Assessing Dangerousness: Domestic Violence Offenders and Child Abusers

Violence against women and children is one of the most common forms of human rights abuse in Australia (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2012). Given the high rates of domestic violence and child maltreatment in the general Australian community and the even higher rates within underserviced communities, social workers are increasingly expected to contribute to what Campbell and Messing term “risk informed collaborative interventions” (p. 1). Using risk assessment tools. However, to meaningfully engage in critically reflexive and ethical practice, social workers must interrogate the use of such tools to ensure that they align with social work values and ethics, particularly in relation to the promotion of human rights, client self-determination, and social and cultural justice. Campbell and Messing provide a thorough review of the evidence base regarding the assessment of dangerousness in the context of interpersonal violence, which is extremely beneficial to professionals engaging in critically reflexive practice.

This collection provides a comprehensive summary of the most commonly used risk assessment tools, albeit in North America. The collection includes detailed explanations about multiple tools, including their intended purposes and administrative requirements. Moreover, information about factors that should guide the selection of the most relevant tool including the practice setting, skill set of the assessors, and accessibility of information are discussed.

Chapters highlight that the vast majority of risk assessment tools aim to predict the potential for future violence or homicide and are frequently used within the criminal justice system where they contribute to multiple judicial outcomes including sentencing, decision-making about treatment options, and probation and parole considerations. In the family law and child protection arenas, risk assessments also contribute to judicial and administrative decisions relating to parenting orders, care and protection orders and the development of care plans. Increasingly, risk assessment tools are being used to predict the potential for elder abuse.

The opportunities and limitations of various risk assessment models, which can assist social workers to engage in critically reflexive and ethical practice are discussed. For example, information is presented about important concepts such as the predictive validity of risk assessment instruments. Moreover, attention is given to the need to develop more sophisticated risk assessment models that more accurately meet the needs of people from LGBTQI, Indigenous, and CALD communities.

Evidence is presented to highlight how the use of validated instruments in conjunction with the survivors’ assessments of the dynamic risk and protective factors is currently considered best practice in assessing dangerousness and safety planning. Such evidence aligns with social work values of client self-determination, promoting human rights and engaging in culturally safe practice. Although there is limited reference to Campbell’s earlier unpublished pilot work on the danger assessment circle, readers are presented with an adapted model, which was developed with and for Indigenous women and children in Canada. It presents an excellent example of how risk assessment tools can be developed in collaboration with women survivors in order to improve the safety of women and children.

This collection is very timely for the Australian context where a number of State government inquiries have highlighted the need to improve risk assessment and risk management processes in order to achieve two goals: to enhance the safety of survivors of family violence and to hold people who use violence and control accountable (Not Now, Not Ever, Queensland, 2015; State of Victoria, 2014–2016). However, given the pervasiveness of neo-liberalism and managerialism in Australian social service settings, there is a risk that tools can be used as weapons to advance state interests. For example, one can argue that the uncritical use of risk assessment models historically has contributed to the over-representation of Indigenous children in out-of-home care and Indigenous adults in incarceration. It is thus vital that social workers critique organisational policies and practices and resist engaging in practices that compound oppression.

This collection provides social workers with vital information that can enable them to engage in conversations that contribute to knowledge building about ethical risk assessment and avoid some of the pitfalls identified by Gillingham (2011). In their practice, social workers engage closely with the real experts in the field—women and children who survive, manage and resist violence and control on a daily basis. Thus, they are well placed to contribute to advancing the field of risk assessment to ensure that it aligns with the ethics of care and social justice.