In Germany, short leave is an integral part of treatment in forensic psychiatric hospitals. It is believed that the practice has many benefits for patients’ well-being and their treatment progress. However, the risk of an incident in the form of absconding or new offenses may be especially heightened during unsupervised short leave. This study analyzes the impact of unsupervised short leave on treatment progress using a pre-post design with follow-up and a sample of 298 forensic psychiatric patients. Furthermore, incidents on short leave were considered in the analysis. The results of the study suggest that unsupervised short leave can foster treatment progress. However, they also reveal that incidents during leave can disrupt the progress of treatment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BordinE. S. (1979). The generalizability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 16(3), 252–260. 10.1037/h0085885
ChenF. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. 10.1080/10705510701301834
4.
DrieschnerK. H., & BoomsmaA. (2008). The Treatment Engagement Rating scale (TER) for forensic outpatient treatment: Description, psychometric properties, and norms. Psychology, Crime & Law, 14(4), 299–315. 10.1080/10683160701858206
5.
DrieschnerK. H., & VerschuurJ. (2010). Treatment engagement as a predictor of premature treatment termination and treatment outcome in a correctional outpatient sample. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 20(2), 86–99. 10.1002/cbm.757
6.
EdworthyR.SampsonS., & VöllmB. (2016). Inpatient forensic-psychiatric care: Legal frameworks and service provision in three European countries. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 47, 18–27. 10.1016/j.ijlp.2016.02.027
7.
FarnworthL.NikitinL., & FosseyE. (2004). Being in a secure forensic psychiatric unit: Every day is the same, killing time or making the most of it. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67(10), 430–438. 10.1177/030802260406701003
8.
FrankeI.BüsselmannM.StrebJ., & DudeckM. (2019). Perceived institutional restraint is associated with psychological distress in forensic psychiatric inpatients. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, 410. 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00410
9.
Gilling McIntoshL.JanesS.O'RourkeS., & ThomsonL. D. (2021). Effectiveness of psychological and psychosocial interventions for forensic mental health inpatients: A meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 58, 101551. 10.1016/j.avb.2021.101551
10.
GoodsteinL.MacKenzieD. L., & ShotlandR. L. (1984). Personal control and inmate adjustment to prison. Criminology, 22(3), 343–369. 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1984.tb00304.x
11.
GratzW. (1986). Die Praxis der Unterbringung zurechnungsfähiger geistig abnormer Rechtsbrecher (Vol. 3). Schriften zum Strafrecht, Orac.
12.
GrünebaumR., & VolckartB. (2015). Maßregelvollzug: Das Recht des Vollzuges der Unterbringung nach §§ 63, 64 StGB in einem psychiatrischen Krankenhaus und in einer Erziehungsanstalt (8 Aufl.). Heymanns.
13.
HachtelH.VogelT., & HuberC. G. (2019). Mandated treatment and its impact on therapeutic process and outcome factors. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, 219. 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00219
14.
HiltermanE. L. B.PhilipseM. W. G., & GraafN. D. d (2011). Assessment of offending during leave: Development of the leave risk assessment in a sample of Dutch forensic psychiatric patients. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 10(3), 233–243. 10.1080/14999013.2011.598601
15.
HuL., & BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. 10.1080/10705519909540118
16.
HuynhH., & FeldtL. S. (1976). Estimation of the box correction for degrees of freedom from sample data in randomized block and split-plot designs. Journal of Educational Statistics, 1(1), 69–82. 10.3102/10769986001001069
KlineR. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Research methods (3th ed.). Guilford Press.
19.
KöhneM., & LestingW. (2012). § 11: Lockerungen des Vollzuges. In FeestJ. & LestingW. (Eds.), StVollzG: Kommentar zum Strafvollzugsgesetz; (AK-StVollzG) (6th ed., pp. 102–125). Heymann.
20.
LecoutreB. (1991). A correction for the ε˜ approximate test in repeated measures designs with two or more independent groups. Journal of Educational Statistics, 16(4), 371–372. 10.3102/10769986016004371
21.
MauchlyJ. W. (1940). Significance test for sphericity of a normal n-variate distribution. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 11(2), 204–209. 10.1214/aoms/1177731915
22.
McNeishD. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 412–433. 10.1037/met0000144
23.
MüllerJ. L.NedopilN.FreislederF. J.GrafM., & HallerR. (2017). Forensische Psychiatrie: Klinik: Begutachtung und Behandlung zwischen Psychiatrie und Recht (5 überarbeitete Aufl.). Georg Thieme Verlag.
24.
MüllerJ. L.SaimehN.BrikenP.EuckerS.HoffmannK.KollerM.WolfT.DudeckM.HartlC.JakovljevicA.-K.KleinV.KnechtG.Müller-IsbernerR.MuysersJ.SchiltzK.SeifertD.SimonA.SteinböckH.StuckmannW., … ZeidlerR. (2017). Standards für die Behandlung im Maßregelvollzug nach §§ 63 und 64 StGB: Interdisziplinäre Task-Force der DGPPN [Standards for treatment in forensic committment according to § 63 and § 64 of the German criminal code: Interdisciplinary task force of the DGPPN]. Der Nervenarzt, 88(Suppl 1), 1–29. 10.1007/s00115-017-0382-3
25.
Müller-IsbernerR.FreeseR.JöckelD., & CabezaS. G. (2000). Forensic psychiatric assessment and treatment in Germany. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 23(5-6), 467–480. 10.1016/S0160-2527(00)00056-X
26.
NeumannM.HeintzschR.GlaubitzC.KilligL.SchumannR., & BliesenerT. (2019). Analyse der Vollzugslockerungen im niedersächsischen Maßregelvollzug (KFN-Forschungsbericht No. 150). Kriminologisches Forschungsinstitut Niedersachsen e.V. (KFN).
27.
O’ConnellM.FarnworthL., & HansonE. C. (2010). Time use in forensic psychiatry: A naturalistic inquiry into two forensic patients in Australia. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 9(2), 101–109. 10.1080/14999013.2010.499558
28.
ParharK. K.WormithJ. S.DerkzenD. M., & BeauregardA. M. (2008). Offender coercion in treatment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(9), 1109–1135. 10.1177/0093854808320169
29.
PollähneH. (2018). Das Maß des Freiheitsentzugs (Vollzugslockerungen). In PollähneH. & KammeierH. (Eds.), Maßregelvollzugsrecht (4th ed., pp. 229–306). De Gruyter.
30.
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 4.1.2) [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. 10.18637/jss.v048.i02
33.
RylandH.CookJ.YukhnenkoD.FitzpatrickR., & FazelS. (2021). Outcome measures in forensic mental health services: A systematic review of instruments and qualitative evidence synthesis. European Psychiatry, 64(1), 1–40. 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.32
34.
SchuringaE.SpreenM., & BogaertsS. (2014). Inter-rater and test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and factorial structure of the instrument for forensic treatment evaluation. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 14(2), 127–144. 10.1080/15228932.2014.897536
35.
SturidssonK.TurtellI.TengströmA.LekanderM., & LevanderM. (2007). Time use in forensic psychiatry: An exploratory study of patients’ time use at a Swedish Forensic Psychiatric Clinic. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 6(1), 79–86. 10.1080/14999013.2007.10471251
36.
SuhlingS.PucksM., & BielenbergG. (2015). Ansätze zum Umgang mit Gefangenen mit geringer Veränderungs- und Behandlungsmotivation. In WischkaB.PecherW., & van den BoogaartH. (Eds.), Studien und Materialien zum Straf- und Massregelvollzug: v.26. Behandlung von Straftätern: Sozialtherapie, Maßregelvollzug, Sicherungsverwahrung (pp. 233–293). Centaurus Verlag & Media.
37.
SykesG. M. (1974). The society of captives: A study of a maximum security prison (Third paperback print). Princeton University Press.
38.
ThomasS. D. M.SladeM.McCroneP.HartyM.-A.ParrottJ.ThornicroftG., & LeeseM. (2008). The reliability and validity of the forensic Camberwell Assessment of Need (CANFOR): A needs assessment for forensic mental health service users. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 17(2), 111–120. 10.1002/mpr.235
39.
WalkerA.FarnworthL., & LapinksiS. (2013). A recovery perspective on community day leaves. The Journal of Forensic Practice, 15(2), 109–118. 10.1108/14636641311322296
40.
WardT.DayA.HowellsK., & BirgdenA. (2004). The multifactor offender readiness model. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9(6), 645–673. 10.1016/j.avb.2003.08.001
41.
WatsonT. M., & ChooL. (2020). Understanding and reducing unauthorized leaves of absence from forensic mental health settings: A literature review. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 32(2), 181–197. 10.1080/14789949.2020.1837917
42.
WedlerK., & MaaßC. (2016). Lockerungsentscheidungen im Erwachsenen-Maßregelvollzug. In HäßlerF.KinzeW., & NedopilN. (Eds.), Praxishandbuch Forensische Psychiatrie: Grundlagen, Begutachtung, Interventionen im Erwachsenen-, Jugendlichen- und Kindesalter (2nd ed., pp. 539–550). MWV.
43.
WickhamH. (2016). Ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. Use R! (2nd ed.). Springer. 10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4
44.
WilkieT.PenneyS. R.FernaneS., & SimpsonA. I. F. (2014). Characteristics and motivations of absconders from forensic mental health services: A case-control study. BMC Psychiatry, 14, 91. 10.1186/1471-244X-14-91
