Discuss the Insanity Defense Reform Act (1980) with your classmates. Using the appropriate terminology, examine the background, participants, and historical significance of the act in relation to standardized offender risk assessments used in today’s forensic practice. In your discussion, provide the psychometrics of two offender risk tools that are preferred in your offender rehabilitation program.

QUESTION

In response to your peers, build upon their analysis of the offender risk tools. Is there something you notice in your peers’ analysis that they did not? Is there a different tool you would use? Any ethical considerations?

More Instructions:

Since we are discussing psychopathy this week, I wanted to share some examples of what this might like, should you ever come across it in your professional or personal lives. Psychopathy is a collection of many variables such as manipulation for personal gain, being charismatic and charming, being impulsive, lying, lying about lying, having a lengthy and diverse criminal history, lack of empathy, lack of regard for others, cheating on intimate partners, lack of responsibility, etc. Because there are so many different variables, these folks can look incredibly different. Not all are violent. Dr. Robert Hare, who began research on the term, wrote a book called Snakes in Suits, that discusses the high incidents of psychopaths that work in places like Wall Street, executive offices, work as CEOs, and in other capacities that tend to be highly respected, and where they do high levels of damage to society. There are also a lot of psychopaths in politics. Think about it: lying, manipulation, cheating, having affairs, promising things they know they cannot deliver seems like a consistent in the lives of so many politicians. The other large category of psychopaths are concentrated within our prison systems. These are probably what most people think about when they hear those words. One individual I worked with who had the highest degree of psychopathy possible on the psychopathy assessments who was a hired assassin. He used to kill people for money and had absolutely no remorse or discomfort with that. Another individual who fit the criteria was a gang kingpin and used to tell stories about torturing people for money, drugs, because they owed him something, for fun, or for no reason at all. One aspect I often talk about with psychopaths is the snap. It is quite common for these folks to be calm then instantly transform into violence, sometimes domestic violence, or other aggression- verbal or physical. I did an assessment on a psychopath once who killed a person because they made it to the Taxi before him and he really wanted a ride, so he killed the other passenger with a knife, threw his body out of the car, and told the driver calmly where he would like to be driven to and what kind of music he liked, as if nothing had happened. It is also quite common for society to not believe that they would ever do anything wrong due to their charismatic charming personality. These folks work hard to be liked and admired. They may have a glimmer of decency or appeal, but there is also a lot of manipulation underneath.

ANSWER

Insanity Defense Reform Act (1980) and Standardized Offender Risk Assessments in Forensic Practice

Introduction

The Insanity Defense Reform Act (IDRA) of 1980 is a significant legislation that aimed to reform the use of the insanity defense in criminal cases. This act had profound implications for the field of forensic practice, particularly in relation to the development and utilization of standardized offender risk assessments. In this discussion, we will examine the background, participants, and historical significance of the IDRA, focusing on its relevance to standardized offender risk assessments used in contemporary forensic practice. Additionally, we will explore the psychometrics of two preferred offender risk tools within an offender rehabilitation program and address any ethical considerations that arise.

Background and Participants

The Insanity Defense Reform Act was enacted in response to growing public concern over the use and perceived abuse of the insanity defense. The act introduced a standardized federal definition of insanity, narrowing the scope under which it could be successfully invoked. It shifted the burden of proof to the defendant, requiring them to prove “by clear and convincing evidence” that they suffered from a mental disease or defect, rendering them unable to appreciate the nature and quality or wrongfulness of their actions.

Historical Significance and Relation to Standardized Offender Risk Assessments

The IDRA played a crucial role in shaping the landscape of forensic practice, including the use of standardized offender risk assessments (Simmons et al., 2023). By establishing stricter criteria for the insanity defense, the act aimed to ensure that individuals who posed a significant risk to society were not exempted from criminal responsibility solely based on mental illness.

The act’s emphasis on clear and convincing evidence necessitated the development and utilization of standardized offender risk assessments to assess the potential danger posed by individuals with mental disorders. These assessments provide structured and objective evaluations of an offender’s risk factors, aiding in the determination of appropriate sentencing, treatment, and risk management strategies.

Psychometrics of Preferred Offender Risk Tools:

In our offender rehabilitation program, we prioritize the use of two widely recognized and psychometrically sound offender risk tools: the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) and the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG).

Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R)

The PCL-R is a widely used and extensively researched tool for assessing psychopathy in individuals. It consists of 20 items that assess interpersonal, affective, and behavioral characteristics associated with psychopathy (Eisenbarth et al., 2018). The PCL-R demonstrates high reliability and validity, providing a comprehensive evaluation of psychopathic traits.

Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG)

The VRAG is a structured risk assessment tool specifically designed to assess an individual’s risk of future violent behavior. It incorporates various risk factors, such as historical, clinical, and static variables, to generate a comprehensive risk assessment. The VRAG has demonstrated good predictive accuracy and reliability, aiding in informed decision-making regarding risk management strategies.

Response to Peers and Ethical Considerations

In reviewing my peers’ analyses, one notable aspect they did not address extensively is the consideration of ethical implications in utilizing offender risk tools. It is crucial to recognize the ethical concerns associated with risk assessments, such as potential biases, stigmatization, and the impact on an individual’s rights and privacy.

While the PCL-R and VRAG are valuable tools, I would also suggest considering the use of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI). The LS/CMI is a widely employed risk assessment tool that assesses dynamic risk factors, criminogenic needs, and treatment targets. It focuses on guiding case management decisions and tailoring interventions to address individual offender needs effectively.

Regarding ethical considerations, it is vital to ensure the proper administration, interpretation, and communication of risk assessment results (Bhandari, 2023). Professionals must be adequately trained and mindful of potential biases, use assessments as part of a comprehensive evaluation, and respect the rights and dignity of individuals throughout the process.

Conclusion

The Insanity Defense Reform Act (1980) had a significant impact on the field of forensic practice, particularly in relation to standardized offender risk assessments. By establishing stricter criteria for the insanity defense, the act emphasized the need for objective evaluations of offender risk. The utilization of psychometrically sound tools like the PCL-R, VRAG, and LS/CMI aids in assessing and managing the risks posed by individuals with mental disorders, ensuring the safety of society while upholding ethical standards.

References

Bhandari, P. (2023). Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/research-ethics/ 

Eisenbarth, H., Krammer, S., Edwards, B. G., Kiehl, K. A., & Neumann, C. S. (2018). Structural analysis of the PCL-R and relationship to BIG FIVE personality traits and parenting characteristics in an Hispanic female offender sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 129, 59–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.03.015

Simmons, M., Ogloff, J. R. P., & Daffern, M. (2023). Investigating the dynamic nature of multiple risk assessment instruments in a forensic mental health hospital. Psychological Assessment, 35(1), 42–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001174