Adult Deliberate Firesetting. Theresa A. Gannon
Чтение книги онлайн.
Читать онлайн книгу Adult Deliberate Firesetting - Theresa A. Gannon страница 8
Название: Adult Deliberate Firesetting
Автор: Theresa A. Gannon
Издательство: John Wiley & Sons Limited
Жанр: Социальная психология
isbn: 9781119658153
isbn:
Book Rationale
This chapter has provided some of the context surrounding the emergence, in the past decade and a half, of research on deliberate adult firesetting as a coherent field of enquiry. Given the relative nascence of this field, some may ask whether an entire book devoted to the assessment and treatment of adults who set fires is necessary.
At times, firesetting has been viewed as one behaviour amongst a broad repertoire of offending, whereby the individual is generally antisocial (i.e., the generalist hypothesis; Gannon et al., 2013). There is some research evidence to suggest that people who set fires are likely to also commit other types of offences (e.g., Soothill et al., 2004), and they are more likely to recidivate in ways other than firesetting (see Chapter 4). Based on these findings, it could be argued that firesetting does not warrant special attention. However, there is a growing body of evidence that support the specialist hypothesis—that some people who set fires do not commit other forms of offending—or that people with firesetting convictions may represent a distinct population within correctional settings (Gannon et al., 2013). In other words, it appears that many individuals with a history of adult firesetting have distinct psychological and psychopathological features (see Chapter 2) that require a more tailored approach to treatment. Such targeting of these likely criminogenic needs is fundamental to the effectiveness of forensic clinical practice (see Bonta & Andrews, 2017).
The fact that emerging literature suggests that people who set fires represent a population within the criminal justice and healthcare systems that experience specific needs demonstrates how our understanding of deliberate adult firesetting has changed in a short period of time. We argue that this book is timely because it allows us to synthesise the findings of a rapidly expanding field while highlighting where the gaps remain in our knowledge and where new ways of working are needed in terms of the data that public agencies and researchers gather; the manner in which researchers approach hypothesis testing around the aetiology, assessment, and treatment of people who set fires; and the ways in which practitioners work with this population.
Concluding Remarks
This book consolidates the research evidence into a practical guide to inform the assessment and treatment of adults who set fires. Evidence-based practice is the ultimate goal. However, admittedly, many elements of this book are evidence-informed (Bonta & Andrews, 2017) rather than evidence-based. As discussed in this chapter and further interrogated throughout this book, the research literature is yet to be saturated with clinical trials and/or quasi-experimental research designs evaluating varying methods to assess risk and reduce reoffending. Nonetheless, existing theories and research do provide sufficient steer for clinicians to make informed judgements.
Note
1 1 If firesetting rates were not reported per 100,000 in the sources we cite, we calculated this rate based on the reported firesetting statistic relative to the approximate population size in the relevant year. Doing so allowed us to report prevalence of firesetting in a standardised way across studies or sources.
2 Key Characteristics and Clinical Features of Individuals Who Set Deliberate Fires
Describing the characteristics of who sets fires will not be particularly informative unless we begin by noting two important considerations. First, there is no one personality or psychopathology that defines individuals who set fires. These individuals are heterogeneous in their characteristics, offending histories, and motives for setting fires. Second, consideration of the factors that differentiate people who engage in criminal firesetting (i.e., apprehended or non-apprehended) from people in the general population who have not engaged in criminal behaviour differs from consideration of the factors that differentiate people who have engaged in criminal firesetting from other justice-involved individuals who have not set fires. This distinction is important. If people who set fires are indistinguishable—psychologically speaking—from the general population, then practitioners have no treatment targets to address in prevention or treatment initiatives. If individuals apprehended for firesetting are indistinguishable from other justice-involved individuals, then treatments need not be tailored for firesetting. This chapter examines the key demographic, developmental, psychopathological, and psychological features of individuals who have set fires. A key aim of this chapter is to highlight (1) the key clinical features that appear to differentiate those who have set deliberate fires from the wider population and (2) the key clinical features that differentiate individuals apprehended for firesetting from other justice-involved individuals.
When considering the characteristics of any offending population, it is worth considering why we are interested in these characteristics. First, establishing what sets our focal population apart from the rest of the population may provide indirect evidence of the causal chains that have led to the offending behaviour. The observation of differences between groups provides a starting point for hypothesising about the causal relationships between background or psychological factors and offending behaviours like firesetting. Second, examining group differences in characteristics helps us to determine which factors are statistically related to increased risk of offending or re-offending and thus improves decisions about the prioritisation of individuals for treatment as well as public protection decisions about release and supervision. A third reason why we are interested in the characteristics of offending populations is to determine which factors may be targets for treatment.
A key consideration when examining and presenting information on the characteristics of adults who set fires is the quality of evidence available. The most useful evidence for the characteristics of this population would come from high-quality sources, ideally cohort studies, representative large sample studies, well-powered studies with matched comparison groups, or meta-analyses. Unfortunately, these types of sources are rare in the study of adult firesetting due to the relative recency of sustained research on the topic.
Characteristics of Adults Who Set Fires
Sociodemographic Findings
Men appear more likely to engage in deliberate firesetting than females. Examination of a nationally representative US sample including participants self-reporting lifetime firesetting (including juvenile firesetting) suggested that for every woman reporting deliberate firesetting, there were almost five men (the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions [NESARC] dataset; Blanco et al., 2010; Hoertel et al., 2011; Vaughn et al., 2010). A study of all individuals convicted of arson in Sweden over a 12-year period indicated that approximately four men were convicted of arson for every woman (Anwar et al., 2011). The gender difference was slightly larger in a study of all individuals convicted of arson in a 9-year period in a single Australian state, with over six men convicted for every woman (Ducat et al., 2017). Dickens and Sugarman (2012) suggested that women may be more likely to be diverted from the criminal justice system or referred to psychiatric services. Some psychiatric samples appear to evidence this latter point. For example, Enayati et al. (2008) reported three men for every woman in their study of all individuals convicted of arson and sent for psychiatric assessment СКАЧАТЬ