The Assessment of Young Offenders within the Juvenile Justice Services - English

I

The Assessment of Young Offenders within the

Juvenile Justice Services

Italian Ne twork for Young Offenders’ Assessment and

Treatment INYOAT

With financial support from the Prevention of and Fight Against Crime Programme. European

Commission – Directorate-General Justice, Freedom And Security GU L 58, 24.2.2007

Ministero della Giustizia Dipartimento Giustizia Minorile Centro per la Giustizia Minorile

per la Lombardia - Milano

Istituto Centrale di Formazione del Personale

1 dicembre 2010 The assessment of young offenders in juvenile justice services

II

September 2010 – Milan, ITALY

III

Preface

This report documents the results of a project carried out by the Minotauro,

in cooperation with “Istituto Centrale di Formazione” ICF (the national staff

training office of the Juvenile Justice Department) and Lombardy Juvenile

Justice Centre.

The primary objective of the project was to establish an exchange between

psychologists, social workers and educators working within the Italian

juvenile justice services, paving the way for an exchange at European level

concerning the assessment of young offenders.

The project was focused in particular on the psychologists working within a

juvenile justice services, with the aim of assessing the objectives and

methods of their work.

The project examined the following questions:

• How does psycho-social assessment guide the court’s decisions?

• What are the objectives of the psycho-social assessment (e.g.

screening, diagnosis, liability to prosecution, social dangerousness,

re-offending risk)?

IV

In order to answer such questions, the following activities were carried

out:

• A review of the literature on the psycho-social assessment carried

out in other European justice settings;

• Interviews with psychologists working in the Italian juvenile justice

services;

• National meetings between the managers of the Juvenile Justice

Services or other representatives of the services involved;

• Analysis of the reports provided by the juvenile justice services to

the court. The reports contain information about the young

person’s circumstances and aim to help the court to deliver a

suitable criminal response;

• The promote an exchange of practices and methods during

meetings between the psychologists working within the Italian

juvenile justice services;

• An international conference on assessment attended by

managers of the Juvenile Justice Services and representatives of

the services involved;

• The establishment of a mailing list for psychologists working

within the Juvenile Justice Systems, through with they can

exchanging information.

V

The results of this project are presented in this report. A book detailing

the assessment of young offenders will be published in Italy and is

currently in press.

The report is addressed to professionals working in the field and judges

delive

VI

Content

Document Development Gruop VII

1. Introduction 1 2. The Juvenile Justice System in Italy 11 3. Recent trends in criminal policies in Europe 19 4. The assessment carried out within the Juvenile Justice Services in Italy 25 5. The psychological work within the Juvenile Justice services 33

6. The assessment of antisocial behaviour within a developmental frame 65 7. Conclusions and perspectives 139 Bibliography 145

VII

Document development group

Alfio Maggiolini

Alessandra Ciceri

Cristina Colli

Mauro Di Lorenzo

Giovanna Kluzer

Carlo Trionfi

Cristina Saottini

Veronica Scuffi

Virginia Suigo

Minotauro is a social cooperative of psychologists, researchers and trainers. Minotauro was

founded in 1984. The president is Gustavo Pietropolli Charmet; its members are

psychologists, psychotherapists, researchers and trainers, sharing their research and

intervention experiences in institutional contexts and in clinical activity, in a common

framework highlighting the importance of affective symbolisation processes, and the

developmental dimension of psychological uneasiness. Theoretical approaches and

experienced interventions are listed and presented in different publications

(www.minotauro.it).

VIII

Istituto Centrale di Formazione

Cira Stefanelli

Maria Grazia Castorina

Bruno Costa

Elvira Narducci,

Giuseppe Mandalari

Antonella Zanfei

The Juvenile Justice Centre of Lombardy

Flavia Croce

The “Istituto Centrale di Formazione (ICF) (the national staff training office of the Juvenile

Justice Department) plans, organizes, carries out and evaluates training activities involving the

staff under the Ministry of Juvenile Justice

Juvenile justice centres are administrative decentralized agencies whose jurisdiction usually

covers the territory of several regions and appellate courts districts. Their functions are: technical

and financial planning, follow-up and supervision of juvenile justice services such as the offices of

youth social service, juvenile classification homes, juvenile detention detention centres and

residential communities.

1. Introduction

1

There has been a widespread pessimism about the treatment of young

offenders. The criminal response was considered to be largely ineffective.

Recently, the results of meta-analytic studies have shown that it is possible

to reduce re-offending. It has also been found that many antisocial

disorders can be treated and, contrary to all expectations, sufficiently

intensive and long treatment may also change psychopathic traits of

personality (McGuire, 1995; Salekin, 2010; Andrews, Bonta, 1998).

Early intervention with young offenders may prevent the development of a

criminal career. In order to deliver a programme effective in reducing the

risk of re- offending it is essential to assess the young person, his

environment and his deviant behaviour.

A psychological assessment of young people involved in criminal

proceedings may:

- address a psychological issue and highlight a possible psychopathology,

from a treatment-oriented perspective;

- include the family and the environment, in order to assess the risk and

protective factors

- focus on the risk of re-offending;

Italian Netw

ork for Young Offenders A

ssessment and

Treatment


2

Prevention and Fight Against Crime 2007

With financial support from the Prevention of and Fight Against Crime Programme

European Commission – Directorate-General Justice, Freedom And Security

- respond to specific questions delivered by the court, such as issues

concerning maturity/immaturity and social dangerousness

An assessments many focus on particular aspects depending on the

offence, the characteristics of the youth, the criminal context, the stage of

the trial and, the theoretical framework and the methods employed by the

professionals carrying out the assessment.

The most recent trends show that age and gender (male adolescence) are

risk factors for rule-breaking behaviours. From a developmental viewpoint,

they may represent a physiologic rule-breaking attitude. They may also

underpin behavioural disorders, antisocial personality disorders or other

psycho-pathologies. However, in some cases, they may also reveal a failure

of the family, the environment and/or the school to understand the youths'

developmental needs.

One developmental psychopathology approach (Cicchetti, Cohen, 1995;

Achenbach, 2001; Rutter, 1988) attributes importance to the environment,

and overcomes the idea that the adolescence “carries” a disorder. This

approach finds that antisocial behaviours start as the result of a negative

interaction between an individual’s developmental needs and the

environmental’s responses, where the representations of the individual

1. Introduction

3

concerning his needs and the responses from others to those needs,

become of paramount importance. This developmental psychopathology

approach found that antisocial behaviours may be the result of various

developmental paths which are open, at any time, to different

developmental paths.

As one of the main objectives of the criminal response, is to reduce re-

offending, it is necessary to understand which features of the young person

and his environment lead to a favourable prognosis. It is also necessary to

understand the relation between psychological objectives (e.g taking

responsibility, changing their developmental path) and objectives more

strictly related to a change in the antisocial behaviours. By conducting

individual assessments the juvenile justice services may prevent the

delivery of an unspecified provision to all young offenders.

Some offences may be related to specific mental health disorders, but

generally it is conduct disorder or antisocial personality disorder (DSM-IVR,

2000 that young offenders suffer from. However, within the juvenile justice

services, a diagnosis of a conduct disorder or antisocial personality

disorder, as specified by the DSM-IV R (a condition characterized by

persistent disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in

childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood) does not

seem sufficiently specific.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


4




A systematic survey of young offenders’ mental health issues paves the way

for an understanding of effective practice within the Italian juvenile justice

services.

The criminal response does not only pursue punishment and the

preservation of social security, it also aims to promote a change in the

young person, and is therefore seen as a form of treatment.

In order to assess and address the young person and his environment,

psychological, educational and/or social support workers perform various

types of interventions within a detention setting or via diversion measures.

The complexity of the work makes it difficult to evaluate its efficacy. The

criterion usually employed is a reduction in the re-offending rates, which is

necessary, but not sufficient, because adolescents may well cease criminal

activities while still being antisocial or becoming asocial, e.g. with issues of

substance abuse, social marginalization and so on.

The insufficient attention paid to providing evidence-based practice may

partly be due to the widespread pessimism about the outcome of both

criminal provisions and the psychotherapy of antisocial disorders. However,

even though antisocial behaviour still seems persistent, it is widely thought

that it may change. Moreover, a change often occurs spontaneously: some

1. Introduction

5

studies have shown that about half of even the most persistent offenders

actually stop their antisocial behaviours, managing to gain a positive social

identity, i.e. work and engage in a couple relationship. As the family and the

social environment where such behaviours take place are often crucial to

such change, experts question whether the involvement with the criminal

justice system may end up being a risk rather than a protective factor. The

criminal context, and detention in particular, may indeed have an iatrogenic

effect (McGuire, 1995).

A conceivable approach of the Juvenile Justice Services is to regard

criminal response as a form of care. Such an approach may eventually

evaluate its efficacy, in terms of both re-offending rates, and the

adolescents’ development. In order to pursue such an approach a survey

and an analysis of the data concerning young people involved in the

criminal justice system is of paramount importance. To tailor an effective

programme, it would also be essential to understanding the features of the

young person to thereby avoid the provision responding to institutional

demands, rather than the young person’s needs.

Assessment between the mental health objectives and the demands

from the juvenile justice service

To guide the criminal response, the assessment of young offenders should

include the risk of re-offending, and psychological and social issues, which

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


6




are the criminogenic needs that underpin the individual’s involvement in

crime.

Amongst young offenders, re-offending rates are usually high. Data is

difficult to compare, due to the diversity of the samples in terms of age,

severity, follow up and criteria employed to define re-offending (e.g. further

charge, further arrest, further conviction). Generally speaking, it is estimated

that up to two thirds of the non occasional young offenders re-offend within

three years. “Chronic” delinquents (about 5% of all young offenders) show

the following rates: at a 5 year follow up, 77% of the 15-20 age group, 50%

of the 20-25 group and 35% of the 25-30 group re-offended, with a mean of

4.6 offences for those who committed more than one (Rutter, Giller, Hagell,

1998). The results of a study carried out in 15 US States found that more

than 80% of the14-17 years old prisoners were re-arrested within three

years of their release. (Langan, Levin, 2002). A study carried out in the UK,

reported that 88% of the 14-16 years old prisoners re-offended within two

years of their release. (Hagell, 2002). Another study found re-arresting rates

to be: 49.2% at a one year follow up, 70.8% at a two years follow up, and

76.7% at a three years follow up (Mc Guire et al., 1995). Vermeiren, De

1. Introduction

7

Clippele and Deboutte (2000) reported a 46.2% rate of recidivism at an 8

months follow up.

In Italy, a study was carried out with a sample of 103 young male offenders

(Italians, nomads and foreigners), with the use of a form assessing

recidivism risk at intake within the Juvenile Justice Services. The results

show that a little more than half of the sample (54.1%) was at high risk of

re-offending; one out of four (25.1%) were at a medium risk, one out of five

(20.8) at a low risk. At their two year follow up, 32% of the sample had been

charged with another offence; none of the low and medium risk group re-

offended while within the high risk group 44% of the sample re-offended and

were reported to be mainly nomads or Italians showing severe mental

health issues. (Maggiolini, Ciceri, Macchi, Marchesi, Pisa, 2009).

This study shows that the assessment of re-offending risk to be accurate.

The pre-trial measures ordered by the court at intake were broadly coherent

with the level of risk. The follow up of the high risk group stresses the

importance of providing treatment to nomads and Italians living in highly

dysfunctional families or environments, and developing even more severe

mental health issues. The study conclusively showed that recidivism risk is

significantly related to risk factors within the cultural-family environment.

Mental health disorders and criminogenic needs are also important to

assess.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


8




Antisocial behaviours may be the result of a conduct disorder or an

antisocial personality disorder or some other severe psychopathology.

Whatever is the case, they are also all the signs of an adjustment issue, in

the relation between adolescence needs, age-related developmental tasks,

family and environment.

To better understand psychological issues in delinquency, various studies

have been carried out in the past few years on the relationship between

mental health issues and juvenile delinquency. These studies aim to

understand underlying risk factors and precursors in childhood,

distinguishing profiles of antisocial adolescents as well as the prevalence of

psychological disorders amongst young people getting involved with the

criminal justice system (Dazzi, Madeddu, 2009; Grisso, Schwartz, 2000;

Loeber, Farrington, Stouthamer- Loeber, Van Kammen, 1998; Vreugdenihl,

Doreleijers, Wermeiren, Wouters, Van Den Brink, 2004; Wasserman,

McReynolds, Lucas, Fisher, Santos, 2002; Wasserman, Ko, McReynolds,

2004).

A number of studies have confirmed that young people undergoing criminal

proceedings, and prisoners in particular, have between three and five times

1. Introduction

9

more risk of developing a mental disorder (Teplin, Abram, McClelland,

Dulcan, Mericle, 2002; Wasserman, McReynolds, Lucas, Fisher, Santos,

2002; Vermerein, 2003; Boesky, 2002). Conduct disorder is the most

frequent diagnosis amongst juvenile delinquents, followed by oppositional-

defiant disorder (Moffit et al., 2003; Boesky, 2002). Substance abusers are

also at a higher risk of offending (Moffit et al., 2000).

In Italy in 2005, a sample of 66 young males (with a mean age mean of

16.3, 35% Italians, 65% foreigners or nomads) were interviewed at intake

within the Juvenile Justice Services, using the Youth Self Report

(Achenbach, 2001). The professionals involved were asked to complete the

Teacher Report Form (Achenbach, 2001). The professionals reported

internalized and externalized problems in 72%, while only 38% of the young

people reported externalized problems and 29% internalized problems..

Crossing psycho pathological issues and a re-offending risk index showed

that 91.2% of the adolescents at high risk of re-offending had clinically

significant mental health issues. The study confirms that mental health

disorders are widespread amongst the young people involved with the

criminal justice service. The fact that psychopathology is mostly related to

high re-offending risk emphasises that psychological work may be helpful in

reducing recidivism.

Italian Netw


ssessment

and Treatment


10




Criminogenic needs are at the core of the assessment and discriminative of

evidence-based practice (Dowden, 1999). The programmes, which are the

most effective in reducing re-offending, are those which combine

psychological support with vocational and social work (McGuire, 2004). A

correct assessment at intake may guide the work within the juvenile justice

services (Vermerein, 2003).

The objective of the assessment is not the provision of a diagnosis of a

psychopathology, but rather the involvement of the young person in a

programme informed by an understanding of his personality and psychic

functioning. The programme’s primarily aim is to help the adolescent

resume his development and gain a new social identity.

The psycho-social assessment also represents the first opportunity for the

adolescent to see himself as someone having emotions, desires and

intentions, and express his point of view on the offence and think about its

subjective meaning.

2. The Juvenile Justice System in Italy

11

The Juvenile Court

The Juvenile Court was set up in 1934, under Royal Decree (n° 1404) and

exercises its jurisdiction upon civil, criminal and administrative matters. The

Juvenile Courts are tasked with proceedings related to juveniles between

14- 18 years of age, who have been accused of criminal offences.

The 1934 Decree has been amended on a number of occasions, , most

notably by a special law created in 1988, to the “rules about criminal

proceedings against minors” (D.P.R. 448/88). The Decree followed the U.N.

“Minimum rules on “social reactions to juvenile delinquency” and the so

called “Bejing rules” (Recommendation 40/33 of the 29th of November 1985)

which were a point of reference for the reform of a criminal process for

juveniles which lead to a highly innovative model.

The Juvenile Criminal Procedure Code enforces criminal provisions such as

stay of proceedings while the juvenile is placed under supervision (similar to

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


12




probation) and various alternative non-custodial measures are taken. The

aim is to prevent juveniles from entering the criminal justice system and to

reduce the potential harm of the criminal proceedings on juveniles;

detention is used as a last resort. Under the code, juveniles are placed

under the care of social services, with the direct involvement of the youth,

his family, his school, his peer group and his environment and indirectly

though the work carried out with agencies in the community.

In this frame, the discipline of the probation (“stay of proceedings and

placement under supervision”) is of paramount importance. According to

such an institution, the young offender’s proceedings are deterred until the

outcome of a supervision period; if the supervision is successful and the

youth is reintegrated to society, the offence is discarded. It can be ordered

for any kind of crime, and it is not restricted to the first offence; it lasts up to

three years. A probation programme is prescribed in the early stages of the

proceedings. It may be suggested by the prosecutor, the defence counsel,

the young person, his parents, or the social worker. Probation requires the

young offender’s cooperation, it cannot be imposed on someone who is

unwilling to undertake it. The law does not specify whether the defendant’s

guilt is to be ascertained; however, it is a commonly thought that it

represents an unexpressed pre-requisite for a probation order. The order


13

delivered by the court is based on the assessment of the young person and

environmental issues and resources, provided by the Juvenile Justice

Services or the local social services.

Generally speaking, the ratio of the response to juvenile delinquency is to

promote the young offender’s awareness of the meaning of the offence and

encourage him to take responsibility for his behaviour. It tends to be

programme-oriented, meaning that a rehabilitation aim is favoured, and the

punishment of the young offender is of secondary importance.

The Italian juvenile justice services

1. Offices of Youth Social Service (USSM thereof)

2. Juvenile Detention Centres (IPM thereof)

3. Juvenile Classification Homes (CPA thereof)

4. Residential facilities

Offices for Youth Social Service (USSM) provide young offenders with

assistance at every stage of the criminal proceeding, starting from the

enforcement of pre-trial measures. The USSM plays a supporting and

monitoring role during the enforcement of non custodial pre-trial and post-

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


14




trial measures and the stay of proceedings with placement under

supervision. When requested, the USSM provides the court, with

information concerning the assessment of young person and his family.

Juvenile Classification Homes (CPA) admit juveniles under provisional

arrest and grant them residence for up to 96 hours until the validation

hearing, without being actual prison facilities. The CPA teams make a first

psycho-social assessment on the juvenile’s situation and the local

resources available, with the aim of providing the judicial authority with

information that is helpful in identifying the most suitable measure for the

young offender.

Juvenile Detention Centres (IPM) secure the enforcement of orders (such

as pre-trial detention and conviction sentences) made against juvenile

offenders under 18 years of age (or up to 21 years of age, provided that the

offence was committed when under 18) by judicial authorities. In this

context, the young offender is granted the right not to interrupt his

educational, physical and psychological development. IPMs provide young

offenders with school, vocational training, cultural, sport, recreational and

theatre activities. The IPMs operate according to the principle of the Italian

law, D.P.R. 448/88, which specifies the minimum intervention by criminal


15

justice and the principle of reducing imprisonment, lead to a decrease in the

number of detainees.

Residential facilities act by law both to secure the enforcement of non-

custodial measures and help integrate young offenders in their social

environment. In Italy, only a few residential communities are directly

managed by the juvenile justice service; most of them are private and have

an agreement with the Ministry of Justice. Placements in socio-educational

residential communities, either in terms of serving a pre-trial measures or

carrying out a probation measure, are common within the juvenile justice

provisions.

Personality assessment

When delivering an order, the young person’s personality is always taken

into account by the court,; In accordance with the principles of the Italian

law D.P.R. n.448/1988, every Italian court’s must take into account the

young person’s needs, circumstances and resources. Consequently,

personality assessments take place at various stages of the criminal

proceedings.

Quoting art. 9 of the D.P.R. n.448/1988:

Italian Netw

ork for Young Offend

ers Assessm

ent and Treatment


16




“The State Attorney and the judge shall gather information about the child’s

situation and personal, familiar, social and environmental resources, in view

of establishing his criminal responsibility and degree of liability as well as

considering the social relevance of the offence and ordering adequate

penalties and possibly taking the appropriate civil measures”.

It should be emphasised that, differently from other countries, in Italy the

personality assessment is not aimed at identifying competence to stand trial

but instead focuses on the process itself to shape and become accessible

to a developing and changing young person.

Taking responsibility

According to Italian law, the criminal procedure for juvenile offenders,

(D.P.R.. 448/1988) does not consider the young offender as either someone

to be punished or someone to be protected, but as an interlocutor, someone

who can hold a dialogue with the adult magistrate and take decisions

regarding his own future within the criminal justice system.


17

In addition to safeguarding the educational needs of the young offender, the

criminal juvenile process strives to help young offenders to to take

responsibility for their actions. Assessing the truth of an event or punishing

the young offender is of secondary importance. The primary goal is to

rehabilitate the young person by promoting his capacity to engage and

repair the damage he has done.

The trial provides educational value through both safeguard the young

person's educational needs and in the fact that the trial itself may deliver a

developmental-oriented function. The various professionals involved with

the young person during the criminal proceedings (e.g. psychologist,

educator, social worker, judge, lawyer) perform such a function.

The juvenile criminal process must not interrupt the developmental process

by disrupting vocational training or school but it may actually also be the

chance for educational relationships to start, : such an aim is pursued both

within the process, as it involves the youth’s parents, whenever possible,

and outside, in the liaison with the community.

The juvenile criminal process adapts itself to the youth’s personality,

circumstances, developmental needs and degree of maturity.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


18




The personality assessment carried out by social workers, psychologists

and educators is thus not aimed at providing a diagnosis, or assessing the

competence to stand trial, but rather at adapting the process to the young

person’s needs, capacities, degree of development and maturity.

3. Recent trends in criminal policies in Europe

19

In recent years the policies of the Juvenile Justice Service have shown

different trends within the countries of the European Union. On the one

hand, the repression of criminally relevant behaviours has increased, while

a remarkable opening to “restorative justice” has also emerged; on the

other, some offences, previously under the competence of the juvenile

criminal justice have been transferred to the competence of administrative

justice (Padovani, Ciappi, 2010).

In some countries of the European Union the criminal justice has become

harsher, with a parallel debate about the lowering of the age for criminal

liability to prosecution; this trend may be due in the first place to the failure

of the rehabilitation model in Anglo-Saxon countries, and the prevalence of

emerging social defence issues and the need for social control. In the past,

instead of focusing on the young offender’s rehabilitation pessimism about

the welfare rehabilitation-oriented model lead to a focus on the offence and

the victim, with primary aim of social security.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


20




A new approach referred to as ‘Restorative justice’ as provided an

alternative to the traditional model of criminal response . Within this new

model, the restorative feature of criminal justice is paramount, i.e. the focus

is on the resolution of the conflict created by the offence, and the repair of

the consequent damage rather than behaviour-controls,retribution or the

pursuit of the punishment of the youth. Unlike the traditional model of

criminal response where the victim was excluded, the restorative model

frequently involves the victim through a process of mediation (such as the

Victim-Offender Mediation programme).

Regarding the increased importance of administrative justice in countries

such as Great Britain, Holland, Belgium and Germany, the most recent

criminal policies address administrative measures (such as diversion,

restorative justice, youth panel conferencing), with the involvement of local

authorities, while the criminal justice withdraws and its role becomes the

formal control of provisions managed by administrative bodies. As an

example, in Great Britain, the criminal provision is diversified, with the aim

of avoiding as far as possible the involvement of the young person with the

juvenile justice system.


21

Within this “diversion” frame the Great British police force has a number of

options as alternatives to prosecution,. Similarly, in Germany an exception

to the “legality principle” is given through the discretionary power granted to

the prosecutor to request, in alternative to prosecution, the dismissal of the

case with the simultaneous provision of educative measures. The aim is to

avoid an inappropriate involvement of the young person in the criminal

justice system and, most importantly, to favour the rehabilitation and the re-

integration of the young offender in civil society, responding to an

“opportuneness principle”, underpinned by empirical research on the

reduction of recidivism.

Within the so-called “what works” policy, i.e. the focus on promoting

evidence-based practice as a guide to crime prevention policies, the

identification of risk management factors and actuarial measures is the

ground of the orders delivered by the court. Today, at a European level,

interventions and programmes cannot set aside an in-depth evaluation of

their efficacy in reducing recidivism. The recent trends in criminal policies

have therefore lead to a decline in the treatment and socialization

philosophy, in favour of aims of risk-management and prevention-oriented

social control.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


22




Such trends affect the methods employed for the assessment of the young

person. Following a broad request to the services in Europe, to carry out an

assessment of personality, maturity and personal, familiar, social and

environmental circumstances of the young offender, the most innovative

procedures and methodologies tend to be precise and standardized (see

“ASSET”, the form employed within the juvenile justice services in Great

Britain or “BARO”, a similar form used in Holland and in Switzerland), based

on actuarial predictive models.

In comparison with other European countries, the rehabilitation function is

still at the core of the Italian juvenile justice system, even though such

intervention philosophy are traditionally less focused on providing evidence

of its efficacy. The Italian criminal system is less agile and the proceedings

and the criminal provision are both poorly differentiated in relation to the

severity of the offence put in place and to the risk of re-offending.

Very few Countries in Europe have published, as well as Great Britain and

the US, specific guidelines for the assessment and the treatment of young

offenders, so that the procedures and the methods put in practice are less

formalized. There is a gap in the regulations that results in inconsistency


23

and uncertainty about prescribing when a personality assessment may be

requested, by whom, and who is in charge of providing it and the methods

actually employed in the work.

In countries such as Croatia, social services in the community are in charge

of the assessment while in other countries, such as Belgium, Portugal and

Spain, social services within the juvenile justice system are appointed. In

most European countries there is a clear-cut distinction between civil and

criminal juvenile justice: Italy in an exception, as a juvenile judge is

competent both in civil and in criminal matters.

In Greece the request for an assessment of the young offender tends to

address mental health-psychiatric issues, or to involve the assessment of

drug abuse. Personality assessment are not compulsorily requested (as

they are in Holland, Slovenia, and Italy), and may only be requested in the

most severe cases.

In Germany, if the youth is attending school or has employment, the

personality assessment of the young offender includes the direct

involvement of teachers or employers, , in all cases except when the

assessment may jeopardize the position.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


24




In conclusion, the lack of guidelines shared at European level, regarding the

assessment of young offenders leads to a variety in the procedures, making

them quite difficult to compare.

4. The assessment carried out within the Juvenile Justice Services in Italy

25

The staff training centre (Istituto Centrale di Formazione) of the Italian

Juvenile Justice Department have studied the way that the personality

assessment of the young offender is carried out within a Juvenile Justice

setting.

Personality assessment is at the core of the work, in the interaction with the

court. The reports made by the juvenile justice services testify in the daily

practice the assumptions and methodologies of the work, where

psychological, social and educational knowledge is combined. Not only are

the reports an expression of the understanding of the circumstances of the

youth, his family and his environment, they also express what is deemed

useful for the court to know.

There may be a considerable gap between the knowledge that the juvenile

justice services has and what is communication to the court. It is sometimes

necessary for the reports to omit some information concerning the crime,

so that the trust relationship between the young person and his family is not

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


26




jeopardised. This relationship is crucial to an effective intervention.

Omission may also be made in order to leave the court in a position to

make an unbiased assessment of the circumstances strictly related to the

offence.

Such reports, carried out both at the initial stages and throughout the

criminal provision, were analysed.

The sample included representatives of all services (CPA, USSM, IPM) and

locations (in the North, Centre and South of Italy)

A total of one-hundred and sixty-eight reports were collected, distributed as

follows:

• 29 from Rome and Sassari CPAs; 75 from Bolzano, Naples, Rome, Lecce

and Turin USSMs; 64 from Milan, Catania and Catanzaro IPMs.

• Gender: 85% males 15% female

• Age: aged 14-16: 9.4%, aged 16-18: 40%, aged 18-21: 12.5%.

• Nationality: Italians: 68.8%; foreigners (31,2%) mostly come from Romania

(8.8%) and Morocco (5%).

• Offence: 37.5% against property, 20.6% against the person, 16.9% drug-

related and 4.4% other.


27

Half of the reports combine assessments undertaken by more than one

professional (social worker, psychologist, educator). Otherwise, it is either

the social worker (33%) or the educator (17%) writing the report, rather than

the psychologist.

The reports were analysed in terms of both the structure (opening, central

part, conclusions) and its main contents (description of the young person,

the offence, the family, the environment, the intervention, the probation

programme).

The reports are mostly between 2 to 4 pages. They tend to start with a

reference to the offence ascribed (88%). The central part describes the

young person and his attitudes and behaviours and the conclusions may

include general remarks, with no specific suggestions to the court (46%),

suggestions to the court (24.4%) or the description of a detailed programme

(17%).

Information is collected through interviewing the young person and

observing his behaviour in relation to the service or to his family (54%).

There is very little reference to tests or questionnaires (5%). A mayor source

of information is provided by agencies in the community (89%), residential

communities (24,.4%) and schools (18.2%). In the description of the young

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


28




person information on his family, school performance or employment are

frequently mentioned, together with a reference to the way the young

person behaves in relation to the juvenile justice process.

Maturity and fixed traits of behaviours or attitudes (personality) are

mentioned in a little less than half of the reports (46%) as is information

about the story of the young person, with particular reference to the

important events which have occurred in his life. Relationships with peers

(38%), liaise time (30%), sexual and friend relationships (15%) are less

frequently mentioned. Explicit diagnoses of psychopathologies can be found

in only 13% of the reports.

The usual style is to report data and information, with no explicit

assessment or processing from the professionals’ side, as if the aim is to

present the information as objectively as possible. The opinions from the

assessing team only become more frequent in cases of references to

attitudes of the youth in the relationship to the professionals themselves or

the work carried out..

The reports usually start with a reference to the charge. However, within the

reports there are no comments about the subjective meaning of the offence,


29

or the assessment of re-offending risk factors(mentioned in 32% of the

reports). The reports contain little reference to judicial precedents or to the

assessment of social dangerousness.

In 67% of the reports there is an explicit reference to whether the young

person acknowledges the offence he is charged with . There is little

information about his understanding of the social consequences of the

offence, the damage suffered by the victim, the perceived severity of the

offence or, the capacity to understand the meaning of the criminal

proceedings.

Family circumstances and relationships are frequently mentioned (90%),

usually describing family members and the socio-economic circumstances

of the family, but references to the environment, and the multi-cultural

dimension in case of a foreign youth, are rare. Educational styles and the

attitudes towards criminal justice can be found in half of the reports; such

information is usually just presented and not commented upon.

Previous intervention carried out by local social services or juvenile justice

services are described in 83% of reports. Information regarding reactions

and attitudes of the young person in relation to the criminal proceedings are

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


30




frequently mentioned, but when a probation programme is presented, its

objectives are usually not discussed.

In conclusion, the reports show a prudence in providing information and

interpretations about the personal features of the young persons, which

may be in an attempt to avoid interfering with the right to defence.

The attention to providing information, without expressing interpretations or

evaluations, may also express an implicit trend to appreciate and protect a

call for help from the young person, in view of granting in the first place a

working alliance with the young person, which is a fundamental pre-

requisite for the programme that may follow the assessment phase.

The attention to the offence is quite clearly the “social motive” of the

intervention carried out within the juvenile justice services. The

professionals writing the reports seem very careful not to provide

interpretations of the offence and its social and personal meaning. Such

attitude probably comes from a culture aimed at protecting the young

person from possible stigmatization and exploitation by other professionals.

However, research in the field shows that a wider understanding is more

useful, aimed at promoting a methodological use of such approaches as a


31

psyco-socio-pedagogical reading, while avoiding the risk of overlapping with

the court.

The analysis undertaken opens questions about the way the juvenile justice

services interpret the questions posed by the court, how they respond to

them, the relationship between information and interpretation and the use of

tests and the possible integration between social, educational and

psychological knowledge in understanding the young person in relation to

his environment.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


32




5. The psychological work within the Juvenile Justice Services

33

The role of the psychologist

The Juvenile Criminal Procedure Code (dating back to 1988) does not

determine set roles and tasks that have to be performed by the

psychologists working within the juvenile justice services. The importance of

the psychologist is indirectly emphasised in the personality assessment

requested by the court, to be carried out in collaboration with other

professionals, both in terms of personal resources and shortcomings and of

environmental, family and social resources.

The current tasks performed by the psychologist within the juvenile justice

service may be divided in two areas of intervention, related to different

judicial/institutional objectives:

1. Assessment, during the course of the proceedings, of liability to

prosecution, social dangerousness and circumstances related to the

youth and his environment.

Italian Netw


ssessment

and Treatment


34




2. Support to the young person, both during the criminal proceeding

and while serving the sentence.

The assessment not only provides information concerning individual, family,

environmental and social circumstances, it also specifically addresses

circumstances and resources in relation to the actual criminal responses

and provisions available. The law seeks professional advise via the

assessment of which criminal provisions may be harmful, detrimental or

suitable for which personality conditions; which measures, provisions,

allocations, decisions may better suit which youths; which levels of

containment, detention and control should apply to youths at high risk of

fleeing or re-offend etc. . The law requests the psychologist addresses both

circumstances and resources of the young youth and circumstances and

resources within the environment and the criminal provision. From this

perspective, features and shortcomings of the young person are not “data”

but rather direct questions, challenges and risks for the judge and the

services to consider.

From a psychological viewpoint, the assessment may concern:

• Risk factors screening e.g. risk for self harming behaviours;


35

• Clinical diagnosis, on the basis of a category (e.g. DSM-IV-TR

oriented) or dimensional (e.g. personality-oriented) assessment

• Risk and needs from a developmental psychology and

psychopathology framework;

• The degree of maturity and social dangerousness

How psychological work is carried out within the ju venile justice

services .

In 2009 a law transferred health care functions performed within the juvenile

justice services to the National Health Service (NHS), affecting the

psychologists’ role and assigned tasks. The NHS is in charge of the

psychological intervention, while social workers and educators, and police

officers, report into the Ministry of Justice.

Within assessments, psychologists may consequently focus on a

diagnosis, from a “mental health” perspective, leaving the other

professionals with the task of addressing risks and concerns such as the

environment and development of the young offender. No guidelines have

been created to exactly determine how the Juvenile Criminal Procedure

Code should be applied.

Italian Netw

ork for Young O

ffenders Assessm

ent and Treatment


36




A study involving the psychologists working within the juvenile justice

services

Objectives

The purpose of the study was to understand if the psychologists work within

the juvenile justice services are satisfied or dissatisfied with the objectives,

methods, and tests employed in their work. Collate the knowledge and

sentiments of psychologists working within the Italian juvenile justice service

could also pave the way for an exchange with colleagues at a European

level.

A sample of psychologists, either consultant or employed by the NHS,

working within the juvenile justice services (CPA, IPM, USSM), from the

North, the Centre or the South of Italy were questioned in semi-structured

interviews. The interviews included questions about: objectives, methods

and tests employed, representations of the task and the professional role,

the relationship with the young people and the other professionals. The aim

was to gain an understanding of the theoretical backgrounds, difficulties and


37

dissatisfactions faced by psychologists working within the juvenile justice

services,.

Method

Thirty psychologists working within the Italian juvenile justice services (CPA,

IPM, USSM) were interviewed. Even though the sampling was not random,

there was a distribution per work experience, location, type of service,

contract (consultant-employee).

When the study took place 43 psychologists were employed by the Ministry

of Justice (32 directly involved with the young offenders, 11 with other tasks,

such as training) and 68 psychologists worked within the Juvenile Justice

services as consultants.

Table 1. Sample

Psychologists

30 (23 F, 7 M)

Age 16 (<45 years) 14 (>45 years)

Professional qualification

9 psychologists (including 3 specialized in Criminology) 21 psychotherapists

Contract 14 employed 16 consultant

Service 15 (IPM) 14 (USSM)

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


38




1 (CPA only, however, some psychologist working in USSM and IPM also work in CPA)

Location 14 (North: Milan, Turin, Genoa, Venice, Treviso) 6 (Centre: Bologna, Florence, Rome) 6 (South: Teramo, Naples, Bari, Catanzaro) 4 (Islands: Cagliari, Sassari, Catania)

Number of years in the Service

18 (<10) 12 (>10)

Number of working hours per week

16 (<20) 14 (>20)

The first part of the interview collected information on the professional role

(i.e. anagraphic data, professional qualification, contract, number of working

hours per month, service they worked in).

The second part of the interview focused on the role of the psychologist

within the service, with particular regard to personality,risks and need

assessment (i.e. areas of assessment, theoretical framework, use of tests,

profiles of the young offenders and their problems, perceived efficacy of the

work) within the context of a team work (i.e. relationship with other

professionals involved, type of collaboration set up and level of integration,

possible conflicts).


39

Activities

The psychologists reported the following three activities:

• Personality assessment of the young person and psychological

support;

• Interviews with the youth's parents and meetings with social workers

and/or educators working in residential communities;

• Team meetings and report drawing.

The interviewed psychologists were asked to estimate the percentage of

time they dedicated to each activity, to broadly understand how the work is

divided. There are no differences in the sample according to the type of

service, apart from the higher involvement of the parents in USSM.

Table 3. Time per activity (broad estimate)

Activity Personality assessm ent and psychological support

60%

Team meetings, report drawing

30%

Interviews with parents, meetings with social services/educators

10%

Most psychologists reported that the main activity they carry out is

personality assessments. The psychological support provided during the

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


40




criminal provision is also highly valued, even though counselling and

psychotherapy are not generally considered the focus of the work.

All the psychologists interviewed value teamwork and view team meetings

as a valuable exchange with the other professionals, during which they aim

to gain a shared assessment of the situation and consider a tailored

programme. Following team involvement, all psychologists said that they

spend a considerable amount of their time within the service writing

assessment reports.

Psychologists tend not to attend hearings; the relation with the court is often

indirect, mediated by the reports and other professionals.

The environment-related activities mentioned include interviews with

parents and other professionals, mainly those working in the local health

services, drug and alcohol provisions and in residential communities. The

interviews with the parents are aimed at better assessing the situation.

Initially to collecting information about the young person and later to find

resources available in the environment. Rarely are parents provided with

psychological support.


41

The psychologists working in USSM tend to carry out more environment-

related work (e.g. Interviews with parents or educators) than those working

in IPM and CPA (who tend to split their time between team meetings and

clinical work).

The clinical work with the young person in general, and the assessment in

particular, even though it may be seen as the main activity undertaken, is

actually carried out for little more than half of the working time.

Only a third of the psychologists interviewed thought that the amount of

shared time was adequate and satisfactory. Most thought that it would be

advisable to extend the amount of time spent in direct clinical work with the

young person, especially providing psychological support (“It would be so

much better to have time to support the young person all throughout the

criminal provision”), but not to the detriment of teamwork and environment-

related work, which were deemed to be equally important.

To conclude, the main problem appears to be a lack of time, due to the few

human resources available and the inadequate number of working hours.

Under such circumstances, some bureaucratic duties are regarded as a

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


42




nuisance, as they steal time from the clinical work (“Bureaucratic duties are

an irritation! They steal time from the work with the young people”).

The primary task

The psychologists reported that their primary task should concern clinical

work, i.e. the assessment and the psychological support of the juvenile,

combined with the work carried out within the service by the other

professionals. The importance of providing an integrated intervention is

confirmed by the amount of time reserved for meetings.

Some emphasised that the psychologist brings together the professionals

within the team (“The psychologist is like a bonding agent for the team”).

This is because the psychologist provides a reading of the situation that is

different from the social or the educational and is useful for a shared

assessment and a tailored programme.

Differences can be found in the role of the psychologists, depending on the

service they work in. In CPA the psychologists tend to provide assessment,

in IPM they tend to assist the young person to deal with the restriction of his

or her freedom and promote the proposal for substitutive measures; while


43

the psychologists in USSM tend to pursue a treatment aim, by gradually

motivating the juvenile who is undertake a probation order.

There is a shared opinion that it is possible to combine the objectives of the

psychological work with those of the criminal institution, even though it is

not always easy. The young offends lack of motivation towards the

psychological support may hamper combined work, as it interferes with the

construction of a basic trust relationship. Also, the objectives of

psychological work may be different from those pursued by the criminal

system.

The assigned task to provide the court with useful information, in order to

deliver a suitable order, may require an in-depth assessment of the youth's

personality, his developmental needs and resources, possible psycho-

pathologies, level of maturity, recidivism risk, availability of treatment and

the provision/programme best suiting to the youth's circumstances.

From a strictly clinical perspective, the psychologist may limit himself to

providing information on needs and resources, general elements

concerning the youth's personality and a sustainable provision, in order to

help the judge deliver an order. The psychologist may also define a clinical

Italian Netw


ssessment and Treatm

ent


44




diagnosis, the risk of re-offending and how the programme could be best

carried out.

A specific issue concerns the difficulty in combining the time of the

psychological intervention with that of the criminal provision. The prevailing

idea is that the time needed for psychotherapeutic and developmental

changes to occur is usually longer than the criminal provision. Only in rare

cases is the opposite found i.e. that a prolonged criminal provision may

interfere with the developmental needs of the young person.

Another issue is the general lack of human resources and time available,

preventing the professional from undertaking a sufficiently long and deep

assessment and treatment. In some cases the court orders a widening of

the assessment, or the young offender is provided with extensive treatment,

regardless of the actual shortage of resources available.

In the background and , not always explicitly mentioned, is the issue of how

definitive the assessment should be, in terms of the diagnosis provided and

the recommended programme; and, for its part, to which extend the court

should order a specific intervention to be provided (e.g. tests to be


45

administered, frequency of treatment sessions), entailing the risk of each

part exceeding its competences.

Another challenge born out of combining clinical objectives and the tasks

assigned by the criminal institution is preserving public security. Public

security may necessitate control duties and lead to the extension of pre-trial

measures, possibly little syntonic with the youth's developmental need for

autonomy.

On the other hand, the psychologists are only too aware that the

compulsory frame of the interventionis actually very helpful, as it provides a

framework and a setting, essential to the understanding of the meaning of

the offence put in place and, more generally, to increasing the juvenile's

self-awareness.

No significant differences emerged between psychologists working in CPA,

USSM or IPM. They all agree, as a general principle, that the psychological

work is compatible with the task assigned by the institution, even though a

lack of time and a certain effort in liaising with the court’s “language” and

demands were emphasised.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


46




Theoretical frame

The psychologists working within the juvenile justice services have different

theoretical backgrounds. The study found the psycho-dynamic model was

the most popular, while the systemic and the cognitive-behavioural

frameworks were also well represented:

Table 4. Theoretical frameworks

Psycho -dynamic

13

Cognitive -Behavioural

7

Systemic

6

Other

4

It is important to emphasise that beyond the general theoretical

background, many psychologists did not mention a specific training in

criminology, legal psychology, or developmental psychology.


47


The psychologists value both a comprehensive personality assessment of

the young offender and an assessment of specific areas related to the

criminal setting.

For instance, the assessment of the resources available (e.g. In affective,

cognitive and relational terms) needs to be considered along with an

assessment of impulsiveness and aggression features, the youth’s

availability to understanding the meaning of the offence, his motivation to

engage in a programme and the psycho pathological risk.

While the areas more specifically related to the criminal setting depend

upon the service the psychologist works in, the personality assessment in

general terms is a shared task.

Table 5. Areas of personality assessment

Cognitive aspects (e.g. intelligence, cognitive impairment, capacity for self reflection) Affective development Social identity Psycho-pathological risk

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


48




Social background and family Impulsiveness / aggression Self harm Availability for working on the offence Competence to stand trial and to cope with detention Motivation to change and to engage in a programme Availability to treatment

Tests

The psychologists interviewed tend to rely on the clinical interview; two

thirds also use tests. The tests commonly used are listed in table 6.

Table. Tests more widely used

Semi-structured interviews (SCID II) Questionnaires (Achenbach's YSR e TRF, MMPI) Cognitive tests (WAIS, WISC, Raven Matrixes) Graphic test (D.A.P. Test, F.D.T. test) Projective tests (Rorschach, TAT, Blacky Pictures)


49

Other tests mentioned are graphic tests, the Moral Disengagement Test, a

test on object relationships, a self report questionnaire named “OSQR”, the

Multidimensional Self Concept Scale, a test focusing on anxiety, phobia,

depression and hysteria such as the “MQR”, the Facial Action Coding

System, the SCL-90-R. While the use of some tests, such as Rorschach is

widespread, there appears to be a local culture on the other tests,

regardless of the general location or type of service.

There was no relationship found between the psychologists’ theoretical

backgrounds and tests. Most psychologists tend to use both projective and

cognitive tests, regardless of their theoretical background, even though

projective tests in general, and the Rorschach test in particular, tend to be

used by psychologists with a psycho-dynamic approach.

Team work

Assessment teams include psychologists, social workers and educators.

Some differences emerge in relation to the type of service that takes place.

Psychologists working in USSM tend to cooperate most frequently with

social workers (sometimes with educators), while psychologists working in

IPM and CPA tend to cooperate primarily with educators, and then with

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


50




social workers. The study also found that psychologists work with a range of

other professionals including: police officers, cultural mediators, teachers

and professionals working in the community.

Most interviews reported a general feeling of satisfaction in relation to

teamwork, even though difficulties concerning communication, language,

reciprocal competences and competitive objectives were mentioned. The

interviewed psychologists commonly complained about: the lack of

appreciation their role attains from other professionals, excessive discretion

in the referrals, and, above all, lack of time and inadequate resources.

In this respect, no differences emerge in relation to the type of service and

all the issues are equally mentioned.

Table 7. Issues involving team work

Inadequate resources 13

Little appreciation of the role of the psychologist (no acknowledgement, little team work, discretion in th e referrals)

11

Troublesome integration (different language, compet ences and objectives, role competition)

6


51

Having adequate time available was considered a requirement for an

effective integration of the work undertaken. Even though combining

competences is highly valued, as it provides a wider understanding of the

young person, setting boundaries in competences and roles may result in

overlapping and confusion, which is detrimental to the work.

Some of the psychologists’ interviewed explained that they perceive a lack

of appreciation of their role and function makes it difficult to work with other

professionals. The psychologists who expressed this view tend to display

more frustration than the rest of the sample.

The young offenders

The profiles of the young offenders vary according to the type of service the

psychologists work in and their location in Italy.

While in big cities, such as Milan, psychologists equally work with Italian

and foreign young offenders. In smaller cities and in the South of Italy,

Italian young offenders tend to be referred, especially in Sardinia, where the

work almost exclusively involves Italians.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


52




In IPM, psychologists tend to work mainly with foreign young offenders,

while in USSM and CPA psychologists worked with Italians proportionally to

the prevalence of foreigners and Italians within the services. In USSM social

workers make referrals to the psychologists for only some of the juveniles

undergoing criminal proceedings, those willing to undergo a probation

measure. In CPA the psychologist is called by the educator in case of need,

mainly for the assessment of Italian young offenders displaying severe

issues requiring further and qualified attention.

According to the psychologists interviewed, the main problems amongst

Italian young offenders are: developmental issues, social privation and

mental health disorders. The main problem of foreign young offenders is

social privation, relating to the process of immigration and integration within

Italy.

The study found that commonly identified developmental problems in Italian

young offenders were: personality disorders, behavioural problems, poor

impulse control, poor tolerance to frustration and substance abuse. The

social problems mentioned, common to both Italian and foreign young

offenders, were the presence of a multi-problematic social and family


53

background (i.e. organized crime, severe economic problems, deviant

family culture). The prevalent representation is that getting involved in the

criminal system may be the only choice for a foreign young person, given

the lack of resources and alternatives available.

Crime is seen as a more deliberate choice for Italian young offenders, the

outcome of interacting psychological and environmental factors. The Italian

young offender is indeed described as more severely disturbed from a

psychological and psycho-pathological point of view than the foreign young

offender, thus more difficult to treat (a number of such Italian young

offenders had undergo various programmes, and failed them all).

Dissatisfactions and possible improvements

All the psychologists interviewed indicate that the most satisfactory aspect

of their work is the relationship with the young people.

The clinical relationship with the young offenders seems reassuring in

comparison to the wider intervention within the juvenile justice services,

which seen at times to be wasteful and undefined.

The main problems reported by the psychologists revolve around the

institutional setting and include specific issues such as the difficulty in

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


54




teamwork, the fragmented nature of the work, the lack of cohesion in the

psychologists' group and the shortage of adequate time and resources.

The difficulty in combining work taking place in prison with community work,

both in terms of the limited availability of the family and the environment,

and a shortage in the resources available, is emphasised by IPM

professionals. The psychologists commonly feel unsatisfied or ineffective in

relation with the environment, rather than in objectives and methods

involving the clinical work. The relation with the young offenders himself is

not an issue either.

Possible improvements are usually related to the organization area. Most

psychologists think that the organization of the service may be improved by

providing a more systematic coordination in teamwork, within the service

(within psychologists, between psychologists, social workers and educators)

and external to the service (coordination with the local social services).

They also emphasized the importance of having their role appreciated,

when sometimes it is perceived as accessory (e.g. the excessive discretion

in the referrals, the waste of useful information, the lack of adequate spaces

for clinical interviews and the lack of data processing systems). The


55

psychologists also requested an increase in the number of working hours,

as currently the hours do not adequately cover the various level of

intervention.

A sense of non belonging to the service appeared to be widespread; the

feeling that one's function is deemed accessory, rather than essential. This

was in stark contrast to the involvement and the satisfaction the

psychologist attained through the assessment and treatment of the young

people themselves.

Other suggestions for possible improvements entailed the involvement of

the family of the young offender and the liaison with the local social

services; the provision of group work and more diversified psychological

and educational support paths.

The perceived efficacy of the psychological work

Most psychologists think that their intervention is largely effective. Various

meanings may be attached to the word “effective”, falling in two categories:

clinical work with the young offenders/team work and rehabilitation in the

community. Most psychologists report that an intervention is effective when

changes are achieved, even though they may be quite difficult to define.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


56




The efficacy of the clinical work is rooted in the trust relationship that is

established between the psychologist and the young offender in which the

young person's needs are addressed. Motivating the young person is

reported by many psychologists as proof of the efficacy of the work, as if the

acknowledgement of one's problems and need for help were an outcome in

themselves, almost regardless of the expected changes to follow.

The psychological work should be focused on improving the adolescent's

self-awareness, his representations, strengths and developmental needs.

Another shared view is that the criminal provision stops the young

offender's tendency to act out, thus becoming a chance for the young

person and his family to pursue both an understanding and to improve

individual and social resources, so that developmental impasses may be

overcome.

Consequently, the encounter with the court is not only seen as a provision

of a personality diagnostically oriented assessment but also the chance for

the young person to think about himself and becoming more self-aware,

which may promote a change in itself, both for the adolescent and for his

family.


57

During the interviews, the psychologists emphasised the importance of the

assessment, in improving the young person’s awareness. The psychologists

perceived this function to be more important than providing the court with an

extensive personality assessment of the youth, for the court to deliver an

order in line with the developmental needs of the young person.

A general sense of efficacy was reported through having been able to work

in a team, i.e. having come to a shared understanding of the young person

and formulated a tailored programme, such as a probation programme.

However, it is important to emphasise that not all the psychologists

interviewed linked the perceived efficacy of the intervention with a positive

outcome on a practical and external level. Many psychologists mention the

importance of a personality change, regardless of a positive outcome of the

criminal provision, because they think that external and uncontrollable

variables, environment-related may affect its outcome. (“The young offender

may have done very well therapeutically, even though the outcome of the

probation was negative).

Sometimes the positive outcome, from a psychological perspective, is not

related to recidivism risk. Other psychologists emphasise that the efficacy of

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


58




the psychological intervention depends upon the criminal setting, and

consequently has to be related to a reduction in re-offending rates.

Generally speaking, a psychological intervention is deemed effective when

it produces a change, either internal or involving the environment.

IPM and CPA feedback received from the community is positively valued,

when the young offender, after the experience in prison, seems more able

to modify his lifestyle and to engage in a different future. In USSM the

psychologists undertake long-term work with the young offenders, by

supporting them throughout the criminal provision; consequently, a

psychological outcome is considered positive when it enables the youth to

overcome the impasse in his developmental path, by promoting his

understanding of his own circumstances and the improvement of his

competences.

Generally speaking, the psychologists working within the juvenile justice

services think that working in a well-coordinated team, both on the “internal

world” and on the resources of the environment, is of paramount

importance.


59

In contrast, the psychologists think that a negative outcome is related to the

lack of a motivation on the young person's side, when a probation measure

is accepted only on an exploitable basis.

Further issues that lead to a negative outcome are the shortages within the

service or the community, so that it becomes impossible to set up a tailored

provision and to carry it out. When integrated team work is not available, it

leads to dissatisfaction on the psychologist’s side.

Beyond the obstacles related to the juvenile justice setting, the

psychologists interviewed mentioned difficulties related to the severity of the

situation, either to severe psycho-pathological problems on the youth's side,

or to issues involving the family and the social background.

Rarely is the poor outcome traced back to a mistake in the psychologist's

assessment.

In conclusion, the psychologists think that their work is effective when it is

well integrated with that of the other professionals, either working in the

service (i.e. team work with the social worker and the educator) or in the

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


60




community (e.g. professionals of the local social services). However, it is

important to emphasize that recidivism is rarely an indicator of failure.

Psychologists specifically think that a positive outcome, from a

psychological viewpoint, is related to the establishment of a trusting

relationship, motivating the young person both to engage in the

psychological work and in the rehabilitation process. The psychological

work is aimed at promoting a positive social identity and enabling the youth

to overcome the impasse to his development.

The psychologists tend to see their contribution as overall effective, i.e. first

of all (at a clinical level) through promoting an internal change and an

increased self awareness; secondly, through the cooperation and the

coordination with the other professionals to develop a tailored programme

to be identified and implemented. Only rarely is a good outcome related to a

reduction in the recidivism rate.

Training

The exchange with colleagues mainly takes place on cases-by-case basis,

with the hand-over of information concerning the young offender following a


61

change in the criminal provision or the transfer of the youth from a juvenile

jail to another.

Rarely do methodological or theoretical exchanges take place, even though

about half of the psychologists interviewed recently underwent some

training, particularly those employed by the NHS, on the occasion of the

recent institutional change. The contract of consulting psychologists does

not include training.

All the professionals who attended training sessions, on themes such as

adolescence issues or the use of psycho-diagnostic tests, found them

useful in their work. The professionals who were not involved in training

emphasized that it would be useful and desirable for training to be provided.

There are a number of themes the psychologists want to know more about:

adolescence-related issues; methodologies and assessment tests; the

experience of other colleagues working within the juvenile justice services.

Some also mentioned that it would be useful to have access to supervision

with particularly severe situations.

Table 8. Suggestions for training

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


62




Foreign youths: migration and the multicultural approach

Personality assessment: objectives, methods, tests

The treatment of antisocial disorders in different environments (e.g. In

residential communities)

Criminal justice proceedings code

Exchange of methods and tests employed with the various juvenile

justice services

Substance abuse

Therapeutic and working alliance with the young offender and

motivation to the psychological work

Supervision on particularly severe situations

A request for training strongly emerges, mainly seen as an exchange of

experiences, in order to achieve a shared system of practices and methods.

Such a request seems related to a general feeling of isolation within the

juvenile justice services. Even though well integrated team work (including

social worker, educators, and professionals from the local health services)

seems essential, it tends to be perceived as difficult to achieve, not very

gratifying, and unable to replace an exchange with other psychologist

colleagues.


63

The psychologist often feels arbitrary or inconstantly involved, due to the

shortage of adequate working hours, or not fully appreciated in his specific

competences, leading to the work becoming scattered and fragmented.

The difficulties do not involve the tasks assigned by the institution which are

generally regarded as being compatible with the psychological work, but

rather, involve the organization level and the relationship with the other

professionals.

Most psychologists share this opinion, regardless of the service they belong

to (IPM, CPA, USSM), their contract (employed/consulting) and location of

the service (North, Centre or South of Italy). However it must be noted that

psychologists working in USSM appear to be more satisfied. Generally

speaking, the psychologists feel isolated both within the institution and

professionally, due to the fact that there is no set model of intervention, and

no specific professional training.

From the Ministry of Justice to the NHS

Psychologists are ambivalent about the change in department from the

Ministry of Justice to the NHS. Two positive effects of becoming part of the

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


64




NHS include having greater professional acknowledgement and

responsibility.

Many psychologists value being in a position that provides clear

acknowledgement of a defined professional identity. Some emphasize that

under the NHS, it is now possible to have an exchange with colleagues.

A general sense of uncertainty exists with regard to the undefined relation

between providing a diagnosis, in a mental health perspective, and a

personality assessment, in a criminal setting perspective. Complying with a

“mental health” model, seems more related to an increased

acknowledgement of the psychologist's role than to the feeling that the two

perspectives are not compatible.

Most psychologists have experienced a sense of exclusion and a lack of

professional acknowledgement within the juvenile justice services. Work

satisfaction is only provided through the relationship with the young

offender.

An open question remains “Is it possible and/or useful to combine an

institutional-related intervention (i.e. the personality assessment requested

by the art. 9) to a mental-health-based provision (i.e. diagnosis-and-

treatment related)?.

6. The assessment of antisocial behavior within a developmental frame

65

Even though there are a number of theories explain antisocial behaviours,

empirical data supporting the different theoretical hypotheses tend to

progressively converge, so that some points may be given as granted. A

survey of such results seems to suggest that different theories may actually

explain complementary, rather than incompatible, aspects of the issue:

integration is particularly possible when a developmental perspective is

adopted.

To understand criminal behaviour (Lahey, Moffitt, Caspi, 2003) it is

important to consider the combination of an individual predisposition, based

on specific temperamental traits, such as low self esteem, negative

sensitiveness, liability in impulse control and insensitivity – with negative

educational interactions during childhood (Hare, 2003; Lahey, Waldman,

2003). Inadequate educational styles and parental care quickly transform

such temperamental predispositions to behavioural problems in childhood,

in an action-reaction scheme often becoming a vicious circle of coercion

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


66




(Snyder, Reid, Patterson, 2003) where the lack of an empathic

understanding of the child’s needs and a deficiency in symbolic processing

become central features (Fonagy, Target, 2002).

Early educational interactions represent an important precursor of antisocial

behaviours in adolescence. Dysfunctional relational schemes or expectation

schemes on interpersonal relationships may play a crucial role in

behavioural problems in childhood leading to antisocial disorders in

adolescence. Such schemes generally show that the tendency to overvalue

hostility in interpersonal relationships, with regards to both familiar people

and mostly with strangers, and to consider that others are responsible for

the events occurring, rather than oneself. (Dodge, Lochmann, Laird, 2002).

Systems of representation of oneself and the other, based on

impulsiveness, the tendency to a processing style in persecutory rather that

in depressive terms, to little empathy, to overvalue oneself and to

undervalue the other, become of increased importance when a redefinition

of oneself takes place in adolescence, in the development of a social

identity (Moffitt, 2003).


67

The adolescent may consequently use his antisocial behaviour as a means

for defining his social identity (Novelletto, 2000), to assert himself in social

terms and to create a social reputation, mainly within the peer group (Emler,

Reicher, 1995).

Therefore, the actual antisocial behaviour is directly related to the person’s

motivations and set of values (the role ideal), and their relationship to the

opportunities provided (or not provided) by the social environment,

responding to the adolescent’s developmental tasks (Wikstrom, Sampson,

2003)

From this viewpoint, it is essential to consider, as the basis of the antisocial

behaviour, the desires and the values of the youth, and the way he

interprets interpersonal relationships as he on carrys out of his

developmental needs.

Juvenile crime may be the expression of a rule-breaking attitude in

adolescence. It may alternatively be the result of behavioural problems or

an antisocial personality, or of a more severe psychopathology. In most

cases, professionals working within the juvenile justice services are

confronted with severe antisocial disorders. In any case, both social

problems and psycho-pathological disorders may be seen as different forms

of a difficulty for the adolescent to develop a social identity, i.e. an Ego

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


68




ideal, an idea of oneself and one’s value in relation to being a male or a

female. Antisocial behaviours may be seen as the expression of a failure in

the process of taking responsibility for one’s behaviour: an insufficient

development in the capacity to control one’s behaviour and to feel guilty, a

problem in the development of one’s identity or a distorted perception of the

hostility from the other (jeopardising the development of a social image)

may undermine such developmental process (Maggiolini, 2002).

Combining the different theoretical approaches may be easier, when a

general perspective of developmental psychopathology is adopted.

Developmental psychopathology is particularly helpful in understanding

antisocial behaviour, its onset and its development throughout adolescence

and adulthood, as it shows how crime may both be the result of different

developmental paths and at the same time open to different developmental

paths and expressions. A developmental psychopathology approach leads

to giving great importance to the environment, overcoming the idea that the

adolescent “holds” a disorder: antisocial behaviours are seen rather as the

result of negative interaction between developmental needs and

environment’s responses, where the representations of the individual

concerning his needs and the responses from others are of paramount


69

importance. The general principles of developmental psychopathology (i.e.

equifinality, multi-finality contextualism and constructivism) seem particularly

helpful in understanding of behavioural disorders in adolescence (Cicchetti,

Cohen, 1995; Cummings, Davies, Campbell, 2000).

The ultimate goal of the criminal proceedings against young offenders (DPR

n.448/88) is to always support the development of the youth, regardless of

the severity of the issue hampering his social integration, be it adolescent

developmental conflicts, personality or behavioural disorders or mental

health disorders affecting one’s perception of reality. From this viewpoint,

detention centres, residential communities, therapeutic communities or

probation orders may all be seen as strategies pursuing the same general

aim, rather than belonging to different domains (care-punishment).

In psycho-social terms, juvenile crimes have various level of severity, (even

though each category may include different levels of severity)

• Behaviours at risk, more than actual offences even though they

might be classified as offences in some countries, such as vagrancy;

• Status-related offences, where a given behaviour becomes an

offence in relation to the age of the person who does it, such as

sexual intercourse below a given age;

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


70




• Offences not entailing the presence of a victim, such as drug

possession or dealing;

• Offences entailing the presence of a victim, with no direct violence

involved, such as shop-lifting, theft or burglary

• Offences entailing violence on a victim, such as sexual abuse,

robbery or homicide.

Even though different offences may be related to different psycho-

pathologies, most of the times the professionals working within the juvenile

justice services deal with antisocial personality disorders, if the definition

provided by the DSM-IV-R for adults is employed.

However, within the juvenile justice services a DSM IV diagnosis of conduct

disorder or antisocial personality disorder (described as a pervasive pattern

of disregard for and violation of the rights of the others, occurring from 15

years of age and continuing into adulthood) is not discriminative enough. In

addition, such a classification is been criticized by many authors on

theoretical grounds, as it seems excessively based on the observation of

the behaviour.


71

For instance, Hare (1970) emphasizes that sociopathy, or antisocial

personality disorder, and psychopathy, should not be mistaken. Sociopathy

and antisocial personality disorders describe a variety of conditions such as

sexual deviations, alcoholism, asocial and antisocial behaviours, not

necessarily crime-related. On the other hand, psychopathy, defined by both

behavioural criteria and personality traits, more appropriately portrays

delinquents displaying the highest risk of re-offending and committing the

most severe offences, but who are not necessarily impulsive or antisocial

(so much that some may actually be well integrated in society, holding

responsible positions). Hare found two fixed factors in psychopathy: the first

is aggressive narcissism, i.e. egocentrism, insensitiveness and lack of

remorse (related to narcissistic and histrionic personalities, displaying low

levels of anxiety and low empathy for the others). The second factor is an

antisocial lifestyle: irresponsible, non conventional, antisocial, impulsive

lifestyle, where the individual is often sensation-seeking; it is strongly

related to criminal behaviours, low I.Q., low socio-economic status and low

education.

Frick, Barry & Bodin (2000) found similar factors while analysing disruptive

behaviours in childhood. Looking for precursors of psychopathy in

childhood, two personality dimensions were found: insensitivity (or

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


72




coldness) and poor impulsiveness management. Insensitivity include the

following: the child does not care about school, does not feel mean or guilty,

has superficial and ingenuine emotions, does not show feelings or

emotions, acts in seductive and insincere manners, does not care about the

other people’s feelings.

A lack of impulse control may be seen in circumstances where a child tend

to boast, to get angry when corrected, think that he is more important than

the others, behave without thinking about the consequences, reproach the

others’ for his own mistakes, mock the others, be engaged in dangerous,

risky or illicit activities, change his friends frequently and get easily bored.

Both insensitive children and those with little impulse control show

behavioural problems, but it is insensitivity and a lack of emotional response

that are strongly related to an early onset of behavioural issues (a mayor

difference between adults and children is that narcissism in children tend to

be more impulsiveness-related, while in adult it is more insensitivity-

related).

Similarly, even though most adolescents imprisoned meet the criteria for a

conduct or antisocial disorder (about 8 out of ten); only 3 out of 10 meet the

criteria for psychopathy (Forth, Mailloux, 2000)


73

While no differences emerge in relation to gender or age, psychopathy is

strongly related to narcissistic, antisocial or borderline personality traits (the

impulsive cluster of antisocial disorders). Family factors related to

psychopathy are the following: neglect or physical, sexual or emotional

abuse during childhood, family conflict, antisocial or alcoholic parents. From

an educational viewpoint, lack of parental control, incoherent discipline and

early separations during infancy are all predictive factors.

Jones and Westen (2010) recently examined the application of the

antisocial personality disorder (ASP) diagnosis to adolescents and

investigated the possibility of subtypes of ASP adolescents.

The first Q-Factor, psychopathic-like, captures the construct of the fledgling

psychopath. Adolescents who strongly match the psychopathic prototype

are emotionally cold, oppositional, lacking in empathy or remorse (i.e. they

experience little or no remorse for harm or injury caused to others and seem

unable or unwilling to understand or respond to others’ needs or feelings),

dishonest, callous, angry, violent, narcissistic, and manipulative. They are

rebellious or defiant towards authority figures and tend to be quick to

disagree. They are unresponsive to consequences and tend to engage in

criminal behaviour. Further, these adolescents seem to derive satisfaction

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


74




and gratification from their antisocial behaviour and they derive satisfaction

or self esteem from being, or being seen as “bad” or “tough”.

The second personality subtype, Socially Withdrawn, represents

adolescents who are peer neglected and lack close friendships and social

support. Those in the socially withdrawn group not only exhibit social skills

deficits, but are also depressed, anhedonic, bored, angry, rebellious, and

impulsive. They have an external locus of control, low self-esteem, and an

immature and ill-defined self-concept and a little psychological insight into

their own motives, behaviour etc. They tend to feel like an outcast or

outsider, unhappy, depressed or despondent and appear to find little or no

pleasure in life’s activities. They can abuse alcohol or drugs, they tend to

feel helpless and powerless at a mercy of forces outside their control and

they tend to surround themselves with peers who are delinquent or deeply

alienated.

The authors labelled the third Q-Factor Impulsive-Histrionic due to the mix

of rash, reckless, theatrical, and exaggerated emotions common to this

subgroup. Impulsive and impulsive-Histrionic adolescents behave

impulsively in a variety of domains: interpersonal relationships, sexual

interactions, and substance use (i.e. they tend to be sexually seductive or

provocative, to surround themselves with delinquent peers and their


75

relationships tend to be unstable, chaotic and rapidly changing). They seek

to be the centre of attention and will often use their sexuality to further this

endeavour; as a result, they may become rapidly involved in abusive,

dysfunctional, or inappropriate sexual relationships. These adolescents do

not have stable self-concepts but seem to derive pleasure from delinquent

activities.

Emotionally dysregulated adolescents, the fourth personality subtype,

struggle to control their emotions, which tend to change rapidly and

unpredictably. Accompanying the emotional escalations that typify this

subgroup are problems with splitting people into good and bad without

being able to integrate emotionally discordant features of their personality or

behaviour, cognitive disorganization under stress, impulsivity, inappropriate

anger, and attention seeking. These adolescents have immature coping

styles and are deficits in understanding the behaviour of others. They are

prone to outbursts of anger which are out of proportion to the situation, and

when upset, they have trouble perceiving both positive and negative

qualities in the same person at the same time; they also tend, when

distressed, to revert to earlier, less mature ways of coping (i.e. clinging,

whining, having tantrums).

The fifth Q-Factor, Attentionally Dysregulated, represents the highest

functioning subtype, characterized by a combination of both positive

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


76




psychological features and clinical problems associated with ADHD. The

attentionally dysregulated constellation includes difficulties with maintaining

attention, distractibility, hyperactivity, restlessness, and impulsiveness. In

addition, these adolescents frequently lie, perform below their expected

level in school, blame others, and ignore consequences. Alongside these

deficiencies, however, attentionally dysregulated adolescents have a

number of strengths: they are well-liked, have a good sense of humour, and

interact appropriately with others.

Not only are cognitive issue (e.g. not thinking about the consequences of

one’s behaviours) related to the difficulties in impulse control that can be

found in antisocial behaviours, it is mainly narcissistic issues (e.g. boasting

and mocking). In a psychoanalytic approach, Kernberg (1999) located

juvenile antisocial behaviours within the narcissistic spectrum. In the

author’s view, during the identity crisis which occurs in adolescence, even

though it may be difficult to combine different aspects of oneself and of

significant others, there is a capacity to have a realistic picture of the others,

to have interests and to engage in a relationship with others. A tendency to

dominate or to be dominated, lack of empathy in interpersonal relationship,

a grandiose attitude (i.e. Impudent, feeling superior, displaying unwarranted


77

ambitions) and behavioural issues, such as difficulties at school, underpin a

narcissistic disorder. A more severe level of narcissistic disorder is

malignant narcissism, where a narcissistic disorder and antisocial

behaviours overlap. Poor school performance and bad behaviour at school

go together with ego-syntonic aggression and, often, paranoid orientation.

In some cases such hostility, aggression and mistrust produces a proper

antisocial disorder.

Rule-breaking behaviours during adolescence are not always related to

similar issues during childhood. Empirical research shows that it is

important to distinguish between young offenders who’s rule-breaking

behaviour is adolescence-restricted (widespread, non pathological, with a

prevalence of a social motive and little aggressive) and young offenders

who’s behaviours widens to a life span (rare, pathological, often aggressive,

with a prevalence of neuro-biological and hereditary issues). In addition to

the two groups mentioned, a third group includes moderately chronic

isolated and socially withdrawn young offenders, whose antisocial

behaviour is intermittent (Moffitt, 2003).

Another possibility, in the work with young offenders, is to face someone

who’s offences are the expression of a mental health disorder, with a loss of

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


78




contact with reality, rather than a personality or behavioural one, even

though it may temporary or related to his group culture.

Individual psychopathologies intertwine with environment-related psycho-

pathologies. Some crime is related to antisocial culture, where social

motives become more relevant than the individual’s psychological or

psychopathogical ones: their rule-breaking behaviours are not antisocial;

they actually represent a good integration within the group they belong to.

Other adolescents, such as the foreign unaccompanied minors, may offend

in order to survive in the host country.

The relationship between assessment and treatment i n the work with

young offenders

Observation and assessment are an important part of a psychologist’s work

within the juvenile justice services. The assessment may be aimed at

understanding the subjective meaning of the offence, in relation to his

personality features, the environment he comes from and his developmental

needs, and at understanding of the youth’ attitude towards criminal justice

and the provisions he is subjected to.


79

In clinical practice, it might be helpful to have criteria guiding the

assessment, not only in diagnostic terms, but also as the grounds of a

psycho-social probation programme.

For those who have to deal with offenders, either directly or indirectly,

conducting assessments is simply part of their regular working routine. Any

intervention with an offender requires an assessment of how the

characteristics of the offender and the situation are related to a relevant

outcome (Bonta, 2002). The need to implement assessment procedures is

emphasized by research showing that adolescents with mental health

issues and a history of drug abuse are more likely to offend than the others

(Moffit et al., 2000) and by the very high prevalence of mental health issues

amongst young offenders (Atkins et al., 1999; Duclos et al., 1998; Randal et

al., 1999; Boesky, 2002; Teplin et al., 2002; Wasserman, McReynolds,

Lucas, Fisher, Santos., 2002; Vermerein, 2003; Kadzin, 2000; Vermeiren,

Jesper, Moffit, 2006; Maggiolini et al., 2008).

A recent and comparative review (Grisso, 2004) shows that the most

common issues are mood and anxiety disorders, drug-related issues,

behavioural and thought disorders. The prevalence of mental health issues

amongst young offenders is between 60% and 70%, about two to three

times more frequent than in the normal population (Kadzin, 2000, Roberts,

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


80




Attkinson, Rosenblatt, 1998). Consequently, juvenile criminal justice

systems must be capable of identifying young offenders with special

psychological needs at first intake (Grisso, Vincent, Seagrave, 2005). A

developmental psychopathology approach (Cicchetti, Cohen, 2006) is

suitable for screening.

A developmental assessment considers individual functioning, the capacity

to adjust to the environment and well-being or stress (Riva, Trionfi, 2004).

When applied to antisocial issues, its meaning is strictly related to the

following treatment programme, as ““Any intervention with an offender

requires an assessment of how the characteristics of the offender and the

situation are related to a relevant outcome” (Bonta, 2002; p. 355).

The assessment takes place in a coercive frame (Maggiolini, 2002), where

the young offender is not experiencing the difficulties he spontaneously

seeks help for. That is why it is important, in the work with young offenders,

to first of all explain the frame in which the assessment takes place, its

objectives, who has requested an assessment and why. This preliminary

step is essential in the creation of a working alliance, which is otherwise

difficult to establish with young offenders.


81

A developmental psychopathology-oriented assessment is aimed at

understanding the meaning of the offence in relation to his personality,

family, environmental and developmental needs. The assessment is indeed

not classification-oriented or nosographic, it is rather something useful to

collect information on the adolescent’s functioning, particularly those related

to the offence.

The subjective representations of the events leading to a criminal charge

are studied, as well as the developmental issues which the adolescent is

struggling with, in order to find a link between the antisocial behaviour and

the developmental path the adolescent had taken when offending. It is also

important to find the subjective meaning of the offence, often something the

adolescent himself is unaware of, because he has replaced the

subjectivation and mentalization processes with an antisocial acting out.

In short, the psychological assessment of a young offender, in such a

theoretical frame, may be seen as the assessment of the functioning of the

individual, whose core is the understanding of his developmental needs.

In order to do that, developmental issues are related to personality features

and possible shortcomings of the environment. What other theoretical

models may read as a symptom (e.g. impulsiveness, feeling persecuted, a

grandiose attitude), is actually seen as a distorted version of developmental

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


82




issues, or obstacles hampering the chance for the adolescent to meet his

real developmental need, disguised with the antisocial behaviour.

Assessment and treatment based on the understanding of developmental

needs, may offer a solution to the recent debate (Ward, Stewaer, 2003),

between the actuarial and the clinical model. Rather than being

incompatible, the models become integrated in an innovative approach,

perfectly balanced between the nomothetic and the ideographic (Baird,

1984; Schwalbe, 2007, 2008; Shlonsky, Wagner, 2005).

Actuarial models are based on an objective prediction of the risk, carried out

with the predictive observation of the behaviour of the individual. Actuarial

approaches are aimed at identifying the so-called “criminogenic needs”

(Bonta, 2002; Hoge, 2002, Ward, Stewart, 2003), i.e. dynamic risk factors

related to antisocial behaviours in adolescence.

Differently from static and un-changeable risk factors (e.g. age of first

offence, one of the most predictive factors of re-offending), criminogenic

needs, being dynamic factors, are modifiable. Andrews and Bonta (1998)

indeed think thatpersonal and family circumstances, such as impulsiveness,

substance abuse, antisocial beliefs, once modified, decrease re-offending

rates. Criminogenic needs, by definition, provide the professionals with


83

useful information about which aspects are possible to work upon.

According to the “need principle of case classification” (Andrews et al.,

1990), the juvenile justice services should ground their decisions solely on

the assessment of the individual criminogenic needs. An assessment based

on theoretically grounded and empirically valid criminogenic predictors,

measured by standardized, objective and development-sensible tests is

deemed more effective than any clinical assessment made by the

supporters of the actuarial model (Groive, Zald, Lebow, Snitz, Nelson,

2000).

The actuarial model focuses on recidivism risk and aims at reducing re-

offending rather than helping the adolescent overcome his developmental

impasses. While it remains desirable for a young person to improve his

potentials, it not the primary goal of the intervention. On the contrary, a

clinical model is first of all aimed at improving the young offender’s skills

and resilience, by helping the adolescent overcome his difficulties and

consequently, in theory, preventing re-offending (Ward, Stewart, 2003).

While the clinical model is in line with the most recent theoretical and

practical recommendations of the developmental psychopathology, the

recidivism-control model has ruled the treatment of young offenders

(Andrews, Bonta, 1998; Ashfort, Sales, Reid, 2001; Garland, 2001). Even

though Bonta (2000) insists on the superiority of the actuarial model and is

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


84




quite sceptical about the possibility of integrating it with the clinical one

(Bonta, 2002), a recent approach in the international debate suggests that a

combined actuarial-clinical model sacrifices neither the depth of the clinical

understanding nor the empirical evidence of actuarial measures (Schwalbe,

2008; Shlonsky, Wagner, 2005).

Following the identification of the individual’s criminogenic needs, the

actuarial model does not provide information about the clinical decisions to

be undertaken, nor does it recommend how a change may be produced and

a disrupted developmental path overcome,. It simply tells the clinician how

future re-offending may be predicted (Shlonsky, Wagner, 2005). However,

the link between statistic relevance and empiric predictability on the one

hand, and tailored development-based individual treatment on the other is

not clear.

Such a link may be found if criminogenic needs are seen as distortions or

normal expressions of developmental needs (Ward; Stewart, 2003), i.e. as

internal (personality-related) or external (environment-related) obstacles

hampering a favourable developmental path leading to an impasse in the

development. A psychological assessment should then be focused on the

understanding of the real developmental needs of the young offender, in


85

relation to personality features and resources, and the way unmet

developmental needs manifest through the so-called criminogenic needs.

When the actuarial and the clinical model are kept separated, one may not

see which developmental needs underpin apparently similar constellations

of criminogenic needs, so that programmes tackling such constellations

may be put in place, but with no change produced on the young person’s

development.

The aims and how to perform the assessment of young offenders.

Personality assessment responds to the following issues: “sound mind”,

relevance of fact, whether a pre-trial measure is appropriate and which,

whether a probation order is suitable, whether alternative sanctions are

suitable, possible positive outcome of a conviction, its severity and how to

modulate it (Losanna, 2008).

Following a developmental psychopathology approach, a change in the

paradigm employed for the personality assessment of juvenile delinquents

occured (Centomani, Martino, 2008). The focus became the analysis of the

offence, with particular regard for its subjective meaning, the degree of

responsibility at the time of the offence and thoughout the criminal

provision, the way he talks about himself, his identity, his personal, family,

social and environmental resources. Also included is an assessment of the

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


86




environment, with particular regards for the educational styles, and the

development of a criminal career. The prognosis is informed by the concept

of social dangerousness. The assessment informs the treatment.

The aims of the psychological assessment of young offenders includes

identifying the relevant personality features and/or mental health issues, in

the individual dynamic between the developmental needs of the young

person, their interactions with static and dynamic risk factors (the so-called

criminogenic needs) and protective factors within the person or his

environment. A second set of aims includes the assessment of the risk of

re-offending and the risk of violence, overlapping with the concept of “social

dangerousness”. A third aim is the assessment of the degree of maturity –

immaturity of the young person, with particular regards to the way they

affect his degree of responsibility. Finally, the psychological assessment,

should investigate the young offender’s access to treatment where the basis

of an adequate psycho-educational, judicial and social programme may be

posed..

Interviewing and tests

In addition to interviews, the assessment may include the use of tests.


87

Interviewing young offenders may be particularly difficult, due to them being

prone to acting-out and having s poor capacity to symbolize.

The psychologist has to adjust his usual listening approach, in order to

become more active than when faced with someone who acknowledges

that they have a problem and has sufficient capacity for mentalization.

The psychologist should engage with an understanding of the subjective

meaning of the offence (Maggiolini, 2002). A psycho-dynamic understanding

combines with judicial demands, implying that the assessment is not

primarily oriented to define the suitable psychotherapeutic treatment, rather

the suitable criminal and socio-educational provision.

During the initial interviews it can be helpful to understand whether a given

behaviour is acknowledged a rule-breaking value, and whether the young

person is clear that it is illegal. The developmental circumstances under

which the offence occurred are investigated: frequently antisocial

behaviours take place in moments of change (e.g. the end of the school),

crisis or failure in one’s development. At the end of this first stage, the

young person and his parents are given an interpretation of what has

happened, “shaping” the event in a different way, in order to come to a

shared understanding.

An assessment of the young person’s development follows, with particular

regard for the adolescence developmental tasks, i.e. separation-

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


88




individuation processes, social integration, development of a sexual identity

and of realistic plans for the future.

Developmental impasses are liaised with personality features or

shortcomings of the environment. Impulsiveness, lack of appropriate guilt,

grandiose attitude, insensitivity, depression or persecutory attitude are not a

disorder to treat, but a distorted version of developmental issues, preventing

the adolescent from developing an appropriate social identity and taking

responsibility for his behaviour. Obstacles to the adolescent’s behaviour are

often found in the environment rather than in the personality of the young

person. In such cases the antisocial behaviour is the expression of the

developmental psychopathology of his environment.

Family relationships, with particular regard to attachment and control

functions, school performance and behaviour at school, peer relationships

and intimate relationships, the relationship with one’s body, the usual mood

and the possible presence of risk-taking behaviours, allow for the Ego ideal

to be investigated. When working with immigrant youths, the assessment

includes the young offender’s feelings about the immigration, the story of

the migration process and the arrival in the host country, his motivations and


89

his expectations.

The young offender’s viewpoint is very much taken into account, regarding

the charge, the empathy with the damage or the pain caused, the capacity

to anticipate the consequences of his actions, whether the offence was

planned or impulsive; in case of violence, whether it was predatory, reactive,

fight or flight. When other people participated the crime, the role of each

subject is explored. Even when there is no admission of guilt, the way the

young person and his family reacted to the charge might be important.

The psychologist explores whether the young person can take responsibility

for his behaviour (i.e. admission of guilt, acknowledgement of its meaning

and its severity, capacity to plan a programme, capacity to engage in it),

with the aim of working on a shared probation programme, to be presented

and discussed with the court.

The outline of the interviews with parents may be similar (e.g. explaining the

frame of the assessment, exploring what they think about their son and

possible education difficulties...). Interviewing the parents may provide

indirect information about the problems and the possible presence of a

psychopathology and direct information on education and attachment

styles, parental control and empathic mirroring (while family circumstances

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


90




and events are usually collected by the educator or the social worker). The

parents might or might not be able to access their son’s difficulties and

understand his motivations, taking responsibility for his behaviour.

With young offenders the interpersonal difficulties emphasized by the

literature in relation to the use of projective tests with adolescents multiply. A

psycho-diagnostic setting, per se, tend to illicit intrusion and evaluation

fears. However, it is possible to make a potentially judging and intrusive

experience an emotional self-exploring and interpersonal experience,

promoting a working alliance and enabling the young person to get in touch

with his own internal world (Aliprandi, Bassetti, Riva, 2000).

While criminological research on adults seems sceptical about the reliability

of psychological assessment in judicial examinations, the experience with

young offenders show that when the adolescent is directly and transparently

aware of the use of tests in an assessment for a court, and he is helped to

discuss his doubts and worries, he quickly dismisses opportunity

considerations. His often strong anxiety about being tested, does not

address the judge, but the adult in front of him or, even more so, to the


91

internalized adult, some sort of internal parent who has long been judging

and mortifying him, undermining his potentials (Riva, 2002).

With the use of psychological tests the understanding of the young person

goes beyond his awareness, they may provide some information in a faster

manner than interviewing, which still remains of paramount importance in

the assessment, and they tend to be more objective than clinical

judgements. In Hoge’s opinion (2002): the quality of a psychological

assessment is directly related to its validity, and its validity may be improved

with the use of standardized assessment tools.

Some guidelines for the selection and use of assessment instruments with

antisocial youths (Bonta, 2002) include the following: assessment of

antisocial youths should be based on actuarial measures capable of

empirically sound prediction about recidivism and re-offending; assessment

instruments directly relevant to criminal behavior (i.e. criminogenic needs

factors); select instruments derived from relevant theory, reliable, and

empirically validated; use different methods to assess risks and needs

because the predictive validity of assessments can improve when different

methods are combined: when different methods are used, the weakness of

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


92




one assessment instrument can be compensated by the strength of another

test.

From a methodological point of view, depending on its aims and the

moment it takes place, a “screening” process and an “assessment” process

may take place. The distinction between the two is not always clear, given

the general trend to define “assessment” whichever measure of the

psychological features of an individual (Grisso et al., 2005; Wasserman et

al., 2003).

Screening and assessment may be seen as two hierarchic steps of

identification of needs and developmental issues within the juvenile justice

services.

Screenings provides a type of economical identification applied to all youths

at intake within the juvenile justice services, whereas assessment, following

a screening, provides more extensive and individualized identification of

mental health needs to those youths whose screening results suggested

that was warranted (Grisso et al., 2005; p. 12)

It is important to emphasize that screening and assessment do not

necessarily involve different area of investigation. Both steps focus on


93

personality features and psychopathology, risk of re-offending or

behavioural disorders and psycho-social or adjustment problems. However,

the screening is particularly important at intake and provides a less tailored

view on the nature of the young person developmental needs; while the

assessment provides a longer, wider and individual understanding of the

young person, his needs and his possible developmental paths.

Screening is carried out with every young offender at intake within the

juvenile justice services, it tends to focus on those conditions requiring

immediate attention/response, such as substance abuse or suicidal risk.

Psychological and behavioural information is collected in a rapid, efficient

and inexpensive manner, with the immediate identification of the needs

which require a quickly responds.

Most juvenile justice services lack a structure capable of establishing in

advance which areas should be explored. However, influential authors

(American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2005; Boesky,

2003; Grisso, 2004; Wasserman, Jensen, Ko, 2003) suggest that the

screening taking place within the juvenile justice services should include

emotional and anxiety symptoms, the likelihood of aggressive behaviours,

self-harming behaviours or suicide in the short-term and drug abuse-

misuse.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


94




For the screening to be effective the tests employed should be

standardized, valid and reliable (Wasserman, 2003; American Academy of

Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2005). Notwithstanding the strong

recommendation to provide a systematic, planned and standardized

screening at intake, it has rarely been carried out within the juvenile justice

services so far (Bailey, Trabuck, 2006)

Assessment – in contrast to screening, the assessment provides a

comprehensive and tailored view of the young offender’s functioning. While

the screening provides answers to short-term questions such as: “Is the

young person likely to assault someone while in CPA? Is it necessary to

take precautions against the risk of self-harming?” - the assessment

provides useful information for the identification of a long-term programme

or treatment (Grisso et al., 2005).

Differently from the screening, the assessment is selective, as it cannot be

carried out for all the young offenders involved with the juvenile justice

system. Three selection criteria (Grisso et al., 2005) may be the following:

an assessment is to be carried out in order to explore in depth issues

arising from the screening, in order to answer a judicial question, or in order

to share with the young person a tailored programme.


95

The assessment provides a wide understanding of the psychic functioning

of an individual, his adjustment skills, whether he is experiencing some

stress and the relationship between personal features, the environment,

criminogenic needs and developmental needs.

The most important areas to be explored may be: personality features, with

the help of tests for a clinical assessment; the risk of re-offending, with the

help of actuarial tests and issues concerning the judicial frame where the

assessment takes place, with the help of so-called “forensic” tests (Grisso,

1986; Grisso et al., 2003).

Finally, the assessment taking place in the juvenile justice systems should

be carried out by more than one professional, by the “institution” itself,

meaning a device combining different competences and objectives. The

interdisciplinary assessment team (Centomani, Martino, 2008) is

fundamental to collate different viewpoints and competences in one

narration. It may include educators, psychologists, social workers, cultural

mediators, medical doctors, probation officers and professionals from

various agencies.

The Massachussetts Assess Youth Symptoms Instrument-2 (MAYSI-2;

Grisso, Barnum, 2003) may be recommended for screening. It was

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


96




developed as a brief, self-reporting tool and can be administered by

persons without clinical youth training at any entry or transitional placement

point in the juvenile justice s. It was designed to identify youths

experiencing thoughts, feelings, or behavior that may be indicative of

psychopathologies and/or an acute emotional crisis requiring immediate

attention (Grisso et al., 2005). As a screening tool, the MAYSI-2 assesses

emergency treatment needs, especially for serious depression, suicidal risk,

aggression that might harm others in detention and potential consequences

of substance abuse withdrawal. The MAYSI-2 screens for symptoms of

mental and emotional disturbance, as well as potential crisis problems.

MAYSI-2 screening should be conducted within the first 24 hours of a youth

being admissed into the juvenile justice system. It is appropriated for use

with boys and girls between 12-17 years of age and administration scoring

is quite short (about 10-15 minutes).

The instruments consist of a paper and pencil questionnaire containing self-

report inventory of 52 questions. The seven primary scales are: 1)

Alcohol/Drug Use, 2) Angry-Irritable; 3) Depressed-Anxious; 4) Somatic

Complaints; 5) Suicide Ideation; 6) Thoughts Disturbance (validated only for

boys); 7) Traumatic Experiences. Research in the juvenile justice field has


97

affirmed the instrument's reliability (Archer, Stredny, Mason, 2004; Cruise,

Dandreaux, Marsee, 2004). In other studies Wasserman and colleagues

(2004) found that most of the scales correlated best with DSM-IV diagnostic

clusters as measured by the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children –

Version IV (DISC-IV). Several studies found that MAYSI-2 scores predicted

future behaviors or conditions including, institutional maladjustment (i.e.

isolation for inappropriate behavior); services provision by mental heath and

juvenile justice professionals; lengthier sentences for higher scores; staff

intervention for suicidal risk, sexual misconduct, and assault on staff

members.

The MAYSI-2 represents a valid and reliable standardized assessment tool

in the juvenile justice systems; however it should be recommended as a

secondary assessment when youths score above the “Caution” cutoff on

any of the scales (Borum, Woldpaw, 2008). Significant correlations with

other personality questionnaires, for example the Youth Self Report (Grisso

et al., 2001) and the MMPI (Espelage et al., 2003) suggest their use in the

following phase of youth assessment.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


98





Psychological assessment focuses on the functioning of the individual, his

adjustment skills, his well being or his experiencing stress. There is a

number of assessment models: some focus on symptoms, their presence

and co-presence, their duration and their intensity; while others focus on the

personality as a whole, the individual history and the quality of the family

and social environment. Rarely in adolescence does “normality” mean lack

of symptoms; further development depends upon the way adolescence

developmental tasks are dealt with and overcome.

Assessing an adolescent may mean a better understanding of the way he

faces developmental tasks, engaging him in the development of a social

identity, in the integration in his mind of his sexual body, in the individuation-

separation process, in the working through of his internal objects, with

regards to both the AXES of his image and his value, and that of the

relationships with significant others.

The paramount importance of the developmental dimension in adolescence

can be seen as a limitation in the use of categorial and dimensional

systems of personality features classification. The fluid and changeable


99

adolescent psyche does not easily fit in a categorial classification. Nor does

a dimensional assessment of personality traits apply easily, as traits'

constellations are subject to frequent changes due to the re-organization of

the whole personality. A psycho-dynamic assessment in adolescence

focuses on two processes: developmental needs and the adolescence's

capacity to develop an adequate identity.

In a developmental psychopathology approach, the environment is very

important, as negative interactions between the adolescent, with his

developmental needs, and the environment may underpin antisocial

behaviours.

Both the way the adolescent is developing his personality and the dynamics

of his functioning within his environment are explored. The concept of

“developmental task” itself combines intra-psychic aspects, personality-

related and relational aspects, related to the young person's “enlarged

psychic space

An assessment taking place within a juvenile justice setting requires a

bifocal perspective not limited to the psychologist-patient relationship but

rather involving every professional within the assessment team. The team

looks at the young offender within his different settings and social roles,

informative of “affective roles” not necessarily integrated in one

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


100




representation of himself. The assessment understands the subjective

meaning of the choices and the behaviours of the young person, in their

expressive and communicative message to the environment (Maggiolini,

Riva, 1998). In the understanding of the motives of the offence, the young

person's desires, values and way of interpreting interpersonal relationships

in relation to developmental needs are explored. Juvenile crime may be the

expression of a rule-breaking attitude, behavioural disorders or antisocial

personalities or some more severe psychopathology. The combination

between individual predisposition, based on temperamental traits (such as

negative emotions, low self esteem, insensitivity and poor impulse control),

and dysfunctional interpersonal schemes or dysfunctional schemes of what

to expect from the other (such as the tendency to overvalue the others'

hostility and responsibility about the events) are explored (Dodge,

Lochmann, Laird, 2001).

Grisso and colleagues (2005) recommend a developmental theoretical

frame when assessing young offenders, changing the way his problems are

conceptualized and the strategies employed to assess them and summarize

the following points (p. 37):


101

• Identifying a youth's mental disorders is greatly complicated by the

normal developmental changes in young people across adolescence;

• Youths who have mental disorder are quite likely to have more than

one;

• Mental health information about youths is likely to have a shorter

“shelf life” than such information about adults. Development and

change happens more rapidly for youths than for most adults, so that

what we see when we identify a youth’s mental disorders, at a given

time, may change when we see them in a year;

• Most youth violence is not “caused” by mental disorders. But many

mental disorders increase the risk of delinquency and aggressive

behaviours;

• We need to think about the “seriousness” of youths' mental health

needs in two ways. Some youths' disorders are serious because their

symptoms are currently severe and require immediate attention.

Other youths' disorders are serious because they are pervasive,

involving chronic problems that have persisted since childhood and

are likely to continue well into their adult lives.

The personality assessment of young offenders involves the relationship

with the significant others, with particular regards to attachment issues (e.g.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


102




does he care about the others? Does he feel they care?) parental control

(e.g. is he given rules? Does he respect them?) and value (e.g. are they

proud of him? Does he feel they value him?). Academic or job performance,

as well as hobbies or personal interests, provide information about the

adolescent's self-efficacy and his capacity to engage. Hyperactive or

oppositional-defiant disorders in childhood are also explored, and whether

the adolescent is not so grandiose as to have an inappropriate relationship

with the authority. Frequently young offenders show poor performance and

behavioural problems with their teachers and other pupils.

They may be related to attention or cognitive shortcomings that are not

acknowledged, as they are disguised through behavioural issues. It might

be useful to see whether such dysfunctional interpersonal relationships

have had positive or negative developments from school to work. Relational

style with friends provides information about the capacity to engage in

relationships, even in case of disrupted family relationships or whether the

adolescent is withdrawn or on the contrary over-engage in an antisocial

group, with a domination-submission dynamic. Relationships with the

opposite sex may also provide information about the capacity to engage in

non-manipulative relationships, to integrate sexuality and care. Information


103

on impulse regulation, body-related and image-related anxieties, eating or

sleep disorders is also collected. The general mood and mood swings give

information about the tendency to feel high or depressed, and the capacity

to manage emotions. As many young offenders act out dangerous

behaviours, the presence of sensation-seeking attitudes, impulsive

behaviours even if un-related to crime, ego-syntonic aggressiveness,

reactive or not, is also explored. Finally, the adolescent's capacity to set

realistic plans for the future is considered.

The assessment of personality features and developmental issues

combines with the assessment of mental health issues. Adolescents with

mental health issues and a history of drug abuse are more likely to offend

than the others (Moffit et al., 2000). Moreover, the prevalence of mental

health issues amongst young offenders is very high (Atkins et al., 1999;

Duclos et al., 1998; Randal et al., 1999; Boesky, 2002; Teplin et al., 2002;

Wasserman, McReynolds, Lucas, Fisher, Santos., 2002; Vermerein, 2003;

Kadzin, 2000; Vermeiren, Jesper, Moffit, 2006; Maggiolini et al., 2008).

A recent and comparative review (Grisso, 2004) indicated mood and

anxiety disorders, drug-related issues, and behavioural and thought

disorders as the most common mental health disorders amongst young

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


104




offenders. The prevalence of mental health issues amongst young offenders

is between 60% and 70%, about two to three times more frequent than in

the normal population (Kadzin, 2000, Roberts, Attkinson, Rosenblatt, 1998).

In addition, the assessment of cognitive impairment and attention-deficit-

hyperactive-disorder is not frequently carried out within the juvenile justice

setting, even though they are significantly more frequent amongst young

offenders than in the normal population. Having said that, those meeting the

criteria for one or more psychiatric diagnosis, do not necessarily coincide

with those that would require psychological and/or psychiatric treatment

(Grisso, 2004). Finally, a psychiatric diagnosis of a mental health disorder is

the only way to describe the psychological needs of young offenders, as

different from a symptoms-based,dimensional, or a problem-oriented

approach. Most importantly, it rarely meets the demands of an assessment

carried out within a developmental psychopathology frame (Cicchetti,

Cohen, 1995).

The professionals within in a juvenile justice setting should be very aware

that the tests used to quantitatively and qualitatively assess mental health

disorders, whether of a temporary or fixed features of his functioning,

whether normal or pathological, were not created for the purpose of a risk


105

assessment or an assessment taking place. Having said that, the

assessment of severe mental health disorders, or pervasive and

dysfunctional personality traits, may guide the professional to determine

which treatment to provide (Grisso et al., 2005).

The Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA;

Achenbach, 2001) is widely used for personality assessment. It was

developed to meet the need for practical, low-cost assessment of youths’

behavioural problems in several contexts. These contexts include: juvenile

justice, mental health, medical and educational settings.

The ASEBA includes the Youths Self Report for ages 11 to 18 (YSR) which,

obtains youths’ report of their competencies and problems in both

quantitative and qualitative forms. Several syndromic scales derived from

the questionnaire, assessing both internalizing (i.e. anxious/depressed;

withdrawn/depressed; somatic complaints), externalizing (i.e. rule breaking

behaviour, aggressive behaviour) and borderline (i.e. social and thoughts

difficulties) problems.

The ASEBA allows other perspectives on youths’ functioning whenever

possible: youths are important sources of information about their own

functioning, however they may not always provide accurate reports of their

competences. To provide a systematic overview of youths functioning the

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


106




ASEBA includes the following companions to the YSR: Child Behaviour

Checklist for ages 6 to 18 (CBCL) which is completed by parents, parent

surrogates, and others who play parental roles, such as staff members of

residential facilities; Teacher Form Report (TRF) which is completed by

teacher and other educational personnel. The ASEBA’s approach is

especially good for multicultural research. The ASEBA instruments can be

easily translated for use in diverse cultures. There are translations in over

80 languages and thousands of published reports of the ASEBA being use

in over 67 cultures. Numerous multicultural comparisons of ASEBA findings

have been published. Subsequent studies by Achenbach and Rescorla

(2007) from dozens of societies have analysed tens of thousands of CBCLs

from 31 societies, TRFs from 21 societies, and YSRs from 24 societies.

ASEBA forms can be used in many ways in juvenile justice contexts.

Examples of findings for juvenile justice populations include strong

association between CBCL/YSR scores and drug abuse, symptoms of the

DSM-IV diagnosis of conduct disorder and suicidal tendencies on the other

(Crowley, Mikulich, Ehlers, Whitmore, MacDonald, 2001). Examples of long-

term prediction of delinquent behaviour from ASEBA scores include

significant prediction of police contacts, substance abuse and behavioural

problems (Achenbach et al., 1995, 1998; Ferdinand, Blum, Berhulst, 2001).


107

In addition, these studies showed the ability to prediction many of the

problems that may be of concern to juvenile justice, such as suicidal

behaviour, unwed pregnancy, dropping out of school, receipt of mental

health services, and being fired from jobs (Grisso et al., 2005).

The ASEBA system shows remarkable strengths including:

1) The forms are short, clear and available in a number of languages;

2) Scoring and interpretation are quite easy;

3) The parallel use of three forms (YSR, CBCL, TRF) provides a

systematic approach and the chance to put together the adolescent's

viewpoint and that of his significant others';

4) The interpretations are valid and culture-sensitive, with specific

standards provided for a number of countries.

The assessment of violence and re-offending risk

Reducing re-offending is one of the main goals of the juvenile justice

services. The assessment of young offenders should therefore include

positive and negative factors, within the person or his environment. One

may also wonder about the relationship between psychological objectives,

such as promoting responsibility and the youth's development, and

objectives related to behavioural control.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


108




In a juvenile justice setting, the risk of re-offending, i.e. the chance that the

juvenile offender might keep in the future the present antisocial behaviour,

becomes the core of the decision on which the criminal provision isapplied.

An accurate assessment may prevent the criminal provision from being the

same for all young offenders, regardless of the risk of re-offending.

As described above, in a developmental psychopathology framework, the

assessment should include the environment the young person lives in. In

the assessment of re-offending risk and risk factors related to antisocial

behaviours, factors within the environment are taken into account, often

very much explaining the antisocial behaviour, alongside other personal

factors.

Rather than a strictly clinical assessment, psychological tests assessing the

risk of re-offending are mainly based on the observations of the young

offender's behaviour, his environment and the presence of behavioural

problems in the past.

Persistent young offenders tend to be males, manifesting behavioural

problems in childhood, with severe school difficulties, poorly integrated in

society and with disrupted families; they normally have a number of

behavioural issues and showed early rule-breaking attitudes. The type of


109

offence is less predictive of future re-offending (Rutter, 1998). Some studies

show that episodes of violence in the past or frequent episodes of violence

in the present are relatively reliable indicators of future violence (Moffitt,

2003). Psychopathy may also predict violence. (Forth & Burke, 1998; Frick,

1998; Salekin, Ziegler, Larrea, Anthony & Bennett, 2003). Recent reviews

and meta-analyses recommend that psychopathy should be considered

when assessing re-offending risk for both adolescents and adults. Most risk

models include the measurement of psychopathy, which seems to be highly

predictive.

In summary , the most widely recognized risk factors in the assessment of

re-offending and social dangerousness are the following:

1. Age of first offence

2. Number of previous convictions

3. Type and severity of the present and past convictions

4. Previous criminal provisions

5. Alcohol or substance abuse

6. Current difficulties at school or difficulties in the past

7. Antisocial friends

8. Family disruption and lack of parental control

9. Physical or sexual abuse

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


110




10. Social services care in the past and its outcome

11. Gender

Short and long-term re-offending risk is important to consider when

assessing young offenders (Hoge, 2002; Grisso et al., 2005).

In Italy, the assessment of re-offending risk is usually carried out in non

astandardized manners, on the basis of the expertise of the professionals,

even though a number of tests have been internationally developed, both in

the US, where about three quarters of the juvenile justice services use

standard procedures of assessment (Barton, Gorsuch, 1989), and in

Europe.

An intuitive approach may help, but it may be unreliable or inaccurate. In

fact, limits can also be found in approaches exclusively based on statistical

assumptions. For instance, if it is estimated that a given group of subjects,

say a group of young offenders at intake in CPAs, have a 30% re-offending

risk the, it may mean that each adolescent has a 30% risk or that 3 out of

10 adolescents have a 100% re-offending risk rate, and the other 7 out of

10 have a 0% re-offending risk rate, i.e. no risk at all. Extreme as it is, this


111

example emphasizes that the individual's unique degree of risk needs to be

assessed.

In order to overcome the unsystematic approach to data collection, exposed

by the literature of the field (Baird, 1984; Towerman, 1992; Wiebush et al.,

1995), a number of standardized tests have been created, for the

assessment of re-offending and violence risk (Champion, 1994; Hoge,

1999, 2001; Hoge, Andrews, 1996; Wiebush et al., 1995). Evidence shows

that “in order to find the antisocial adult of tomorrow we need to look for the

antisocial child of today” (Lynam, 1996): it is only a small proportion of youth

that display early antisocial behaviours that become chronic during

adolescence and committing about 50% of all crimes (Farrington, 1995;

Loebert, Stouthamer-Loeber, 1998; Moffit, 1993). To reduce re-offending is

is essential to identify adolescents at risk, in order to prevent their violent

and antisocial behaviours from becoming chronic(Grisso et al., 2005).

The actuarial approach has long been the “gold standard” in the

assessment of re-offending risk (Bonta, 1996; Hoge, 2002; Andrews, Bonta,

1998; Welsh et al., 2008; Wong et al., 2007; Andrews, Bonta, Wormith,

2006) and it has produced increasingly advanced, “generations” of tests

(Bonta, 1996).

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


112




First generation tests were largely based on unstructured clinical

judgements. Notwithstanding their positive outcomes (Boothby, Clements,

2000), their predictive validity was marginal (Andrews, Bonta, Wormith,

2006).

Second generation tests had a more empiric approach, even though only

the static risk factors were considered (Kraemer et al., 1997). The limitation

of the second generation tests includes the lack of a theoretic paradigm

informing them, the fact that change was not assessable and that

indications for further treatment could not be drawn.

Third generation tests tried to respond to such limits by introducing dynamic

factors, and providing theoretically grounded indications, mainly coming

from the social learning paradigm.

Even though dynamic risk factors were included, third generation tests have

been criticized for their lack of gender sensitivity and for the main focus

being on risk assessment, while protective factors and strong points of the

adolescents were omitted(Brennan et al., 2009).

More recently, to respond to such criticism and to overcome the debate

between an actuarial and clinical approach in the assessment of violence

and re-offending risk, fourth generation tests have been produced (Wong et

al., 2006; Andrews, Bonta, Wormith, 2006; Brennan et al., 2009), where


113

another approach, defined the ““structured professional judgement” (Grisso

et al., 2005) was proposed. Such an innovative approach tries to improve

the clinical judgement by providing a structure and standardized decision

process, while at the same time improving actuarial measures by

introducing the relevance of clinical interpretations (Borum, 1996, Borum,

Douglas, 2003).

The Psycopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV; Forth et al., 2003) is

widely used for the assessment of social dangerousness. Modern

conceptualizations of psychopathy view it as characterized by a

constellation of interpersonal (e.g., egocentric), affective (e.g., callous), and

behavioural (lifestyle and antisocial traits; e.g., impulsive) traits (Blonigen,

Hicks, Grueger, Patrick, Gacono, 2006; Cleckley, 1976; Hare, 1991).

Research involving adults indicates a strong relationship between

psychopathy on the one hand and serious repetitive crime, violent

behaviour, and a poor treatment response on the other. But psychopathy

does not emerge suddenly in adulthood: researches and clinician believe

that psychopathic traits are manifested early in life (Forth, Mailloux, 2000;

Frick, Berry, Bodin, 2000; Cruise, 2000; Forth, Burke, 1998): this belief has

led to a growing body of research into children and adolescent psychopathy.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


114




As in adults, adolescent psychopathic personality traits are associated with

violence and recidivism.

Via a structured clinical rating approach the PCL:YV is an instrument

designed to assess psychopathic traits and behaviour in male and female

adolescents ages 12-18 years old.. It was adapted from Hare Psychopathy

Checklist – Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 2003), considered to be the gold

standard in the assessment of adult psychopathy (Fulero, 1995). The

PCL:YV consists of 20 items that measure the interpersonal, affective and

behavioural dimensions considered to be fundamental to the construct of

psychopathy (i.e. grandiose sense of self-worth; pathological lying; lack of

empathy; failure to accept responsibility; criminal versatility). Each item is

scored either as a 2 (the item “definitely applies”), 1 (the item “applies to

some extent”) or 0 (the item “definitely does not apply”). Several sources of

information are needed to score the PCL:YV – namely a semi-structured

interview with the youth and a review of available file and collateral

information.

Confirmatory factor analysis across all the samples suggested that a model

with four correlated factors provides a good explanation for the pattern of

PCL-YV scores (Forth et al., 2003): a first factor is an interpersonal

dimension (i.e. “impression management”), a second factor is an affective


115

dimension (i.e. “callous”), a third factor is a behavioural dimension (i.e.

“lacks goals”). The final factor is an antisocial dimension (i.e. “serious

criminal behaviour”).

The items are summed to obtain a total score ranging from 0 to 40.

Research suggests a subdivision in three level of seriousness: “high” (>30),

“medium” (18-29) and “low” (<18).

Although the PCL-YV was not designed as a measure for predicting

criminal behavior, a growing body of research suggests that it is a strong

predictor, particularly with respect to violent behavior (Forth, Mailloux,

2000). Gretton and colleagues (2001) in a sample of adolescent sex

offenders found that high scores were associated with attempted and

successful escape from custody and theviolation of the condition of release.

Catchpole and Gretton (2003) found that PCL-YV scores were related to

general and violent recidivism. Perspective studies confirm the predictive

validity of the PCL:YV (Gretton, Hare, Catchpole, 2004; Vincent, Vitacco,

Grisso, Corrado, 2003; Corrado, Vincent, Hart, Cohen, 2004; Rowe, 2002).

Issues have been raised about the appropriateness of applying the

construct of psychopathy to youths and the consequences of doing so

(Seagrave, Grisso, 2002; Edens, Skeem, Cruise, Cauffman, 2001). The

clinicians may be reluctant to apply the PCL-YV because the considerations

around psychopathy may be read as oppositional to the most scientifically

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


116




valid models of developmental psychopathology. However, research studies

have shown that psychopathy in childhood shows prevalence (Cruise, 2000;

Forth, Burke, 1998), functioning (Schrum, Salekin, 2006; Vincent, 2002) and

factorial structure similar to the adult one. Moreover, a genetic

predisposition to psychopathy has been found at seven years of age

(Viding, Blair, Moffitt, Plomin, 2004). Finally, Decoene and Bjttebier (2008)

state that an underlining grandiose attitude, lack of empathy and ego-

centrism in childhood does not imply that different developmental pathways

are not possible, not leading to a psychopathic disorder in adulthood.

The assessment of the youth's maturity

Under Italian law, in order to be punishable, young offenders must be of

sound-mind, i.e. “able to understand and to want” in the moment he

committed the crime. “Understanding” refers to the ability to understand the

meaning of the fact, in relation to its possible consequences on others,

while “wanting” refers to the ability to determine one's behaviours, in relation

to conscious intentions. With young offenders, the assessment of maturity is

more relevant than the assessment of an acclaimed psychopathology

(Fornari, 2004), due to the inappropriateness of fixed


117

personality/symptomatic constellations in adolescence, as it is a period

characterised by change and development.

Theories regarding the “ability to understand and to want” and the liability of

young offenders depend upon historic changes in the relationship between

psychiatry and law, and also upon geographic differences (Ceretti,

Merzagora-Betson, 1994). In the past, mental health disorders possibly

leading to non-liability to prosecution were limited to those classified in Axes

1 of the DSN-IV-TR (APA,2000). However, a 2005 verdict of the Supreme

Court acknowledged that personality disorders might also be relevant to

non-liability matters.

The competence to stand trial remains a very variable field, with regards to

the methods and the tests used (Borum, Grisso, 1995). Recently, a focus on

the juvenile competence to stand trial has emerged, as it is within the

juvenile justice services that such an issue becomes of primary importance.

Guidelines have been proposed by some authors with regards to

procedures, areas to be explored and how to perform the assessment of the

juvenile competence to stand trial (Barnum, 2000; Grisso, 1998). They

suggest that the degree of development of the young person should be

explored, as well as the presence of mental health disorders, cognitive

impairment or impairment in the psycho-social development (Grisso, 1998).

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


118




Moreover, the degree of maturity, the moral and the emotional development,

movement and language skills and mental health psychic and behavioural

childhood-onset disorders should also be explored (Barnum, 2000; Bonnie,

Grisso, 2000; Grisso, 1998; Oberlander, Goldstein, & Ho, 2001; Ryba,

Cooper, Zapf, 2003).

With adolescents, it is difficult to say whether a given problem is the

expression of some normal immaturity, compatible with a normal and

developing condition, or the outcome of a mental health disorder, a

personality disorder, a cognitive impairment or an organic disease, or

produced by severe emotional immaturity. The adolescent is “normally

immature” (Faraglia, Maggiolini, 2008) in a number of ways affecting his

ability to behave responsibly, due to the limited ability to make decisions

and appreciate their consequences and his dependence upon the others

(making him subject to external conditioning) and to his personality still in

process (Steinberg, Scott, 2003).

The most recent psychological and neuro-psychological studies into the

development of antisocial behaviour (Paus, 2005; Raine, Lee, Yang, Coletti,

2010) emphasize that the adolescent is usually immature. They are


119

informing the trends of juvenile criminal justice (Bruber, Yurgelun-Todd.

2006). For instance, in the US the American Psychiatric Association, the

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and the American

Society of Adolescent Psychiatry have requested that death criminality for

young offenders under 18 is abolished, on the grounds that adolescents are

empirically proved immature (Miraglia, 2005).

Every adolescent, deserves that the assessment of his behaviours takes

into account his developmental immaturity and that the response from the

criminal justice is mitigated. However, difficulties in the assessment of the

degree of maturity (which may lead to non-liability to prosecution) remain.

Neuro-psychological studies emphasize the immaturity of the adolescent's

brain, so that, as Giedd says, it may be unfair to expect from the adolescent

the same level of organization and decision-making powers as those of an

adult, when his brain has not yet stopped growing (Giedd, 2004). Criminal

liability is influenced by how much the adolescent depends upon his family

and his peer group, as they may both promote responsibility or diffusion of

responsibility. Finally, cognitive abilities “in the heat” of a crime may be

different from the usual ones at his disposal: the adolescent, in the decision

making process, may greatly be influenced by the environment, while

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


120




undertaking risk behaviours or anticipating the consequences of his

behaviours.

In Italy, the court decides whether the young offender is liable to prosecution

or not according to: his cognitive development and strength of character,

incapability to understand the meaning of his own actions, to appreciate the

difference between right or wrong, licit and illicit, and choose between one

or the other, bearing in mind a number of issues, related to the physical and

psychic development of the young offender, his socio-economic and family

circumstances, his education, the nature of the crime, and the behaviour

before the court (Larizza, 2005).

In actual practice, the number of juveniles proved not accountable for their

behaviour is quite low. The data can be read as both evidence of the

difficulty in proving non-liability, and acknowledgement of immaturity as

normal during adolescence. The assessment of the “ability to understand

and to will” is more often linked to mental health disorders than to

immaturity. Official data (Ministry of Justice, 2006) show that dismissal for

immaturity is relatively rare, in comparison to other forms of dismissal of the

case, such as judicial pardon. Dismissals for immaturity decrease as the

proceedings continue: the percentage is 3.6% at preliminary hearing and

0.2% following the trial itself.


121

The assessment of young offenders should therefore investigate whether a

definition and an empirical assessment of maturity is feasible and suitable.

It appears difficult to identify empirical criteria differentiating physiologic

immaturity from pathological immaturity. Maturity is indeed a complex

system, including biologic maturity (which may process at a different pace

than that of normal physical development) intellectual maturity (e.g.

cognitive maturity); emotional maturity (e.g. impulse control and emotion

management); social maturity (e.g. adjustment and social skills) (Ceretti,

2002).

It would be helpful to be provided with an operational definition of the

minimum competences required of an adolescent in order to be considered

mature and responsible, manifesting his ability to consider alternative

behaviours and appreciate their consequences on the grounds of his ideals

and taking into account ethic values shared by society and dictated by law.

Ewing suggests that information on the youth's maturity is one of the most

important features of a young offender's assessment.

In Ewing's view, information on cognitive maturity may be provided by a

cognitive test, such as the WISC-III (Wechsler, 1991), while emotional

maturity may be assessed with self report-measures such as the Youth Self

Report (Achenbach, 2004), the Thematic Apperception Test or the

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


122




Rorschach Test. Even though such tests may be used with the aim of both

planning a tailored treatment programme within the juvenile justice services,

and of providing the court with useful information on the young person's

situation (Maggiolini, 2002); recently the need to produce standardized

tests, going beyond the assessment of personality or mental health

disorders has emerged, where maturity may be explored in judicial terms.

A comprehensive assessment of maturity should therefore also include

autonomy (i.e. external or internal locus of control, the youth's idea of

himself, the capacity to think about himself and his behaviours); cognitive

skills going beyond the I.Q. (i.e. acknowledgement of the crime,

understanding of behavioural rules, ability to identify alternative behaviours

and take decisions based on the anticipation of their consequences) and

finally emotional maturity (i.e. ability to postpone gratification, to manage

one's emotions, to engage in positive interpersonal relationships and to

show an adequate moral development).

The maturity of the youth may be assessed with the Risk Sophistication

Treatment Inventory (RST-I; Salekin, 2004).

The Risk-Sophistication-Treatment Inventory (RSTI; Salekin, 2004) was

developed to address some very practical and important questions that are


123

frequently asked of mental health professionals operating within the juvenile

justice services, and to integrate a clinical approach to the clinical

personality assessment to the statistical and actuarial prediction needed in

the forensic field. The RSTI was developed to meet the need of clinician

within the juvenile justice settings for an instrument capable of

systematically assessing the construct of the juvenile’s risk for

dangerousness, the youth’s level of maturity or sophistication, and the

degree to which the youth is amenable to treatment.

The RSTI is a semi-structured interview (60-90 minutes) and rating scale

designed to help clinicians assess juvenile offenders (between 9-18 years

of age) in the three important areas cited above. These three scales are

composed of 15 items each. Items are rated on a 3-point scale (0 =

“absence of the characteristic/ability”; 1 = “sub-clinical/moderate”; 2 =

“presence of the characteristics/ability”) that reflects the extent to which the

individual demonstrates the specific characteristics or ability. Each scale

contains three sub-scales, referred to as “clusters”. The Risk for

Dangerousness scale refers to the likelihood of committing future acts of

violence or recidivism, and comprises the Violent and Aggressive

Tendencies (R-VAT), Planned and Extensive Criminality (R-PEX) and

Psychopatic Feature (R-PPF). The clusters of the Sophistication-Maturity

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


124




scale, which refers to emotional and cognitive maturity, are Autonomy (S-

AUT), Cognitive Capacities (S-COG) and Emotional Maturity (S-EMO). The

Sophistication-Maturity scale is neither pro-social nor antisocial (Stenberg,

2000). It broadly measure maturity, while also allowing clinicians to rate the

extent to which the related emotional/cognitive skills are used for

criminological purpose, and the degree to which the criminological lifestyle

has become ingrained. Finally, the Treatment Amenability, which refers to

the likelihood of being responsive to treatment, is divided into the cluster

Psychopathology – Degree and Type (T-PAT), Responsibility and Motivation

to Change (T-RES) and Consideration and Tolerance of Others (T-CAT).

The raw score of each cluster is compared to a norm sample of juvenile

offenders to establish the descriptive categories of “low”, “medium”, or

“high”. Data for RSTI standardized sample represent young offenders

(bwteen 9-18 years of age) from juvenile justice settings. Several studies

have reported evidence for the RSTI’s validity, using other measures of

psychological constructs to which the RSTI constructs should be related

(Leistico, Salekin, 2003). The Risk for Dangerousness Scale correlates

positively with conduct disorder (CD), violent CD, psychopathic traits as

measured by the PCL:YV and both reactive and total aggression. Two

studies (Salekin, 2000; Zalot, 2002) found that the Sophistication-Maturity


125

scale was positively and significantly related to both traditionally defined

intelligence measured by the Kauffman Brief Intelligence Test and

contemporary theories of intelligence. Finally, Risk for Dangerousness scale

was related to previous criminal involvement and was predictive of

recidivism 3 years after RSTI assessment (Salekin, 2004).

The assessment of availability to treatment

The Italian Juvenile Criminal Proceedings, ruled by the Pres. Dec. n.

448/1988 has a educational ratio. The trial of juveniles should not shut but

rather open opportunities, favouring acknowledgement and responsibility,

promoting development and maturation processes, preventing the young

offender from becoming involved with a harsh juvenile justice system

(Losanna, 2008).

The response of juvenile crime usually entails the control over the young

offenders' behaviour within the civil or criminal juvenile justice systems. The

detention or the placement in residential communities of the young

offenders, as well as alternative measures or house arrest all pursue the

aim of controlling their behaviour. From this perspective, such provisions

also have a developmental, rehabilitative and restorative value, both to the

young person and society, and inevitably provide some sort of treatment.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


126




Through psycho-social work, particularly applicable when alternative

measures are applied, a number of programmes are carried out, with the

engagement of the young person and his environment in a psychological,

social or education plan.

The complexity of the programmes makes it difficult to evaluate their

efficacy. The efficacy of a criminal provision is often measured on the basis

of the re-offending criterion, something necessary, but not wholly sufficient,

as young offenders may stop committing crimes while still keeping an

antisocial attitude or developing a-social behaviour, entailing social

isolation, drug abuse and so on.

The little attention paid to provide evidence-based practice in the field of

juvenile criminal justice may also be due to the widespread pessimism on

both the psychological treatment of young offenders and the criminal

response.

In the 1970sand 1980s there was a widespread pessimism about the

efficacy of the response to juvenile crime, originating from the results of the

studies available at that time. In the 1970s Martinson, came up with the

following synthetic conclusion, following a extensive review of the literature

of the field: “It may be that education at its best, or that psychotherapy at its


127

best, cannot overcome, or even appreciably reduce, the powerful

tendencies of offenders to continue in criminal behaviour” (1974, p. 49).

Recently, the results of meta-analytic studies have shown that it is possible

to reduce re-offending, that antisocial disorders may be treated and that,

contrary to all expectations, it is also possible to change psychopathic traits

of personality, with sufficiently intensive and long treatment.

The results of more recent studies are encouraging, given the use of more

comprehensive and sophisticated methodologies and the progressive

improvement in treatment techniques (McGuire, 1995).

Even though antisocial behaviour is still recognized as persistent; today it

seems subject to change. Young offenders often spontaneously change

their behaviours: about half of all young offenders, even in the most severe

cases, do not persist with antisocial behaviour. As the family and the social

environment may play a crucial role in such a change, one may wonder

whether the criminal provision itself represents a protective factor or a risk

factor in future behaviour (as frequently observed in the iatrogenic effect of

criminal provision in general and detention in particular).

A review on the studies published in English in international journals,

gathering and matching scientifically based provisions within a juvenile

justice setting, consider treatment to be effective in around 10% of cases

(McGuire, 1995). This data shows that a treatment on juvenile delinquency,

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


128




in comparison with no treatment, reduces re-offending by 10%. Even if

positive, it may be discouraging, even though it is comparable to treatments

carried out in other fields, for the cure of severe diseases still receiving a

number of funds.

Concerning the various types of treatment, meta-analytic studies show that

the results of standard psychotherapy are not as encouraging, as those of

pharmacological treatment, when they are not combined with psycho-social

provisions. The outcome of psychological counselling seems largely

negligible, even though some particularly appropriate psychological

treatments reduce re-offending by up to 50% in comparison to control

groups. The poor efficacy of the treatment of juvenile delinquency seems

largely due to the negative effects of detention. However, it is important to

emphasize that young offenders in prison or residential facilities, tend to be

more severely antisocial, and that meta-analyses often does not adequately

differentiate the features of the young offenders at intake (McGuire, 1995).

Meta-analytic studies commonly show that the most effective treatments are

the multi-modal ones (tackling a number of contexts and strategies at the

same time), oriented to improving behavioural and cognitive skills.

Cognitive-behavioural approaches are objectively favoured, in comparison


129

with other psychotherapeutic approaches, like the psychoanalytic one, due

to their invest in efficacy research (Roth, Fonagy, 1996).

From a theoretical point of view, psychological and educational treatment,

not only limiting itself to symptoms change, but supporting competences

and the capacity to engage in long-standing and significant relationships,

seems most appropriate with young offenders (Paris, 1996). It also

highlights that psychological support, when combined with psycho-social

provisions, is useful in the treatment of young offenders, while the criminal

provision alone tends to have a iatrogenic effect; with particular regard to

the treatment combining insight and tackling the antisocial behaviour, with

the psychological work providing understanding of the meaning of the

offence, in strong combination with psycho-social work (Masters, 1994). The

psychoanalytic approach suggests a combination of an expressive

approach along with the work taking place within the juvenile justice

services, instead of the classical psychoanalysis of purely supportive

treatment as the most effective with patients showing low Ego strength, like

antisocial young offenders (Kernberg, Clarkin, 1994).

Studies in the field do not sufficiently consider the different features of the

young offenders, beyond their gender, type of offence, age, level of risk,

while the treatment provided, its methods and the personality features of the

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


130




young person explain most of the effect. In order to gain more reliable

results the studies should also consider the: developmental features of the

behaviour, lifestyle, circumstances concerning the offence, the thoughts and

feelings at the time it took place and the environment.

A standard provision within the juvenile justice services does not usually

prevent about two thirds of the young offenders from re-offending. A very

good outcome is considered to be a one third reduction in re-offending.

In a juvenile justice setting, it would be advisable to consider provisions as

forms of treatment, evaluating their effectiveness in relation to both re-

offending rates and the personal development of young offenders under

psycho-social care. From this perspective, collecting and analysing data

differentiating the features of young offenders may help providing tailored,

and therefore effective, programmes, preventing the criminal provision from

responding to judicial demands, rather than to the young person's

circumstances. In Italy, such a flexibility is permitted by the code for criminal

proceedings which outlines the need to support a young person in his

development and remove the negative influences which hamper his

chances of gaining a positive social identity.

Most criminal provisions take place outside prison, with alternative

measures supervised by the local social services or the juvenile justice


131

office of youth social service. In this respect, probation (“suspension of

proceedings with placement under supervision”) is the most important

criminal provision, introduced by the Pres. Decr. n. 448/1988)

(Scardaccione, Merlini, 1996).

Probation promotes the adolescent “taking responsibility” for his behaviour,

where responsibility, rather than being the starting point of a provision,

represents its goal (De Leo, 1998). This means that the adolescent, for

instance is requested: not to re-offend, to engage in school or job

programmes, to be available for structured activities during his spare time,

to carry out community payback or community service or participate in

victim-offender mediation programmes, to acknowledge the judicial authority

supporting and supervising the programme and so on.

That is why the assessment of the young offender includes a decision

surrounding he ability to take responsibility, if supported, i.e. admission of

guilt, acknowledgement of its meaning and its severity, capacity to engage

in a program, actual availability to carry it out, in view of a shared probation

programme to be presented before the court.

As the concept of responsibility is so crucial, one may wonder how to

assess it as a prerequisite for a probation programme.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


132




The subjective prerequisite of a probation programme does not seem to be

the admission of guilt, as it is important to distinguish between the event

and its symbolization or subjective meaning. It is more important that the

young offender acknowledges his responsibility in relation to the event he

may be judged for and accepts engagement in a probation programme,

opening up to developmental paths and opportunities that may be different

from his past. The assessment of his motivation does not involve the

assessment of the young person's sincere attitude, but rather, it addresses

his understanding of the meaning of the relationship with a juvenile justice

professional and the judge, and his willingness to engage in the programme

presented before the court.

The probation programme is based on the assessment of the young

offender, his family and his environment and the trust relationship

established with the professionals, where the work to be carried out is

undertaken. Therefore, the assessment of availability to treatment may be

seen as the final stage of the assessment carried out within the juvenile

justice services, including the assessment of personality traits (the

programme is tailored), re-offending and violence risk (the young person will

be required not to re-offend) and maturity (a probation programme cannot


133

be carried by an individual who demonstrates existan insufficient capacity to

take responsibility and engage).

It is important to study how, similarly to the assessment of maturity, the

assessment of availability to treatment may be carried out. It seems difficult

to find empirical criteria for the concepts of development and capacity to

take responsibility. It would be helpful is an operational definition existed of

the competences requested by an adolescent in order to be considered

mature and able to take responsibility.

The second cluster of the RST-I (Salekin, 2004) only answers in part,

questions indicating the main factors to be considered when addressing the

assessment of availability to treatment.

The young offender’s acknowledgement of his rule-breaking and illicit

behaviour has been studied. Once he has confirmed his willingness to

engage in a probation programme, the practical aspects of his

implementation are addressed.

Consideration also needs to be given to various psychological issues

including: type and severity of a mental health disorder and the

acknowledgement of one's difficulties and or capacity to reflect upon them.

Being the synthesis of the assessment, availability to treatment also

includes the “criminal career” of the young person, e.g. number of previous

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


134




criminal provisions and the age at first offence, as such factors are

significantly and positively related to re-offending.

Finally, interpersonal skills, i.e. feeling appropriate guilt, empathy and care,

positive attachment to significant adults (such as friends, teachers, the

professionals of the assessment team) and protective factors (availability

and support from the young offender's parents' side) need to also be

explored.

Multicultural assessment

Further difficulties arising during the assessment of immigrant young

offenders as, the assessment is initially focused on the understanding of

his cultural identifications. The assessment needs to explore: way the

young person feels he belongs to his culture, and what he thinks of it, how

he approaches Italian culture , how he got in touch with it and whether he

trusts people that are still “foreign” to him (Trionfi, 2002).

Secondly, information about the youth's expectations, motivations and

experience of migration is collecting, starting with the departure from his

country of birth until his arrival in Italy. It can be important to assess whether

the young offender talks spontaneously about his migration and the


135

relationships he maintains with his culture, as some young offenders have

experienced war or long separation from family (Maggiolini, 2002)

The adolescent is involved in the understanding of the possible personal or

family “mandate” relating to his immigration, he is also asked what he thinks

about what he has left behind and what it is like to live in a foreign and

unfamiliar country.

In order to psychologically reach the migrant young offender, a triangular

understanding of himself, his environment while in his country and the

environment in Italy is carried out. It is not about assessing normality as

opposite to psychopathology, it is about understanding how to assess and

to support the developmental path of the young person, what are the

difficulties he is facing, be them migration-related issues, adolescent

conflicts, personality disorders or severe psycho-pathologies. Assessment

tests applicable to cultures should be used.

The risk related to the use of traditional, cross-cultural insensitive tests with

migrant young offenders is that fears of intrusion and judgement may

actually become true.

In addition, an assessment carried out with tests, concepts and categories

not belonging at all to the foreign youth, even if sifted by the professional

during his work with the young person, may be of little use to him, making

him feel even more persecuted and excluded.

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


136




The Multicultural Assessment Intervention Process (MAIP; Dana, 2000) was

created in order to provide a cross-culturally sensitive basis for the

assessment of personality traits and mental health disorders. The

introduction to the manual describes the availability of culturally unbiased

assessment tests: given the current controversy about the evidence of

effective cross-cultural tests, they should be used with care (Dana, 2000,

2005). The MAIP consists of a series of questions for the clinician, who

should also think about the cultural circumstances of the young person, as

four cultural orientations are considered:

• Preservation of the native culture and refusal of the new culture;

• Cultural assimilation patterns: refusal of the native culture in favour of

the new culture;

• “Marginal” orientation: the youth identifies with neither the native

culture or the new one;

• “Transitional” orientation: traditions and values of the native culture

are challenged, in favour of those of the new culture.

Most migrant adolescents within the juvenile justice services come from

countries where traditions are progressively lost, in favour of a process of

homogeneousness replacing traditional beliefs with global and medial


137

models. Such dual belonging may open identification spaces for the

adolescent, or it may lead to barrier during the development of their identity,

where different aspects of one's identity are in conflict. Whatever is the

case, the relation with one's origins necessarily leads to a psychic work

where the adolescent tries to reconstruct the shapes of his world

(Maggiolini, 2002).

Assessing the cultural orientation to the world prevents confusion between

psychopathology and cultural aspects, or psycho-pathology and cultural

identity to occur. If an individual understanding of each young person's

circumstances is carried out, stress related to a cultural integration still in

process will not be interpreted as psychological issues.

Not only does the MAIP allow a cross-culturally sensitive assessment, it is

also close to a developmental approach. The focus is indeed on the

strategies used by the adolescent in order to deal with his developmental

needs. The professional tries to understand the individual functioning in

relation to the youth's environment and his developmental path, while

addressing the subjective meaning of choices and behaviours (starting from

migration) in relation to their expressive and communicative message to the

environment (Maggiolini, Riva, 1998).

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


138




The use of psycho-diagnostic cross-cultural tests should be guided by the

following principles:

� Tests should be “empirically based”, in order to allow normative data

to be collected and empirical research to be carried out;

� Tests should prove cross-cultural equivalence and set standards for

ethnic minorities;

� Projective tests should be used provided that objective scoring and

normative data collection procedures are given, allowing valid and reliable

interpretations to be drawn;

� Guidelines on the training and the psycho-diagnostic use of

assessment tests, in order to improve the validity of interpretations drawn

from their results in multi-cultural assessment, should be provided.

Today, there are a few tests meeting the above criteria, granting cultural

sensitivity to clinical assessment, combining in a “multi-cultural set of tests

for personality assessment”.

.

7. Conclusion e perspectives

139

The project promoted an exchange in the field of the assessment and the

treatment of young offenders between psychologists, educators, social

workers and other professionals working within the Italian juvenile justice

services.

The assessment of young offenders is at the core of the work carried out

within the juvenile justice services by psychologists, educators and social

workers who rarely have an opportunity to exchange their opinions about

their work. Representatives of each service were invited to share their views

about objectives and methods of the assessment of young offenders. The

opinions of the psychologists concerning theory and practice of assessment

and treatment were explored in detail.

Seminars attended by European experts in the field, paved the way for an

exchange at European level.

The project was carried out at a time of significant change in the

organization of the Italian juvenile justice services. From the 1st of January

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


140




2010 health care functions performed within the juvenile justice system

were transferred to the National Health Service (NHS). This represented a

major change, particularly for the psychologists who had previously been

employed by the Ministry of Justice. During such a significant restructure,

the project provided a well-timed contribution.

The debate on the assessment of young offenders does not solely concern

Italy. In November 2010 The International Juvenile Justice Observatory held

an international conference on mental disorders and drug misuse amongst

young offenders. The lecturers discussed the high percentage of young

offenders showing mental health issues at intake into juvenile justice and

emphasized the importance of a mental health approach.

The Minotauro team were pleased to present a contribution at the

conference.

The data presented both at the conference and within this report confirms

that the assessment is at the core of the work carried out within the juvenile

justice services. However, it is also necessary to focus on the issue of the

objectives, methods and tests used for the assessment, the relationship

between the professionals involved (e.g. psychologists, psychiatrists, social


141

workers and educators) and finally the relationship between psycho-social

assessment and the court’s decisions.

As a result of this project it has been discovered that an integrated and

inter-professional culture of assessment exists in Italy; even though the

objectives are poorly defined, with limited knowledge exchange and no

common theoretical framework .

The actuarial model of assessment is not popular, taking into account static

and dynamic re-offending risk factors, with particular regards to the dynamic

ones, which are inherently subject to change.

Screening is not usually conducted, nor is a clinical assessment oriented at

providing a diagnosis or using standardized tests.

A socio-educational approach prevails. This approach is based on the

objective, anagraphic or social data, in addition to the opinions of the

professionals’ held in the interpersonal relationship with the young offender.

It is worth noting that the professionals seem reluctant to use standardized

tests or to give structured and defined clinical opinions. Such reluctance

appears to be the result of the professionals attempting to avoid

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


142




stigmatizing the young offender, but it often results in the reports being

poorly defined and not very well constructed.

During the seminars an exchange between diagnostically oriented mental

health logics, considering antisocial behaviours as the result of a mental

health disorder, and socio-educational logics, which are more inclined to

view antisocial behaviours as the result of a complex relationship between

the young person and his family or often a deprived social environment.

The debate revealed that a developmental psychology and

psychopathology approach could be very helpful in understanding juvenile

crime. Such an approach avoids stigmatizing young offenders or exclusively

relating juvenile crime to mental health disorders. A developmental

psychology and psychopathology approach would instead remain open to

the subjective and intentional dimension of crime.

With this approach in mind, an assessment performs a very different

function to a diagnosis, which aims to distinguishing those to be punished

and those ”unsound” to be cured. Although young offenders frequently have

mental health issues , the juvenile justice system should not only perform a


143

health care function. In accordance with the Italian juvenile criminal

procedure code, the juvenile justice system must promote the young

offenders’ development, capacity to take responsibility for their behaviours

and to gain a positive social identity.

A developmental approach combines the focus on the young person with

the focus on his family and social environment, taking into account the

relationship between the offence and developmental needs which have not

been met.

Over the past 50 years, work carried out by the psychologists within the

Italian juvenile justice services has always carried an attention to subjective

meanings. While working within the Italian juvenile justice services,

influential adolescence psychoanalysts, such as Arnaldo Novelletto,

Tommaso Senise and Gustavo Pietropolli Charmet have emphasized even

unconscious subjective meanings attached to the criminal behaviour. As the

culture of psychologists working within the juvenile justice services has

become increasingly diverse (with representatives of the psychoanalytic,

cognitive-behavioural and systemic models), the number of theoretical

approaches has increased leading to a lack of common theory and

Italian Netw


ssessment and

Treatment


144




practices. A developmental approach may help to combine all the disparate

approaches.

As part of the project, a network of the psychologists working in the Italian

juvenile justice services has been established: a mailing list is now used by

its members to exchange information and practices. This Italian network

may set the precedent for an exchange at European level.

Future activities to consider include a systematic survey and a national pilot

project, focused on the relationship between assessment at intake and re-

offending and the study of young offenders aged 18+. It might also be worth

applying the developmental theory to the assessment and the treatment of

antisocial young adults as it may be useful to relate the features of the

young adulthood phase to the assessment and treatment of antisocial

young adults.

.

145

Bibliography

Achenbach T. (2001), Manual for the Youth Self Report 2001. University of

Vermont, Department of Psychiatry, Burligton.

Achenbach, T.M., Howell, C.T., McCounaghy, S.H., Stranger, C. (1995). Six-

year predictors of problems in a national sample of children and youth: II.

Signs of disturbance. Journal of the American Academy of Child and

Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 488-498.

Achenbach, T.M., Howell, C.T., McCounaghy, S.H., Stranger, C. (1998). Six-

year predictors of problems in a national sample of children and youth: IV.

Young adults sings of disturbance. Journal of the American Academy of

Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 37, 718-727

Achenbach T., Rescorla L. (2007), Multicultural Understanding of Child and

Adolescent Psychopathology. New York: The Guilford Press.


146




Aliprandi, M., Bassetti, A., Riva, E. (2001). L'adolescente fra realtà e

fantasma. Il TAT come prova del funzionamento psichico. Franco Angeli:

Milano.

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (2005). Practice

parameter for the assessment and treatment of youth in juvenile detention

and correctional facilities (AACAP Official Action). Journal of American

Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 44,1085–1098

American Psychological Association (2000), Manuale diagnostico e

statistico dei disturbi mentali. Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR). Tr.It. Masson,

Milano, 2002.

Andrews D.A., Bonta J. (1998), The Psychology of Criminal Conduct,

Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing Co.

Andrews, D., Bonta, J., Hoge, R. D. (1990). Classification for effective

rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 17,

19–52

147

Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., Wormith, J. S. (2006). The recent past and near

future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 7–22

Andrews D.A., Dowden C. (2005), Managing correctional treatment for

reduced recidivism: A meta-analytic review of program integrity. Legal and

Criminological Psychology, 10, 173-187.

Andrews D.A., Zinger R.D., Hoge R.D., Bonta J., Gendreau P., Cullen F.T.

(1990), Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and

psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28, 369-404.

Archer R.P., Stredny R.V., Mason J.A., Arnau R.C. (2004), An examination

and replication of the psychometric properties of the Massachusetts Youth

Screening Instrument--second edition (MAYSI-2) among adolescents in

detention settings. Assessement, 11, 4, 290-302.

Ashford, J. B. Sales, B. D. and Reid, W. H. (2001). “Political, legal and

professional challenges to treating offenders with special needs”. In:

Ashford, J. B., Sales, B. D. and Reid, W. H. (Eds.), Treating Adult and

Juvenile Offenders with Special Needs. American Psychological

Association, Washington, DC, pp. 31–49.


148




Associated Marine Institutes (1999), “Recidivism study”, cit. in Fonagy P.,

Target M., Cottrell D., Phillips J., Kurtz Z. (2002), What works for whom? A

critical review of treatements for children and adolescents. New York: The

Guilford Press.

Atkins D.L., Pumariega A.J., Rogers K. (1999), Mental health and

incarcerated youth. Prevalence and nature of psychopathology. Journal of

Child and Family Studies, 8: 193-204.

Baird, S. C. (1984). Classification of juveniles in corrections: A model

systems approach.Washington, DC: Arthur D. Little.

Barnoski R. (2003), Washington State Juvenile Court Assessment. Version

2.1. Washington State Institute for Public Policy,

www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/JCAmanual2-1.pdf

Barnum, R. (2000). “Clinical and forensic evaluation of competence to stand

trial in juvenile defendants”. In T. Grisso, R. G. Schwartz (Eds.), Youth on

trial (pp. 193–223). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

149

Barton, W., Gorsuch, K. (1989). Risk assessment and classification in

juvenile justice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American

Society of Criminology. Reno, NV.

Bayley S., Dolan B. (2004), (eds.) Adolescent forensic psychiatry. London:

Arnold.

Bayley, S. Trabuk, P. (2006). Recent advances in the development of

screening tools for mental health in young offenders. Current Opinion in

Psychiatry, 19:373–377

Boesky M. (2002), Juvenile Offenders with mental disorders. Lanham:

American Correctional Association.

Bonnie, R. J., Grisso, T. (2000). “Adjudicative competence and youthful

offenders”. In T. Grisso, R. G. Schwartz (Eds.), Youth on trial (pp. 73–103).

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.


150




Bonta, J. (1996). “Risk–need assessment and treatment”. In A. T. Harland

(Ed.), Choosingcorrectional options that work: Defining the demand and

evaluating the supply (pp. 18–32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bonta J. (2002) Offender Risk Assessment: Guidelines for Selection and

Use. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29; 355-379.

Boothby, J. L.,Clements, C. B. (2000).Anational survey of correctional

psychologists. CriminalJustice and Behavior, 27, 715-731.

Borum R., Bartel P., Forth A. (2003), Manual for the Structured Assessment

of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY). Version 1.1. University of South Florida.

Borum, R., Grisso, T. (1995). Psychological test use in criminal

forensicevaluations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26,

465– 473.

Borum, R., Verhaagen, D. (2006). Assessing and managing violence risk in

juveniles. New York: Guilford.

151

Brennan, T., Dieterich, W., & Ehret, B. (2009). Evaluating the predictive

validity of the COMPAS risk and needs assessment. Criminal Justice and

Behavior, 36, 21-40.

Catchpole, R.E.H., Gretton, H.M. (2003). The predictive validity of risk

assessment with violent sex offenders. A 1 year examination of criminal

outcome. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 688-708.

Centomani, G., Martino, E. (2008). Verso un cambiamento di paradigma

nell’osservazione della personalià in ambito penale minorile,

Minori&Giustizia, 4, 31-45.

Ceretti, A. (2002). Il concetto di maturità del minore. Alcune proposte per la

sua valutazione dal punto di vista dello scienziato dell'uomo, Minori &

Giustizia, 1, 53-94.

Ceretti, A., Merzagora, I.(1994). QUESTIONI SULLA IMPUTABILITÀ,

Cedam: Padova

Cicchetti, D., Cohen, D.J. (2006). Developmental Psychopathology, 2nd

Edition. Wiley and sons.


152




Champion, D. J. (1994). Measuring offender risk: A criminal justice

sourcebook.Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Corrado, R.R., Vincent, G.M., Hart, S.D., Cohen, I.M. (2004). Predictive

validity of the Psychopathic Checklist: Youth Version for general and violent

recidivism. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22, 5-22.

Crowey, t.J., Mikulich, S.K., Ehlers, K.M., Whittmore, E.A., MacDonald, M.J.

(2001). Validity of structured clinical evaluation in adolescents with conduct

and substance problems. Journal of the Academy of Child and Adolescent

Psychiatry, 36, 1269-1277.

Cruise, K.R., Dandreaux, D., Marsee, M. (2004). “Reliability and validity of

Massachusetts youth Screening Instrument – Version 2 (MAYSI-2) in

incarcerated youths: a focus on critical items”. In C.Vincent (Chair), The

Massachusetts youth Screening Instrument – Version 2 (MAYSI-2): Utility

and practical application in juvenile justice. Symposium conducted at the

meeting of the American Psychology – Law Society, Scottdale, AZ.

153

Cummings, E. M. , Davies, P.T., Campbell, S.B. (2000) Developmental

psychopathology and family process: Theory, research, and clinical

implications. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Dana, R.H. (2000). Handbook of cross cultural and multicultural personality

assessment, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah.

De Leo G. (1998). Psicologia della responsabilità. Laterza, Bari.

Dodge, K.A., Laird, R., Lochman, J.E., Zelli, A. (2002) Multidimensional

latent-construct analysis of children's social information processing patterns:

Correlations with aggressive behavior problems. Psychological

Assessment, 14(1), 60-73

Dowden C., Andrews D.A. (1999), What works in young offender treatment:

A meta-analysis, Department of Psychology, Carleton University.

Dowden C., Andrews D.A. (2006), Risk Principle of Case Classification in

Correctional Treatment. A Meta-Analytic Investigation. International Journal

of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50, 1: 88-100.


154




Duclos C.W., Beals J., Novins D.K., Martin C., Jewett C.S., Manson S.M.

(1998), Prevalence of common psychiatric disorders among American

Indian adolescent detainees. Journal of the American Academy of Child and

Adolescent Psychiatry, 37, 866-873.

Emler, N., Reicher, S. (1995), Adolescenti e devianza. Tr.It. Il Mulino,

Bologna, 2000.

Espelage, D.L., Cauffman, E., Broidy, L., Piquero, A.R., Mazerolle, P., &

Steiner, H. (2003). A cluster analytic investigation of MMPI profiles of

serious male and female juvenile offendes. Journal of the American

Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2(7):770-7

Ewing, C.P. (1990). Juvenile or adults? Forensic assessment of juvenile

considered for trial in criminal court. Forensic Reports, 3, 3-13.

Faraglia, B., Maggiolini, A. (2008). Immaturità e riduzione della

responsabilità negli adolescenti. Minori & Giustizia, 4, 78-88.

155

Farrington D.P., Loeber R. (2000), Epidemiology of Juvenile Violence, Child

and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America. 9, 4.

Farrington, D. (1995), The Development of Offending and Antisocial

Behaviour from Childhood: Key Findings from the Cambridge Study in

Delinquent Development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 360.

Ferdinand, R.F., Blum, M., Verhust, F.C. (2001). Psychopathology in

adolescence predicts substance use in young adulthood. Addiction, 96,

861-870.

Frick, P. J., Barry, C.T., Bodin, S.D.(2000). “Applying the concept of

psychopathy to children: Implications for the assessment of antisocial

youth”. In Gacono, C.B. (ed). The clinical and forensic assessment of

psychopathy: A practitioner's guide. The LEA series in personality and

clinical psychology. (pp. 3-24). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates Publishers.

Flores A.W., Lowenkamp C.T., Holsinger A.M., Latessa E.J. (2006)

Predicting outcome with the Level of Service Inventory-Revised: The


156




importance of implementation integrity. Journal of Criminal Justice 34, 523 –

529

Fonagy P., Target M., Cottrell D., Phillips J., Kurtz Z. (2002), What works for

whom? A critical review of treatements for children and adolescents. New

York: The Guilford Press.

Fornari, U. (2004). Trattato di psichiatria forense. Utet: Torino

Forth, A. E. & Burke H. C. (1998) Psychopathy in adolescence:

assessment, violence and developmental precursors. In Psychopathy:

Theory, Research and Implications for Society (eds D. Cooke, A. Forth & R.

Hare), pp. 205–230. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Forth, A.R., Mailloux, D.L. (2000), “Psychopathy in youth: what do we

know?”, in Gacono, C.B. (ed.) The clinical and forensic assessment of

psychopathy. Erlbaum, Hillsdalle.

157

Fulero, S.M. (1995). “Review of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist –

Revised”. In J.C. Conoley, J.C. Impara (Eds.). Twelfth mental

measurements yearbook (453-453). Lincoln, Ne: Buros Institute.

Gatti, Fossa, Lagazzi, Verde (1988) Adolescenti in prigione. Una ricerca

sulla carcerazione minorile a Milano negli anni 1976-1985, Rassegna di

Criminologia, vol. XIX, 1988

Garland, D. (2001). The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in

Contemporary Society. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.

Gendreau P., & Andrews D.A. (1990), Tertiary prevention: What the meta-

analysis of the offender treatment literature tells us about “what works”.

Canadian Journal of Criminology, 32, 173-184.

Gendreau P., Goggin C., Cullen F.T. (1999), The effects of prison sentences

on recidivism. Ottawa: Solicitor General Canada.

Giedd, J. N. (2004). Structural magnetic resonance imaging of the

adolescent brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 102, 77–85.


158




Granic I., Lamey A.V. (2002) Combining Dynamic Systems and Multivariate

Analyses to Compare the Mother–Child Interactions of Externalizing

Subtypes. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 265–

283.

Gretton, H.M., Hare, R.D., Catchpole, R.E.H. (2004). Psychopathy and

offending from adolescence to adulthood: a ten year follow-up. Journal of

consulting and clinical Psychology, 72, 636, 645.

Gretton, H.M., McBride, M., Hare, R.D., O’Shaughnessy, R., Kmka, G.

(2001). Psychopathy and recidivism in adolescent sex offenders. Criminal

Justice and Behavior, 28, 427-449.

Grisso, T. (1998). Forensic evaluation of juveniles. Sarasota, FL.

Professional Resource Press.

Grisso, T. (2004). Double jeopardy: Adolescent offenders with mental

disorders. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

159

Grisso T., Barnum R. (2000), Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument 2.

User’s Manual and Technical Report. Worchester, MA.

Grisso, T., Barnum, R. (2003). Massachussetts Youth Screening Instrument

– Version 2: User’s manual and technical report. Sarasota, FL: Professional

Resource Press.

Grisso, T., Barnum, R., Fletcher, K.E., Cauffman, E., Peuscholf, D. (2001).

Massacchussetts Youth Screening Instrument for mental health needs of

juvenile justice youths. Journal of the American Academy of Child and

Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(5), 541 – 548.

Grisso T., Schwartz R.G. (2000) (eds.), Youth on trial. Chicago: The

University of Chicago Press.

Grisso, T., Strinberg, L., Woolard, j., Cauffman, E., Scott, E., Grham, S. et al

(2003). Juveniles competence to stand trial. A comparison of adolescents’

and adults’ capacities as trial defendants. Law and Human Behavior, 27,

333-363.


160




Grisso, T., Vincent, G., Seagrave, D. (2005). Mental health screening and

assessment in juvenile justice. Guildford press

Grove, W.M., Zald, D.H., Hallberg, A.M., Lebow, B., Snitz, E., & Nelson, C.

(2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-

analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12, 19–30.

Gruber, S.A., Yutgelun-Todd, D.A. (2006). Neurobiology and the Law: A

Role in Juvenile Justice? Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 3, 321.

Hagell A. (2002), The mental health of young offenders – bright futures:

working with vulnerable young people. London: Mental Health Foundation.

Hare, R. D. (1970). Psychopathy: Theory and research. New York: Wiley.

Hare, R.D. (2003). Manual for the revised Psychopathy Checklist. Toronto,

ON: Multi-Health Systems.

Hart S.D., Cox D.N., Hare R.D. (1995), The Hare Psychopathy Cheklist:

Screening Version. Toronto: Multi-Health System.

161

Henggeler S.W., Schenwald S.K., Borduin C. M., Rowland M.D.,

Cunningham P.B. (1998), Multisystemic treatment of antisocial behavior in

children and adolescents. New York: The Guilford Press.

Hoge, R. D. (2001). A case management instrument for use in juvenile

justice systems. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 52, 25−32.

Hoge, R. D. (2002). Standardized instruments for assessing risk and need

in youthful offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 380−396.

Hoge, R. D., & Andrews, D. A. (2001). The youth level of service/case

management inventory (YLS/CMI): intake manual and item scoring key.

Carleton University.

Hollin, C.R. (1995), The Meaning and Implications of ‘Programme

Integrity’,in McGuire, J. (ed.) What Works: Reducing Reoffending.

Guidelines from Research and Practice (pp33–4). Chichester, Wiley.


162




Hollin, C.R. (1999), Treatment Programs for Offenders. Meta-Analysis,

‘What Works’ and Beyond. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry. 22:

361–72.

Howell J.C., Krisberg B., Hawkins J.D., Wilson J. (1995), Serious, Violent &

Chronic Juvenile Offenders, SAGE Publication.

Jones, M., Westen, D. (2010), Diagnoses and subtypes of adolescent

antisocial personality disorder, Journal of Personality Disorders, 24(2), 217-

243.

Kazdin A. (2000) Adolescent Development, Mental Disorders, and Decision

Making of Delinquent Youths, in Grisso T., Schwartz R., Youth on Trial: A

Developmental Perspective on Juvenile Justice. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press, pp. 33–65.

Kernberg, O. (1999), “Psicodinamica e gestione psicoterapeutica dei

transfert paranoide, psicopatico e narcisistico”, Adolescenza, 10.

163

Kernberg O.F. Clarkin J.F. (1992). Treatment of personality disorders.

International Journal of Mental Health, XXI, 2: 53-76 (trad. it.: La

valutazione della terapia dei disturbi di personalità. Psicoterapia e Scienze

Umane, 1994, XXVIII, 3: 41-61).

Koppelman J. (2005), Mental Health and Juvenile Justice: Moving Toward

More Effective Systems of Care in National Helath Policy Forum, n.805.

Kraemer, H. C., Kazdin, A. E., Offord, D. R., Kessler, R. C., Jensen, P. S., &

Kupfer, D. J. (1997). Coming to terms with the terms of risk. Archives of

General Psychiatry, 54, 337–343.

Kroll L., Bailey S., Myatt T., McCarthy K., Shuttleworth J., Rothwell J.,

Harrington R.C. (2003), Mental Health Screening Tool: SIFA. www.youth-

justiceboard.gov.uk/nr/rdonlyres/f1eda350-70db-437c-8f3f-

5d19fd57e533/0/sifa.pdf.

Lahey B.B., Moffitt T.E., Caspi A. (2003), (eds) Causes of conduct disorders

and juvenile delinquency. New York: The Guilford press.


164




Lahey, B.B., Waldman, I. D. (2003) “A developmental propensity model of

the origins of conduct problems during childhood and adolescence”. In

Lahey, B. B., Moffitt, T.E., Caspi, A. (eds). Causes of conduct disorder and

juvenile delinquency. (pp. 76-117). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Langan P. A., Levin D. J. (2002), Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994.

Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, NCJ 193427193427).

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.

Latessa E. J. (1999), What Works and What Doesn’t in Reducing

Recidivism:

The Principles of Effective Intervention. Center for Criminal Justice

Research, www.uc.edu/criminaljustice.

Latessa, E.J., Lowenkamp, C.T. (2005), The role of offender risk

assessment tools. For the Record 4th Quarter, 18-20.

Latessa, E.J., Lowenkamp, C.T. (2005), What are Criminogenic Needs and

Why are They Important. For the Record 4th Quarter, 15-16.

165

Latessa, E.J., Lowenkamp, C.T. (2006), What works in reducing recidivism.

University of St. Thomas Law Journal Vol3:3 2006, 521-535.

Leistico, A.R., Salekin, R.T. (2003). Testing the reliability and validity of the

Risk, Sophistication-Maturity and Treatment Amenability Inventory (RST-I):

An assessment tool for juvenile offenders. International Journal of Forensic

Mental Heath, 2, 101-117.

Lewis D.O., Yeager C.A., Lovely R., Stein A., Cobham-Porterreal C.S.

(1994), A clinical follow-up of delinquent males: ignored variables, unmet

needs and the perpetuation of violence. Journal of the American academy

of child and adolescent psychiatry, 33: 518-28.

Lipsey M.W. (1995), What do we learn from 400 research studies on the

effectiveness of treatment with juvenile delinquents, in McGuire J. (ed.)

(1995), What works: reducing reoffending. Guidelines from research and

practice. John Wiley and Sons. Chichester.

Loeber R., Farrington D.P., Stouthamer- Loeber M., Van Kammen W.B.

(1998), Antisocial Behavior and mental health problems. Explanatory factors

in childhood and adolescence. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.


166




Losana, C. (2008), L’ascolto del minore nell’osservazione sulla personalità,

Minori & Giustizia, 4, 22-30

Lowemcamp C. T., Latessa E. J. (2006), The risk principle in action: What

we learned from 13,676 offenders and 97 correctional programs? Crime &

Delinquency, 51, 1, 1-17.

Lynam, D.R. (2002). Fledging psychopathy: a view from personality theory.

Law and Human Behavior, 26, 255-269.

Madeddu F., Dazzi S. (2009), Devianza e Antisocialità. Le prospettive

scientifiche e cliniche contemporanee. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.

Maggiolini A. (2002), Adolescenti delinquenti. L’intervento psicologico nei

Servizi della Giustizia minorile. Milano: Franco Angeli.

Maggiolini A. (2005), Preadolescenza e antisocialità. Milano: Franco Angeli.

167

Maggiolini A., Ciceri A., Macchi F., Pisa C., Marchesi M. (2009), La

valutazione del rischio di recidiva nei servizi della giustizia minorile.

Rassegna italiana di criminologia, II, 3, 1-15.

Maggiolini A., Pietropolli Charmet G. (2004), (a cura di) Manuale di

psicologia dell’adolescenza: compiti e conflitti. Milano: Franco Angeli.

Maggiolini A., Riva E. (1998), Adolescenti trasgressivi. Il significato delle

azioni devianti e le risposte degli adulti. Milano: Franco Angeli.

Martinson, R. (1974). What works?Questions and answers about prison

reform. Public Interest, 35, 22-54.

Maxwell G. (2003), Achieving effective outcomes in youth justice:

implications of new research for principles, policy and practice. Crime and

Justice Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington.

McGuire J. (ed.) (1995), What works: reducing reoffending. Guidelines from

research and practice. John Wiley and Sons. Chichester.


168




MELTON, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., Slobogin, C. (1997).

Psychological evaluations for the courts (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford

press.

Miraglia, M. (2005). Usa: i minori non muoiono più di giustizia. Cassazione

penale, 45, 3552-3560.

Moffit T.E., Arsenault L., Caspi A., Taylor P., Silva P.A. (2000), Mental

Disorders and Violence in a Total Birth Cohort, Result from the Dunedine

Study. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 57, 979-986.

Moffit T.E., Lahey B., Caspi A., (2003), Causes of conduct disorder and

juvenile delinquency. New York: The Guilford Press.

Moffitt A. (2003), Life-course persistent and adlescent-limited antisocial

behavior: a 10-year research review and a research agenda, in Lahey B.B.,

Moffitt T.E., Caspi A. (Eds.) The causes of conduct disorder and serious

juvenile delinquency. New York: Guildord Press

169

Moffitt, T.E., Caspi, A., Rutter, M., Silva, P.A. (2001), Sex Differences in

Antisocial Behavior: Conduct Disorder, Delinquency, and Violence in the

Dunedin Longitudinal Study. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Murrie, D.C., Cornell, D.G., Kaplan, S., McConville, D., Levy-Elfkon, A.

(2004). Psychopathy scores and violence among juvenile offenders: a

multimeasure study. Behavioral Sciences and Law, 22, 40-67.

Novelletto A., Biondo D., Monniello G. (2000), L’adolescente violento.

Riconoscere e prevenire l’evoluzione criminale. F. Angeli, Milano.

Oberlander, L. B., Goldstein, N. E., & Ho, C. N. (2001). Preadolescent

adjudicative competence: Methodological consideration and

recommendations for practice standards. Behavioral Sciences and the Law,

19, 545–563.

Paus, T. (2005). Mapping brain development and aggression. The Canadian

Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Review, 14, 10-15.


170




Raine, A., Lee, L., Yang, Y., Colletti, P. (2010). Neurodevelopmental marker

for limbic maldevelopment in antisocial personality disorder and

psychopathy. British Journal of Psychiatry, 197, 3, 186-192.

Randall, J., Henggeler, S.W., Pickrel, S.G., and Brondino, M.J. (1999),

Psychiatric comorbidity and the 16-month trajectory of substance-abusing

and substance-dependent juvenile offenders. Journal of the American

Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 38: 1118–1124.

Redondo Illescas S., Sánchez-Meca J., Genovés G.V. (2001), Treatment of

offenders and recidivism; assessment of the effectiveness of programmes

applied in Europe. Psychology in Spain, 5, 1, 47-62.

Retz W., Junginger-Retz P., Hengesh G., Schneider M., Thome J., Pajonk

F.G., Salahi-Disfan A., Rees O., Wender P.H., Rosler M. (2004),

Psychometric and Psychopathological characterizazion of young male

prison inmates with and without attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

European Archive of Clin. Neurisc., 254: 201-208.

171

Roberts, R., Attkinson, C., Rosenblatt, A. (1998). Prevalence of

psychopathology among children and adolescents. American Journal of

Psychiatry, 155, 715-725.

Rice M.E., Harris G.T. (1997), The Treatment of mentally disordered

offenders. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 3, 1,126-183.

Roth, A., Fonagy, P. (1996). What Works for Whom? A Critical Review of

Psychotherapy Research. New York: Guilford Press.

Rutter, M. (1988), Approcci epidemiologici alla psicopatologia evolutiva,

Adolescenza, 5(2), 124-138

Rutter M., Giller H., Hagell A. (1998), Antisocial behavior by young people.

Cambridge University Press.

Schumacher M., Kurz G.A. (2000), The 8% solution: preventing serious,

repeat juvenile crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


172




Ryba, N. L., Cooper, V. G., & Zapf, P. A. (2003). Assessment of maturity in

juvenile competency to stand trial evaluations: A survey of practitioners.

Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 3, 23–46.

Salekin, R.T. (2000) Tuscaloosa Juvenile Detention Center Project.

Unpublished raw data.

Salekin, R.T. (2004). Risk-Sophistication-Treatment Inventory: Professional

Manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Salekin, R.T., Worley, C., Grimes, R.D. (2010). Treatment of psychopathy: a

review and brief introduction to the Mental Model Approach for

Psychopathy. Behavior Sciences and the Law, 28: 235-266.

Salekin, R.T., Ziegler, T.A., Larrea, M.A., Anthony, V.L., Bennet, A.D. (2003).

Predicting dangerousness with two Millon Adolescent Clinical psychopathy

scales. The importance of egocentric and callous traits. Journal of

Personality Assessment, 80, 154-163.

173

Scardaccione G., Merlini F. (1996) Minori, famiglia giustizia. L’esperienza

della “messa alla prova” nel processo penale minorile. Edizioni Unicopli,

Milano.

Schwalbe, C.S. (2007). Risk Assessment for Juvenile Justice: A Meta-

Analysis, Law and Human Behavior, 31:449–462

Schwalbe, C.S. (2008). Strengthening the integration of actuarial risk

assessment with clinical judgment in an evidence based practice

framework, Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 1458–1464

Shlonsky, A., Wagner, D. (2005). The next step: Integrating actuarial risk

assessment and clinical judgment into an evidence-based practice

framework in CPS case management. Children and Youth Services Review,

27, 409−427

Skodol A.E. (1998), Psicopatologia e crimini violenti. Torino: Centro

scientifico editore.

Snyder, J., Reid, J., Patterson, G. (2003) A social learning model of child

and adolescent antisocial behavior. In Lahey, B. B., Moffitt, T.E., Caspi, A.


174




(eds). Causes of conduct disorder and juvenile delinquency. (pp. 27-48).

New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Steinberg, R.J. (2000). Implicit Theories of intelligence as exemplar stories

of success. Why intelligence test validity is in the eye of the beholder.

Psychology, Public, Policy and Law, 6,159.167.

Steinberg, L., Scott, E. (2003). Less guilty by reason of adolescence:

Developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility, and the juvenile death

penalty. AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 58, 1009-1018

Steiner H., Garcia I.G., Matthews Z. (1997), Post-traumatic stress disorder

in incarcerated juvenile delinquents, Journal of American Academy of Child

and Adolescent Psychiatry, 36: 357-365.

Teplin L.A., Abram K.M., McClelland G.M., Dulcan M.K., Mericle A.A.

(2002), Psychiatric disorder in youth in juvenile detention. Archives of

General Psychiatry, 59:1133-1143.

175

Thomas J.M., Guskin K.A. (2008), Il comportamento dirompente nei

bambini piccoli: cosa significa? Infanzia e adolescenza, 7, 1.

Towberman, D. B. (1992). National survey of juvenile needs assessment.

Crime&Delinquency, 38, 230-238.

Tremblay R. E., Hartup W.W., Archer J. (2005) (eds.) Developmental origins

of aggression. New York: The Guilford Press.

Vermeiren R. (2003), Psychopathology and delinquency in adolescents: a

descriptive and developmental perspective. Clinical Psychology Review.,

23: 277-318.

Vermeiren R., De Clippele A., Deboutte D., (2000) Eight-month follow-up of

delinquent adolescents: predictors of short-term outcome. European

Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 250, 133-138.

Vermeiren R., Jespers I., Moffitt T. (2006), Mental Health Problems in

Juvenile Justice Populations. Child Adolescent-Psychiatric Clinic of North

America., 15, 333-351.


176




Vermeiren R., Ruchkin V., Koposov R., Schwab-Stone M. (2003),

Psychopathology and Age at Onset of Conduct Problems in Juvenile

Delinquency. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. 64;8.

Vermerein R. (2003), Psychopathology and delinquency in adolescents: a

descriptive and developmental perspective. Clinical Psychology Review, 23,

277-318.

Vincent, G.M., Vitacco, M.J., Grisso, T., Corrado, R.R. (2003). Subtypes of

adolescent offenders: affective traits and antisocial behavior patterns.

Behavioral sciences and the law, 21, 695-712.

Vreugdenihl C., Doreleijers T., Wermeiren R., Wouters L., Wim Van Den

Brink (2004), Psychiatric Disorders in a Representative Sample of

Incarcerated Boys in The Netherlands, Multnomah County Department of

Community Justice. Journal of the American Academy of Child and

Adolescent Psychiatry, 43.

Ward, T., Stewart, C. (2003). Criminogenic needs and human needs: A

theoretical model. Psychology, Crime & Law, 9(2), 125-14.

177

Wasserman, G.A., McReynolds, L.S., Ko, S.J., Katz, L.M., Cauffmman, E.,

Haxton, W. et al. (2004). Screening for emergent risk and service needs

among incarcerated youths: Comparing MAYSI-2 and Voice DISC-IV.

Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 43,

629-639.

Wasserman G., McReynolds L., Lucas C., Fisher P., Santos L. (2002), The

Voice DISC-IV With Incarcerated Male Youths: Prevalence of Disorder,

Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 41,

314-321.

Wasserman G.A., Ko S.J., McReynolds L.S. (2004), Assessing the Mental

Health Status of Youth in Juvenile Justice Settings. Ojjpd,

http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/202713, recuperato 1 sett 2008.

Wiebush, R. G., Baird, C., Krisberg, B., & Onek, D. (1995). Risk

assessment and classification for serious, violent, and chronic juvenile

offenders. In J. C. Howell, B. F. Krisberg, J. D. Hawkins,&J. J.Wilson (Eds.),

A sourcebook: Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders. (pp. 171-

212). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


178




Wikström, P.H., Sampson, R. J. (2003) “Social mechanisms of community

influences on crime and pathways in criminality”. In Lahey, B. B., Moffitt,

T.E., Caspi, A. (eds). Causes of conduct disorder and juvenile delinquency

(pp. 118-148). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Wong, S. C. P., Gordon, A., & Gu, D. (2007). Assessment and treatment of

violence prone forensic clients: An integrated approach. British Journal of

Psychiatry., 190, 66-74.

Zalot, A.A. (2002). Taylor Hardin Secure Medical Facility Project.

Unpublished raw data.

Health & Medicine

The Assessment of Young Offenders within the Juvenile Justice Services - English