Department for Psychotherapy and Biopsychosocial Health, Danube University Krems, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, 3500, Austria.
IFQM, Medbo (KU), Universitätsstr. 84, Regensburg, 93053, Germany.
J Forensic Sci. 2020 Jul;65(4):1221-1224. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.14281. Epub 2020 Jan 21.
This study examined associations between criminal recidivism after discharge from forensic treatment and variables related to either the time before the current forensic treatment, or the current forensic treatment, or the follow-up after discharge. Participants were treated in 12 forensic clinics according to section 63 of the German penal code. A patient was classified as a criminal recidivist when the patient or the aftercare reported that the patient was delinquent at follow-up. Patients without criminal recidivism were patients for which both perspectives (patient and aftercare) reported no delinquency at follow-up. Mann-Whitney U-tests and Fisher's exact tests were performed. Data to classify patients were available for N = 249 patients. Fifteen patients (6%) were classified as criminal recidivists. The follow-up was M = 12.58 (SD = 1.84) months, and the criminal acts occurred M = 6.00 (SD = 5.55) months after discharge. Differences between patients with and without criminal recidivism were found in pretreatment (young age at first crime, early onset of mental disorder, previous forensic treatments), treatment-related (disorder due to psychoactive substance use, gradual release abuses, outbreaks, assaults against staff, criminal act during treatment, type of discharge, outcome ratings), as well as follow-up variables (no specified housing situation, not being abstinent from psychoactive substances, inpatient readmission, course of outpatient treatment, course of mental disorder) (all p < 0.05). To conclude, it is important to consider variables related to the time before the current treatment, treatment-related variables, and variables related to the follow-up to identify the patients at risk of criminal recidivism after discharge from forensic treatment.
本研究考察了从法医治疗出院后犯罪复发与与当前法医治疗前、当前法医治疗或出院后随访相关变量之间的关联。参与者根据德国刑法第 63 条在 12 个法医诊所接受治疗。当患者或随访后护理人员报告患者在随访时犯罪时,将患者归类为犯罪复发者。没有犯罪复发的患者是指两个角度(患者和随访后护理人员)都报告在随访时没有犯罪的患者。进行了曼-惠特尼 U 检验和 Fisher 确切检验。可用于分类患者的数据为 N = 249 名患者。15 名患者(6%)被归类为犯罪复发者。随访时间 M = 12.58(SD = 1.84)个月,犯罪行为发生在出院后 M = 6.00(SD = 5.55)个月。在治疗前(初次犯罪时年龄较小、精神障碍发病早、以前的法医治疗)、治疗相关(因使用精神活性物质而导致的障碍、逐渐释放滥用、爆发、袭击工作人员、治疗期间犯罪、出院类型、结果评定)以及随访变量(没有指定的住房情况、没有戒除精神活性物质、住院重新入院、门诊治疗过程、精神障碍过程)中发现了有犯罪复发和无犯罪复发患者之间的差异(所有 p < 0.05)。总之,考虑与当前治疗前时间、治疗相关变量以及与随访相关的变量对于识别从法医治疗出院后有犯罪复发风险的患者很重要。