In this short article, a critical look is taken at practice and process surrounding the use of formulation in relation to violence risk assessment within a forensic context. The historical background to the adoption of formulation as a component within clinical risk assessment and management is outlined, and questions are highlighted in relation to the paucity of research evaluating the approach. Despite potential limitations in terms of evidence base, it is noted that the use of risk formulation has risen in popularity, which, in view of the high stakes that characterize the forensic mental health context, may be an issue that merits debate. Central issues are discussed, and broad questions that may be useful to explore in future research are suggested.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DaffernM.HowellsK.OgloffJ.2007. What's the point? Towards a methodology for assessing the function of psychiatric inpatient aggression. Behaviour Research & Therapy., 45: 101–111.
2.
Department of Health. 2007. Best Practice in Managing Risk: Principles and evidence for best practice in the assessment and management of risk to self and others in mental health services, London: Department of Health.
3.
DoyleM.DolanM.2002. Violence risk assessment: Combining actuarial and clinical information to structure clinical judgements for the formulation and management of risk. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing., 9: 649–657.
4.
DoyleM.DolanM. 2006. Evaluating the validity of anger regulation problems, interpersonal style, and disturbed mental state for predicting inpatient violence. Behavioral Sciences and the Law., 24: 783–798.
5.
DoyleM.DolanM.2008. “Understanding and managing risk”. In Handbook of forensic mental health, Edited by: SoothillK.RogersP.DolanM.Cullompton: Willan. Ch. 10
6.
DoyleM.DolanM.ShawJ.CarterS.2008. The development of a practical risk assessment framework for multidisciplinary use in mental health servicesResearch Report for the National Forensic R&D Programme: London
7.
DoyleM.DuffyD.2006. “Assessing and managing risk to self and others”. In Aspects of forensic mental health nursing: Interventions for people with personality disorder, London: Quay Books. National Forensic Nurses' Research and Development Group (Eds.)
8.
DoyleM.LewisG.BrisbaneM.2008. Implementing the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) in a forensic mental health service. Psychiatric Bulletin., 32: 406–408.
9.
EelsT.D.2001. Update on psychotherapy case formulation research. Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 10(4): 277–281.
10.
EelsT.D.2002. “Formulation”. In Encyclopedia of psychotherapy, Edited by: HersenM.SledgeW.New York: Academic Press.
11.
EelsT.D.2009. “Contemporary themes in case formulation”. In Clinical case formulation: Varieties of approaches, Edited by: SturmeyP.Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
12.
HarrisG.T.RiceM.E.2007. Characterizing the value of actuarial violence risk assessments. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(12): 1638–1658.
13.
HartS.D.KroppP.R.LawsD.R.KlaverJ.LoganC.WattK.A.2003. The Risk for Sexual Violence Protocol (RSVP): Structured professional guidelines for assessing risk of sexual violence, Burnaby, BC: Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.
14.
HartS.D.MichieC.CookeD.J.2007. Precision of actuarial risk assessment instruments. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190(suppl. 49): s60–s65.
15.
Hazlett-StevensH.CraskeM.G.2002. “Brief cognitive-behavioural therapy: Definition and scientific foundations”. In Handbook of brief cognitive behaviour therapy, Edited by: BondF.W.DrydenW.Chichester: Wiley.
16.
HiltonN.Z.CarterA.M.HarrisG.T.SharpeA.J. B.2008. Does using nonnumerical terms to describe risk aid violence risk communication? Clinician agreement and decision making. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(2): 171–188.
17.
HuessmannL.R.1998. “The role of social information processing and cognitive schema in the acquisition and maintenance of habitual aggressive behavior”. In Human aggression: Theories, research and implications for social policy, Edited by: GeenR.DonnersteinE.London: Academic Press.
18.
JohnstoneL.DallosR.2006. Formulation in psychology and psychotherapy, Hove: Routledge.
19.
JonesL.F.2002. “An individual case formulation approach to the assessment of motivation”. In Motivating offenders to change, Edited by: McMurranM.Chichester: Wiley.
20.
JonesL.F.2004. “Offence paralleling behaviour (OPB) as a framework for assessment and interventions with offenders”. In Applying psychology to forensic practice, Edited by: NeedsA.TowlG.Oxford: BPS Blackwell.
21.
KuykenW.2006. “Evidence-based case formulation: Is the emperor clothed?”. In Case formulation in cognitive behaviour therapy: The treatment of challenging and complex clinical cases, Edited by: TarrierN.Hove: Routledge.
22.
KuykenW.FothergillC.D.MusaM.ChadwickP.2005. The reliability and quality of cognitive case formulation. Behaviour Research and Therapy., 43: 1187–1201.
23.
LeiperR.MaltbyM.2004. The psychodynamic approach to therapeutic change, London: Sage.
24.
LinehanM.M.1993. Cognitive-behavioral treatment of borderline personality disorder, New York: Academic Press.
25.
MonahanJ.1992. Mental disorder and violent behaviour: perceptions and evidence. American Psychologist., 47: 511–521.
26.
MonahanJ.SteadmanH.J.1996. Violent storms and violent people: How meteorology can inform risk communication in mental health law. American Psychologist., 51: 931–938.
27.
MooreB.1996. Risk assessment: A practitioner's guide to predicting harmful behaviour, London: Whiting & Birch.
28.
National Confidential Inquiry. 2006. Avoidable deaths—Five year report of the national confidential inquiry into suicide and homicide by people with mental illness, Manchester: University of Manchester.
29.
NHS London. 2006. Report of the independent inquiry into the care and treatment of John Barrett, London: HMSO.
30.
NovacoR.W.1994. “Anger as a risk factor for violence among the mentally disordered”. In Violence and mental disorder: Developments in risk assessment, Edited by: MonahanJ.SteadmanH.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31.
PersonsJ.TompkinsM. 1997. “Cognitive behavioural formulation”. In Handbook of psychotherapy case formulation, Edited by: EelsT.D.New York: Guilford Press.
32.
RitchieJ.1994. Report of the inquiry into the care and treatment of Christopher Clunis, London: HMSO.
33.
Royal College of Psychiatrists. 1996. Assessment and clinical management of risk of harm to other people—Council report CR53, London: Royal College of Psychiatrists.
34.
TarrierN.CalamR.2002. New developments in cognitive-behavioural case formulation. Epidemiological, systemic and social context: an integrative approach. Cognitive & Behavioural Psychotherapy, : 311–328.
35.
TaylorP.GunnJ.2008. “Diagnosis, medical models and formulation”. In Handbook of forensic mental health, Edited by: SoothillK.RogersP.DolanM.Cullompton: Willan. Ch. 9
36.
WardT.2002. The management of risk and the design of good lives. Australian Psychologist., 37: 172–179.
37.
WebsterC.D.DouglasK.S.EavesD.HartS.D.1997. HCR-20: Assessing risk of violence (Version 2), Burnaby, BC: Mental Health, Law, & Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University.
38.
WeerasekeraP.1996. Multiperspective case formulation: A step towards treatment integration, Malabar, FL: Krieger.
39.
WeerasekeraP.2009. “A formulation of the case of Antoinette: A multiperspective approach”. In Clinical case formulation: Varieties of approaches, Edited by: SturmeyP.Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
