MENTAL HEALTH AND CRIMINALITY AMONG PSYCHIATRIC OFFENDERS IN SOUTHEASTERN ONTARIO

OBJECTIVES: (1) Describe the population of mentally ill offenders over whom Ontario Review Board (ORB) held jurisdiction. (2) Assess the influences of psychopathology and criminal factors on criminal career. METHOD: This study was a retrospective case series design that reviewed all offenders who were court ordered for psychiatric evaluation at Mental Health Services Site of Providence Care in Kingston, Ontario from 1993 to 2007 (N=347). Eighty five subjects were found not criminally responsible on the account of mental disorder and were included in statistical analysis (n=85). Bivariate associations between five key variables and two outcome variables, seriousness of crime and recidivism, were examined. Logistic regressions were conducted to test the role of the predictor variables on the outcome variables. RESULTS: Age and change in principal psychiatric diagnosis over time were shown to be associated with seriousness of crime. Timing of psychiatric onset, early signs of deviance and change in diagnosis were shown to be associated with recidivism. On the whole, study population did not markedly vary in their distribution of variables by the outcome variables. Regression model included timing of psychiatric onset; psychiatric history; existence of criminal associate; child abuse history; and early signs of deviance. Recidivism was shown to be predicted by early signs of deviance (OR=8.154, p<0.05). Existence of criminal associates was shown to have substantial values of odds ratio at marginal significance (OR=7.577, p=0.13). CONCLUSION: Seriousness of crime is a complex factor that could not be sufficiently predicted by any one or combinations of study variables. Recidivism is better predicted by criminality factors than psychopathology. In the future, an exploratory analysis that more broadly examines the psychopathology and criminal factors in Canadian forensic population is needed. Findings from this study have important clinical and legal implications.

VRAG-R Documentation

The VRAG-R is designed to assess the likelihood of violent or sexual reoffending among male offenders. The data set comprises demographic, criminal history, psychological assessment, and psychiatric information about the offenders gathered from institutional files together with post-release recidivism information. The VRAG-R is a twelve-item actuarial instrument and the scores on these items form part of the data set. Because one of the goals of the VRAG-R development project was to compare the VRAG-R to the VRAG, subjects' VRAG scores are included in this data set. Access to the VRAG-R dataset is restricted. Contact Data Services, Queen's University Library (academic.services@queensu.ca) for access.

Coding Manuals

The VRAG-R is designed to assess the likelihood of violent or sexual reoffending among male offenders. The data set comprises demographic, criminal history, psychological assessment, and psychiatric information about the offenders gathered from institutional files together with post-release recidivism information. The VRAG-R is a twelve-item actuarial instrument and the scores on these items form part of the data set. Because one of the goals of the VRAG-R development project was to compare the VRAG-R to the VRAG, subjects' VRAG scores are included in this data set. Access to the VRAG-R dataset is restricted. Contact Data Services, Queen's University Library (academic.services@queensu.ca) for access.

A Restorative Theory of Criminal Justice

In this project, I defend a restorative theory of criminal justice. I argue that the response to criminal wrongdoing in a just society should take the form of an attempt to heal the damage done to the community resulting from crime. I argue that the moral responsibilities of wrongdoers as wrongdoers ought to provide the framework for how a just society should respond to crime. Following the work of R.A. Duff, I argue that wrongdoers incur second-order duties of moral recognition. Wrongdoers owe it to others to recognize their wrongdoing for what it is, i.e. wrongdoing, and to shoulder certain burdens in order to express their repentant recognition to others via a meaningful apology. In short, wrongdoers owe it to their victims and others in the community to make amends. What I will deny, however, is the now familiar claim in the restorative justice literature that restoring the normative relationships in the community damaged by criminal forms of wrongdoing requires retributive punishment. In my view, how we choose to express the judgement that wrongdoers are blameworthy should flow from an all things considered judgment that is neither reducible to the judgement that the wrongdoer is culpably responsible for wronging others, nor the judgement that the wrongdoer in some basic sense “deserves to suffer” (or “deserves punishment,” etc.).