Risks assessments

169 views 9:39 am 0 Comments June 2, 2023

What is risk assessment and should it be used in the CJS?

Student Name:
Student ID:

IntroductionSpecial Needs Assistance

The risks assessments are for the criminal justice system which tends to provide the predications with the offender’s likelihood with the risks of themselves or others. The evaluation of research based on the evidence with suggesting on the risks assessment that is important for the criminal justice systems as they help in assisting to determine on the offender societal risks levels. The limitations for the risks assessments includes the implications with effectiveness. The essay will focus on the risks assessment methods which includes the approach of clinical and the actuarial approach with the aim to define on the risk’s assessment, and then evaluating the effectiveness. It is through considering the accuracy with the exploring of the ideas for the criminal justice systems. The additional knowledge and understanding of risks assessments tend to entail the effectiveness and accuracy with assisting to determine about what needs to be used for the criminal justice system. It is the tool for gauging the level of risks for the offenders to manage and measure the behavior.

Discussion

The risks assessment in the criminal justice system is the process which is by the psychologists to identify the level of risks and then understand about re-offending after the release or in the future. Over the years, there have been professional tool of assessment which is based on the complex making it hard to predict with the risks assessments that are the tool for attempt to make proper predictions for the behavior of offender (Eckhouse et al., 2019). The assessment aims to predict on the human behavior and then determine about the danger with society involved in considering the factors related to the influence an offender and behavior. The assessment of risks in the criminal justice is considered to be utilized through the different sectors which is about the sentencing, release of decisions, monitoring and the rehabilitation.

In UK, the rate of the risks assessment is based on the criminal sentencing and the US which is a part of the system. In US, there is a survey about the use of assessment with the parole about handling the cases that plays a major role in the decisions. Hence, the broader types of the risk’s assessments are used for the prediction and the offender behavior which is the actuarial and the clinical methods. There are different methods to assess the offender risks and the ways where the evaluation is for the approaches of actuarial and the clinical methods. The use of the empirical based prediction methods is the process of properly making use of the statistical algorithm to determine on the different categories. It is for the offender risks level which is set through demonstrating connection for the variables of predictors in re-offending for the different offenders (Barabas et al., 2018). It is about involved in the predictor variables that include the age, criminal history and personality. The reoffending approach is about the evaluation with the reconviction for the offence and the 5-year period. The approach mainly depends on the assumptions where there are less commitments or the similar crimes. The clinical approach tends to encompass the differed methods with assessing offender behavior (Prins, 2019).

The clinical risks assessment approach is on the knowledge and expert expertise which is to make the prediction and then handle the unstructured approach as it does not tend to consider about the contribution of factors for the offenders for better evaluation. The approach is also focusing on the individual with the consideration about the behaviors. There have been approaches with handling the individual and considering about the evaluation of the offender behavior. The personality and the mental illness information is about the clinical approach to consider on the individual with high valuable approaches for future behavior. Personality and illness information. The clinical approach is based on the psychiatrics and the psychologistic for observing the offender and gathering or interpreting the data pertaining to the offender (Backes et al., 2020). The models are then used for the clinical approach where the expert’s favor to assess the offender. The different models tend to make use of the clinical assessment with linear model and the hypothetic and deductive model with risks assessment approach. The linear model is considered to be the simple model which is used by the psychologists and psychiatrists for the assessing of behavior for the offenders. Hence, the model is based on the flow diagram with the representation of the different decisions and choices. The experts tend to guide and assist the gaging about individual demonstrations of the dangerous behavior. The response is from the offender with experts trying to carry the actions which is in the flow diagram. The deductive model requires the clinicals for creating the proper hypothesis about the offender potential future behavior with the examination of previous behavior (Lee et al., 2020).

The risks assessment is essential component because without them jails and prisons is not performing the duties which is not efficient. Hence, the risks are related to the danger with the issue of perception and the people tend to be tolerating the risks without any danger. There is a need to focus on the blind spots with study about handling the use of risks assessment with the risk’s assessment, strengths and weakness. There are rehabilitation which involves the working on the team and preparing the individuals for the real-world job. Hence, the prior records have the major impact on the decisions with the advantage on the attempt to predict the recidivism to the employing measures like LSI-R. It includes the dynamic variables and the intervention which is for measuring the fixed characteristics with risks estimates that are related to the statistic dynamic with major emphasis than the risks assessment (Kehl et al., 2017). The extensive research includes the risks assessment tool with the accuracy of the professional judgements with future criminal behavior, violence and the sexual offence. It involves the risks assessment tools with the statistical age of the offender and the criminal history. The dependency is on the tool developer with research factors that involves the reduction of the likelihood with the evaluator estimate for the offender that involves the confirmation biasing with the scenario or outcome. Hence, the evidence is based on the structure risks assessment tools with the professional judgments with assessing the risks of individual for the re-offending with contributing to the unfair treatment. It involves the tools curing the influence on bias with handling the compromise the accuracy and the objectivity for the risk’s evaluations. The moral judgments are based on the influence through the internal approach with the internal source of biasing with the risks factors that involves the sexual offenders might affect the judgements. The contextual factors involves the potential approach with the manuals that are for administering the ARAI to handle the evaluator for the potential blame (Cumming et al., 2020). Hence, the professional override decisions are for creating the opportunities with the equal standards for the demographic groups. The evaluators tend to focus on the requiring the evaluators with documenting the justification with improved accountability for the judgement of risks. The accurate predictions are based on the statistical models of the risks factors with ideal conditions that tend to yield the accurate predictions. Hence, the adjustments are for handling the risks scores with the prediction related to the unnecessary costs in terms of the money and the years of the life lost. The suggestions are for the sources and operations with evaluator biasing and testing on the efficiency which involves the improvement of accuracy over the unstructured judgement of the clinical forms (Ward et al., 2017).

Considering the approach, the use of age, criminal history and the other variables might capabilities on the inequalities. The marginalized individuals tend to work on examining on the machine learning with perception of systemic bias that reflects on the criminal justice records. The measures are for the documentation with racial and the ethnic monitories that are likely to be for the behaviors who are not arrested for the behaviors. Hence, the argument is about the criminal history with operational factors with innocence. The consideration is about the risks assessment tools with decision making with the results for the risks assessment tools, with the judge decisions with no more transparent, accurate or consistent than the results of risks assessment tools. Hence, the abolishing of the risk’s assessment comes from the role of risks assessment with the development to inform and not replace the judicial discretion (Coulton et al., 2017). There are suggestions about the risk’s assessment tools with the pretrial decision making, sentencing, parole and otherwise. Hence, the approach is based on the risk’s assessment tools with less of the impact and then there are risks related to the scoring methods which are available on the websites. The situational crime preventions brings the victim completely back from the center of the crime management with the criminal justice techniques. Hence, the rational choice theory is to explain the behavior for the offenders with the leading role that involves the awareness of being the vulnerabilities by the actions (Beresford et al., 2020).

The possibility of subjectivism is based on how the experts are working against the offender. Here, the limitations of opportunities tend to focus on the empathizing and supportive nature with the effectiveness on the actual methods. It is about the making of statistical reliability and the valuable methods to evaluate and then handle the level of the risks for the offenders (Papalia et al., 2019). The actuarial methods are used based on the cases and criminal frequency with statistics that inherent to be easy with predicting about the crime which tend to be occurring at the different positions. Hence, if the crime is seen to be uncommon with the possibility of predictability, then there are common events and the occurrences of the crime. It tends to involve the support for the efficiency that involves the standards to work on statistical data and facts which are defined for the experience opinion. The prediction is based on risks levels with the collaboration to the statistical and the dynamic factors (De Matteo et al., 2019).

The structured professional judgement tends to bring the approaches and then improve the efficiency for the risk’s assessment. The combination of the methods are for the structural professional judgement in the risks assessment with improving accuracy and the effectiveness to determine the offender’s risks levels. The method focuses on the science with guidelines to handle the clinical approach with the decision on the level of risk with reoffending or then returning to the community (Chester, 2018). The approach tends to differ to the actuarial method with the final judgement that involves the actuarial methods with the professional forms. Hence, the risks factors involves the consideration about combing two practices with creating structed professional judgment which is proven in the series of study and the methods have been dramatically reliable with the final judgements.

Conclusion

The use of the risk’s assessment is for the criminal justice with the decisions that are related to the offender. The conclusion is from the risks assessment with offender requiring the treatment or the supervision. Hence, the clinical judgement and the actuarial approach holds the important roles to play the advantages with the pros and the cons. Hence, the awareness is for the negative components with risks assessment tools with efficiency and accuracy. Hence, the traditional risks method includes the combination of methods with structured clinical judgement and results have been proven with accuracy than the clinical and the actuarial approach (Gest, 2018). The combined approach is for the effective and stronger prediction with the continuous improvement with the risk assessment approaches tool that is for the further aids to predict the offenders about the future risk’s behavior. The human behaviors are difficult to predict, with anti-social behaviors with the risks assessment tool in the criminal justice system that is considered to be valuable.

References

Backes, B. L., Fedina, L., & Holmes, J. L. (2020). The criminal justice system response to intimate partner stalking: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of family violence, 1-14.

Barabas, C., Virza, M., Dinakar, K., Ito, J., & Zittrain, J. (2018, January). Interventions over predictions: Reframing the ethical debate for actuarial risk assessment. In Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency (pp. 62-76). PMLR.

Beresford, S., Earle, J., Loucks, N., & Pinkman, A. (2020). ‘What About Me?’The Impact on Children when Mothers Are Involved in the Criminal Justice System. Mothering from the Inside.

Chester, V. (2018). People with intellectual and developmental disorders in the United Kingdom criminal justice system. East Asian Archives of Psychiatry, 28(4), 150-158.

Coulton, S., Stockdale, K., Marchand, C., Hendrie, N., Billings, J., Boniface, S., … & Wilson, E. (2017). Pragmatic randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of a multi-component intervention to reduce substance use and risk-taking behaviour in adolescents involved in the criminal justice system: A trial protocol (RISKIT-CJS). BMC public health, 17(1), 1-10.

Cumming, C., Kinner, S. A., McKetin, R., Li, I., & Preen, D. (2020). Methamphetamine use, health and criminal justice system outcomes: A systematic review. Drug and alcohol review, 39(5), 505-518.

DeMatteo, D., Heilbrun, K., Thornewill, A. and Arnold, S., (2019). Problem-solving courts and the criminal justice system. Oxford University Press.

Eckhouse, L., Lum, K., Conti-Cook, C., & Ciccolini, J. (2019). Layers of bias: A unified approach for understanding problems with risk assessment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(2), 185-209.

Gest, T. (2018). The courts in a fragmented criminal justice system. Criminology & Public Policy, 17(2), 309-320.

Kehl, D. L., & Kessler, S. A. (2017). Algorithms in the criminal justice system: Assessing the use of risk assessments in sentencing.

Lee, S. C., Hanson, R. K., & Blais, J. (2020). Predictive accuracy of the Static-99R and Static-2002R risk tools for identifying Indigenous and White individuals at high risk for sexual recidivism in Canada. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 61(1), 42.

Papalia, N., Shepherd, S. M., Spivak, B., Luebbers, S., Shea, D. E., & Fullam, R. (2019). Disparities in criminal justice system responses to first-time juvenile offenders according to indigenous status. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(8), 1067-1087.

Prins, S. J. (2019). Criminogenic or criminalized? Testing an assumption for expanding criminogenic risk assessment. Law and human behavior, 43(5), 477.

Ward-Lasher, A., Messing, J. T., & Hart, B. (2017). Policing intimate partner violence: Attitudes toward risk assessment and collaboration with social workers. Social work, 62(3), 211-218.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,