In this paper, we argue that risk assessment should be considered a part of daily clinical psychiatric practice. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of various risk assessment procedures. In the event that a high risk for violence is present, we advise on strategies for discharging our duty to protect the public. Finally, by way of an illustrative case, we apply theory to practice and discuss the issues of risk management and risk reduction essential to a modern approach to psychiatry.
CarsonD.1995 quoted in Bingley W. Assessing dangerousness: Protecting the interests of patients. Br J Psychiatry1997;170(Suppl 32):28–9.
2.
DvoskinJAHeilbrunK.Risk assessment and release decision-making: Toward resolving the great debate. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law2001;29:6–10.
3.
NorkoMBaranoskiMV. The state of contemporary risk assessment research. Can J Psychiatry2005;50:18–26.
4.
GrayJCO'ReillyR.Clinically significant differences among Canadian Mental Health Acts. Can J Psychiatry2001;41:315–21.
5.
HarrisonG.Risk assessment in a climate of litigation. Br J Psychiatry1997;170:37–9.
6.
ReedJ.Risk assessment and clinical risk management: The lessons from recent enquiries. Br J Psychiatry1997;170(Suppl 32):4–7.
7.
HarrisM.Training trainers in risk assessment. Br J Psychiatry1997;170(Suppl 32):35–46.
8.
MonahanJ. The clinical prediction of violent behaviour. Rockville (MD): National Institute of Mental Health; 1981.
9.
MonahanJ.Clinical and actual prediction of violence. In: FaigmanDKayDSacksMSandersJ, editors. Modern scientific evidence: The law and science of expert testimony. Volume 1. St Paul (MN): West Publishing; 1997. p 300–18.
10.
GlancyGRegehrC.The predicative validity of measurement tools for assessing dangerous in sex offenders. In: RobertsAYeagerK, editors. Handbook of psychiatric based research. New York: Oxford University Press; 2002.
11.
MossmanD.Commentary: Assessing the risk of violence—are “accurate” predictions useful? J Am Acad Psychiatry Law2000;28:272–81.
12.
QuinseyVKhannaAMalcolmP.A retrospective evaluation of the regional treatment sex offender treatment program. Journal of Interpersonal Violence1998;13:621–4.
13.
QuinseyVHarrisGRiceMCormierC. Violent offenders: Appraising and managing risk. Washington (DC): American Psychological Association; 1998.
14.
WebsterCDouglasKSEavesEHartSD. The HCR-20: Assessing risk for violence. Version 2. Burnaby (BC): Simon Fraser University; 1997.
DouglasKSOgloffRPNichollsTLGrantI.Assessing risk for violence among psychiatric patients: The HCR-20 risk assessment scheme and the psychopathy checklist: Screening version. J Consult Clin Psychol1991;61:917–30.
17.
MonahanJSteadmanHJAppelbaumPSRobbinsPCMulveyEPSilverE, and others. Developing a clinically useful actuarial tool for assessing violence risk. Br J Psychiatry2000;176:312–9.
18.
RogersR.The uncritical acceptance of risk assessment in forensic practice. Law and Human Behaviour2000;24:595–605.
19.
ReidWH. Risk assessment prevention and foreseeability. Journal of Psychiatric Practice2003;9:984–6.
20.
HansonRK. What do we know about sex offender assessment? Psychol Public Policy Law1993;4:50–72.
21.
GlancyGDRegehrCBryantAG. Confidentiality in crisis: Part I—the duty to inform. Can J Psychiatry1998;43:1001–5.
22.
ChaimowitzGAGlancyGDBlackburnJ.The duty to warn and protect—impact on practice. Can J Psychiatry2000;45:899–904.
23.
Wenden v Trikha, Royal Alexandra Hospital and Yaltho (1993), 14 CCLT (2d) 225 (Alta. CA).
24.
Tarasoff v Regents of the University of California, 188 Cal Rptr 129, 529 P2d 533, 1974.
25.
Tarasoff v Regents of the University of California (1976), 17 Cal (3d) 425, 551 P2d 334.
26.
O'ShaughnessyRGlancyGBradfordJ.Smith v Jones: Supreme Court of Canada: Confidentiality and privilege suffer another blow. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law1999;27:614–20.
