Criminology

Name of student

Institution

Criminology

In the case of Mr. Andrews above I would use The Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) method of assessing offenders. I would use this method of assessment because its newest version of the manual describes a multi-axial system relevant to the case of Mr. Andrews. It has the most embracing research literature compared to other offenders’ assessment instruments and it is the most frequently used instrument in Canada and the US. This method considers cognitive disorders, substance related disorders, schizophrenia and psychotic disorders. It also includes anxiety disorders, mood disorders among others. Antisocial personality disorder is looked at as well as obsessive-compulsive personality disorders and mental disorders by LSI-R CITATION Low01 l 1033 (Lowenkamp, 2001). it also includes the client’s general medical condition assessment such as nervous system among others necessary for the case of Mr. Andrews, as well as evaluation of the client’s problems with primary support group like the social environment, family and also lack of absence of social support like retirement, housing, occupation and the like. The general assessment of Mr. Andrews on the scale of 0 to 100 will be undertaken. High scores would indicate greater risks of criminal behaviors. According to the report given about Mr. Andrew, it is an indicator that the scores are higher than 29, meaning that he is at a high and maximum risks level CITATION Bon02 l 1033 (Bonta, 2002)s.

Considering the information given on Mr. Andrew, medium facility is still not the option. He should continue in the maximum facility as he is still getting monitored because of the numerous violation tickets he has received for assault on the inmates, disorderly conduct, and not following bthe instructions given by the correction officer. His behavior is still aggressive and his response to questions vague. This is a clear indication that Mr. Andrew should remain at a Maximum security facility.

References

Lowenkamp, C. T., Holsinger, A. M., & Latessa, E. J. (2001). Risk/need assessment, offender classification, and the role of childhood abuse. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28(5), 543-563.

Bonta, J. (2002). Offender risk assessment guidelines for selection and use. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29(4), 355-379.

Criminology

Name of student

Institution

Criminology

In the case of Mr. Andrews above I would use The Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) method of assessing offenders. I would use this method of assessment because its newest version of the manual describes a multi-axial system relevant to the case of Mr. Andrews. It has the most embracing research literature compared to other offenders’ assessment instruments and it is the most frequently used instrument in Canada and the US. This method considers cognitive disorders, substance related disorders, schizophrenia and psychotic disorders. It also includes anxiety disorders, mood disorders among others. Antisocial personality disorder is looked at as well as obsessive-compulsive personality disorders and mental disorders by LSI-R CITATION Low01 l 1033 (Lowenkamp, 2001). it also includes the client’s general medical condition assessment such as nervous system among others necessary for the case of Mr. Andrews, as well as evaluation of the client’s problems with primary support group like the social environment, family and also lack of absence of social support like retirement, housing, occupation and the like. The general assessment of Mr. Andrews on the scale of 0 to 100 will be undertaken. High scores would indicate greater risks of criminal behaviors. According to the report given about Mr. Andrew, it is an indicator that the scores are higher than 29, meaning that he is at a high and maximum risks level CITATION Bon02 l 1033 (Bonta, 2002)s.

Considering the information given on Mr. Andrew, medium facility is still not the option. He should continue in the maximum facility as he is still getting monitored because of the numerous violation tickets he has received for assault on the inmates, disorderly conduct, and not following bthe instructions given by the correction officer. His behavior is still aggressive and his response to questions vague. This is a clear indication that Mr. Andrew should remain at a Maximum security facility.

References

Lowenkamp, C. T., Holsinger, A. M., & Latessa, E. J. (2001). Risk/need assessment, offender classification, and the role of childhood abuse. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28(5), 543-563.

Bonta, J. (2002). Offender risk assessment guidelines for selection and use. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29(4), 355-379.