Patterns of violence and self-harm in women prisoners: characteristics, co-incidence and clinical significance

Kottler, Chris; Smith, Jared G.; Bartlett, Annie

doi:10.1080/14789949.2018.1425475

Cited by 18 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…firesetting, disorder or criminal damage 2,6,7 compared with all other groups, which likely reflect limitations in self-regulation. 4,12 Furthermore, this versality has been demonstrated in the range of methods used to selfharm 6,7,13 and may account for those who do utilise method substitution. 16 We also know that antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) appears over-represented amongst dual harm populations.…”

Section: Improving Assessment For Dual Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3,4 Identifying prevalence has been easier within institutional settings with early studies on US psychiatric inpatients reporting a prevalence of nearly one-quarter (23%); with over half (53%) of those who self-harm also exhibiting violent behaviour 5 Recent UK studies suggest a custodial population prevalence of between 11 and 16% in men 2,6 and somewhat lower in women. 7 Markedly, both studies identified that between 40 and 60% of those with a history of in-prison self-harm also had a history of institutional violence, similar to psychiatric samples. The presence of dual harm is especially raised within institutional and custodial populations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

“…early self-harm doubles the risk of a later violent offence. 12 ) When considering potentially fatal outcomes, we now know that dual harm uses more lethal self-harm methods 4,6,7,13 with over 6% of suicides having a violent conviction. 14 The development of integrated and focussed intervention could significantly improve overall safety and stability far beyond the boundaries of a singular harm.…”

Section: The Relevance Of Dual Harm On Improving Safety and Securitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dual harm individuals engage in very high levels (3–6 times) of disruptive and maladaptive behaviours (e.g. firesetting, disorder or criminal damage 2,6,7 compared with all other groups, which likely reflect limitations in self-regulation. 4,12 Furthermore, this versality has been demonstrated in the range of methods used to self-harm 6,7,13 and may account for those who do utilise method substitution.…”

Section: Improving Assessment For Dual Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4,17 Furthermore, the presence of early substance dependence 4,18 indicates a potential area for early intervention. However, the mixed relationship between current substance use and recent dual harm within prison populations 2,6,7 suggests this may be best framed as a stable dynamic factor than an explanatory one, a finding in keeping with homicide-suicide. 15 Emerging evidence amongst adolescents suggests those who dual harm as having greater experience of violence in early childhood, early contact with the criminal justice system and a higher rate of psychotic symptoms although no difference in their contact with mental health services.…”

Section: Improving Assessment For Dual Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Dual harm: the importance of recognising the duality of self-harm and violence in forensic populations

Slade

2019

Med Sci Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Improving Assessment For Dual Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: The Relevance Of Dual Harm On Improving Safety and Securitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Improving Assessment For Dual Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Improving Assessment For Dual Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Dual harm: the importance of recognising the duality of self-harm and violence in forensic populations

Slade

2019

Med Sci Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk factors for self-harm in prison: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Favril

Hawton

et al. 2020

The Lancet Psychiatry

142

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Self-harm is a leading cause of morbidity in prisoners. Although a wide range of risk factors for self-harm in prisoners has been identified, the strength and consistency of effect sizes is uncertain. We aimed to synthesise evidence and assess the risk factors associated with self-harm inside prison.Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycINFO) for observational studies on risk factors for self-harm in prisoners published from database inception to Oct 31, 2019, supplemented through correspondence with authors of studies. We included primary studies involving adults sampled from general prison populations who self-harmed in prison and a comparison group without self-harm in prison. We excluded studies with qualitative or ecological designs, those that reported on lifetime measures of self-harm or on selected samples of prisoners, and those with a comparison group that was not appropriate or not based on general prison populations. Data were extracted from the articles and requested from study authors. Our primary outcome was the risk of self-harm for risk factors in prisoners. We pooled effect sizes as odds ratios (OR) using random effects models for each risk factor examined in at least three distinct samples. We assessed study quality on the basis of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and examined between-study heterogeneity. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018087915. FindingsWe identified 35 independent studies from 20 countries comprising a total of 663 735 prisoners, of whom 24 978 (3•8%) had self-harmed in prison. Across the 40 risk factors examined, the strongest associations with self-harm in prison were found for suicide-related antecedents, including current or recent suicidal ideation (OR 13•8, 95% CI 8•6-22•1; I²=49%), lifetime history of suicidal ideation (8•9, 6•1-13•0; I²=56%), and previous self-harm (6•6, 5•3-8•3; I²=55%). Any current psychiatric diagnosis was also strongly associated with self-harm (8•1, 7•0-9•4; I²=0%), particularly major depression (9•3, 2•9-29•5; I²=91%) and borderline personality disorder (9•2, 3•7-22•5; I²=81%). Prison-specific environmental risk factors for self-harm included solitary confinement (5•6, 2•7-11•6; I²=98%), disciplinary infractions (3•5, 1•2-9•7; I²=99%), and experiencing sexual or physical victimisation while in prison (3•2, 2•1-4•8; I²=44%). Sociodemographic (OR range 1•5-2•5) and criminological (1•8-2•3) factors were only modestly associated with selfharm in prison. We did not find clear evidence of publication bias.Interpretation The wide range of risk factors across clinical and custody-related domains underscores the need for a comprehensive, prison-wide approach towards preventing self-harm in prison. This approach should incorporate both population and targeted strategies, with multiagency collaboration between the services for mental health, social care, and criminal justice having a key role.Funding Wellcome Trust.

show abstract

Sentinel events in prison: surveillance of dual-harming incarcerated populations

Smith,

Slade,

Ferdik

et al. 2023

Journal of Offender Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patterns of violence and self-harm in women prisoners: characteristics, co-incidence and clinical significance

Cited by 18 publications

References 25 publications

Dual harm: the importance of recognising the duality of self-harm and violence in forensic populations

Dual harm: the importance of recognising the duality of self-harm and violence in forensic populations

Risk factors for self-harm in prison: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Sentinel events in prison: surveillance of dual-harming incarcerated populations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About