Conrick Kelsey M, Davis Adam, Rooney Lauren, Bellenger M Alex, Rivara Frederick P, Rowhani-Rahbar Ali, Moore Megan
School of Social Work, University of Washington.
Firearm Injury & Policy Research Program, Harborview Injury Prevention & Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
J Soc Social Work Res. 2023 Summer;14(2). doi: 10.1086/714635.
Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO) allow a petitioner to file a civil order to temporarily restrict access to firearms among individuals ("respondents") deemed to be at extreme risk of harming themselves, others, or both. Although unable to file ERPOs for their clients in most states, health professionals may play a pivotal role in the ERPO process by recommending an eligible petitioner initiate the process. We describe the process of filing an ERPO when a healthcare, mental health, or social service professional contacted an ERPO petitioner.
Court documents of ERPOs involving health professionals in Washington State between December 8, 2016 and May 10, 2019 were qualitatively analyzed (n=24). We constructed pen portraits from the documents and analyzed them using an inductive qualitative thematic approach.
Themes included factors influencing the by which each professional evaluated respondent behaviors, factors considered during , factors influencing and subsequent provider during a crisis. These influenced the of the crisis event that led to ERPO filing.
Each professional group differed in their approach to risk assessment of respondent behaviors. Strategies to better coordinate and align approaches may improve the ERPO process.
极端风险保护令（ERPO）允许申请人提交民事命令，以暂时限制被认为有极高风险伤害自己、他人或两者的个人（“被申请人”）获取枪支。尽管在大多数州，医疗专业人员无法为其客户提交极端风险保护令申请，但他们可以通过建议符合条件的申请人启动该程序，在极端风险保护令程序中发挥关键作用。我们描述了医疗、心理健康或社会服务专业人员联系极端风险保护令申请人时提交该保护令的过程。
对2016年12月8日至2019年5月10日期间华盛顿州涉及医疗专业人员的极端风险保护令法庭文件进行了定性分析（n = 24）。我们从文件中构建了人物简介，并采用归纳定性主题方法对其进行分析。
主题包括影响每位专业人员评估被申请人行为的因素、评估期间考虑的因素、危机期间影响通知和后续提供者参与的因素。这些因素影响了导致提交极端风险保护令的危机事件的进程。
每个专业群体在对被申请人行为进行风险评估的方法上存在差异。更好地协调和统一方法的策略可能会改善极端风险保护令程序。
