder trials, whereas drug related factors were associated with an increased risk of a death sentence. Given the high rate of comorbidity of mental health disorders among capital defendants (Salekin et al, 2010;Sevilla, 1999), the inconsistency in juror valuation of discrete types of psychological evidence may pose a particularly serious dilemma in valuating multiple pieces of psychological evidence from a given defendant. These inconsistences also raise somber policy-based concerns related to the ways in which psychological factors are operationalized in the policies and procedures that guide the adjudication process.…”

Section: Mental Illness Mitigationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental health mitigating evidence and judicial outcomes for federal capital defendants

Stites

Dahlsgaard

2015

International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Mental Illness Mitigationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental health mitigating evidence and judicial outcomes for federal capital defendants

Stites

Dahlsgaard

2015

International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Over the past 30 years, there have been important changes in services for people with ID, in the degree to which challenging behaviours of people with ID lead to criminal prosecution, and the prevalence of people with ID at different stages in the criminal justice system (for a recent review, see Salekin et al, 2010;Fazel, Xenitidis, & Powell, 2008). Importantly, the scientific literatures on (1) criminal offending of persons with ID in the general population; (2) challenging behaviours, particularly aggressive behaviour towards others, which are not necessarily criminalised, of persons with ID (usually from ID services) and (3) persons with ID in the criminal justice system are not fully integrated.…”

Section: Changes Over Timementioning

confidence: 99%

Commentary on Lindsay and Dernevik's risk and offenders with intellectual disabilities: Reappraising Hodgins' Swedish birth cohort study

Hodgins

Crocker

2013

Criminal Behav Ment Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thank you for inviting us to comment on the article by Lindsay and Dernevick (2013). First, it is essential to state that determining whether intellectual disability (ID) increases the risk of criminal offending as compared with the general population is relatively trivial. The important issue is to identify the characteristics of individuals with ID who are at risk of offending, and/or engage in aggressive behaviour, and to use such findings to inform effective programmes to prevent offending and recidivism. To reappraise our study of criminal offending by individuals with ID, it is essential to examine the work of Crocker and Hodgins (1997). This paper described the study in detail and aimed to identify characteristics that distinguished children/adolescents with ID who subsequently committed criminal offences from those with no record of offending to age 30. Our findings were correct but limited by time and placeThe cohort included all the 15,117 individuals born in Stockholm in 1953 and still living there in 1963. At this time, children identified as having ID were assigned to special classes. Some children with ID were in institutions, and as noted, a very small number of them were convicted of a crime in the follow-up period. There were three kinds of special classes for children: (1) ID; (2) remedial reading and observation; and (3) visual and hearing impairments (Janson, 1980). We had data from schools when the cohort members were in grades 6 and 9. Lindsay and Dernevick (2013) suggested that the classes we studied did not

show abstract

“…Subsequent research sought to gain insight on those defendants who are not likely to be restored to competence. Findings suggested that intellectual disabilities, 42,112,113 and more severe pathology (eg, schizophrenia spectrum disorder) [114][115][116] were related to poor restoration outcomes. Hubbard and Zapf 117 explored variables related to clinicians' opinions regarding restorability and found no particular set of variables that produced a high classification rate or that served as reliable predictors of restorability.…”

Section: Treatment Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Competence to stand trial and criminalization: an overview of the research

Beltrani

Zapf

2019

CNS Spectr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beginning in the 1960s, a steady decline in the number of inpatient psychiatric beds has occurred across the United States, primarily as a result of stricter civil commitment criteria and a societal movement toward deinstitutionalization. Concomitant with this decrease in psychiatric beds has been a steady increase in the number of mentally ill individuals who are arrested and processed through the criminal justice system as defendants. One consequence of this has been an explosion in the number of defendants referred for evaluations of their present mental state—adjudicative competence—and subsequently found incompetent and ordered to complete a period of competency restoration. This has resulted in forensic mental health systems that are overwhelmed by the demand for services and that are unable to meet the needs of these defendants in a timely manner. In many states, lawsuits have been brought by defendants who have had their liberties restricted as a result of lengthy confinements in jail awaiting forensic services. The stress on state-wide forensic systems has become so widespread that this has reached the level of a near-national crisis. Many states and national organizations are currently attempting to study these issues and develop creative strategies for relieving this overburdening of forensic mental health systems nationwide. The purpose of this article is to review the current state of the research on competence to stand trial and to highlight those issues that might be relevant to the issue of criminalization of individuals with mental illness in the United States.

show abstract

Offenders With Intellectual Disability: Characteristics, Prevalence, and Issues in Forensic Assessment

Cited by 57 publications

References 49 publications

Mental health mitigating evidence and judicial outcomes for federal capital defendants

Mental health mitigating evidence and judicial outcomes for federal capital defendants

Commentary on Lindsay and Dernevik's risk and offenders with intellectual disabilities: Reappraising Hodgins' Swedish birth cohort study

Competence to stand trial and criminalization: an overview of the research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About