Rowlands M T, Palk G, Young R McD
Institute of Health & Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2017 May 10;24(6):812-824. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2017.1315763. eCollection 2017.
The purpose of this article is to review legislation on 'dangerous sex offenders' critically. Most modern legislation determines an individual to be 'dangerous' if he or she is at unacceptably high risk of committing further sexual violence. While the decision is judicial in practice, clinical testimony is utilised to inform courts' decision-making. Dangerousness may be a normative (legal) construct, but it is reliant on clinical assessment. Offenders are not at risk only due to historical factors; the possibility of committing sexual violence in the future is likely affected by temporal factors such as response to therapy, substance misuse, and proximity to victims. It is not clear that mental illness would place an offender at risk, although certain personality disorders are considered to be risk factors. In reporting actual risk, clinicians need to consider a range of variables, and not exclusively use actuarial measures or unstructured clinical interviews.
本文旨在批判性地审视关于“危险的性犯罪者”的立法。大多数现代立法规定，如果一个人实施进一步性暴力的风险高到不可接受的程度，那么这个人就被认定为“危险的”。虽然这一判定在实践中由司法机构做出，但临床证词会被用于为法庭的决策提供参考。危险性可能是一种规范性（法律）概念，但它依赖于临床评估。犯罪者并非仅仅由于历史因素而处于风险之中；未来实施性暴力的可能性可能会受到诸如对治疗的反应、药物滥用以及与受害者的接近程度等时间因素的影响。虽然某些人格障碍被视为风险因素，但精神疾病是否会使犯罪者处于风险之中并不明确。在报告实际风险时，临床医生需要考虑一系列变量，而不能仅仅使用精算措施或非结构化的临床访谈。
