Affiliation:
1. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Monash University, c/- Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health, Locked Bag 10, Fairfield, Vic. 3078, Australia
Abstract
Despite increasing concerns regarding the prevalence of violent behaviour in mainstream mental health settings, the impressive body of forensic research on violence risk assessment has thus far had only limited impact on front-line general mental health practice. The common objection raised by clinicians that risk assessment tools lack utility for clinical practice may contribute to this. The present paper argues that this objection, although understandable, is misplaced. Usage of appropriate, validated risk assessment tools can augment standard clinical approaches in a number of ways. Some of their advantages derive simply from having a well-structured approach, others from consideration of specific kinds of risk factors: ‘static’ and ‘dynamic’. The inappropriate use of tools without a firm evidence base, however, is unlikely to enhance clinical practice significantly.
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health,General Medicine
Cited by
27 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Substance use disorders and violent behaviour in patients with severe mental disorders: A prospective, multicentre study;Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry;2020-10-13
2. Reference intervals—haematology;Oxford Handbook of Clinical Specialties;2020-09
3. Reference intervals—biochemistry;Oxford Handbook of Clinical Specialties;2020-09
4. Updates and Amendments;Oxford Handbook of Clinical Specialties;2020-09