Violence Risk Assessment
Violence Risk Assessment
The clinical, actuarial and structural professional judgments are useful approaches of risk assessment, but they apply different concepts to achieve their ultimate goals. Both the clinical and actuarial approaches of risk assessment are one of the traditional models of risks assessment. The actuarial model is quicker than the clinical approach of risk assessment. The actuarial assessment uses items with a high level of variability in contrast to the clinical model. Various studies and literature has indicated that the actuarial assessment is more reliable than the clinical assessment. According to Skeem and Monahan (2011), knowledge and information relied on in the clinical approach is full of bias and inaccuracies. These indicate the benefits of actuarial model over the clinical method of risk assessment. The structural professional judgment approach is quite difference from the actuarial and clinical approaches of risk assessment as it is centered on the individuals unlike the groups emphasized on the actuarial method.
Compared to other risk assessment methods, the approach requires in depth and reasonable training on risk assessment and the literature on risk assessment. This makes it more demanding than that the other models of risk assessment. Apart from all, all the different methods of assessment are useful in assessing the different forms of risks associated with evaluation of violence among offenders (Huss, 2014). If I were a practicing forensic psychologist, I would use a combination of actuarial and structural professional judgment approaches. I think this combination is the best strategy as it offers increased information and knowledge on offenders to be assessed. The strategy would allow the psychologist to make the final recommendations and judgment based on the evidence available.
Most importantly, I think that the violence risk assessment is highly reliable as it collects information and knowledge related to the subject persons. This guides in making more accurate and reliable decisions on the risks of the violent persons in the society. Many legal and clinical experts have a problem with using the actuarial risks assessment method during the sentencing for offenders due to the vulnerability of method to bias and errors.
References
Huss, M.T. (2014). Forensic psychology: Research, clinical practice, and applications, 2nd Ed. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Skeem, J. L., & Monahan, J. (2011). Current directions in violence risk assessment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(1), 38-42.
The post Violence Risk Assessment appeared first on Homeworkacetutors.
Comments
Post a Comment