PYSC330 - week 8 to week 11 content

What is the second phase of HIPP treatment?:

:Norm Building

Which of the following is NOT primarily addressed by MST: School, Peer Group, Family, or Traumatic Brain Injury?:

:Traumatic Brain Injury

What conclusion is most consistent with Reil et al. (2020) finding that most Youth Court youth had prior Oranga Tamariki involvement?:

:Early government contact creates opportunities for prevention

In Farrington et al. (1996), which family member's conviction had the strongest relationship with men's convictions?:

:Wife

According to Hoeve et al. (2009), which parenting factor was the weakest correlate of youth delinquency?:

:Physical punishment

Which psychometric tools are the primary overall risk tools used by Matapuna STU?:

:VRS-II and VRS:SO

Which SSF traffic-light level provides the greatest autonomy and responsibility?:

:Green

What do Hanson, Helmus and Bourgon (2007) findings suggest about IPV offenders?::

They share many risk factors with general offenders

In Wrightson-Hester et al. (2026), negative childhood experiences are what type of CSEM risk factor?:

:Developmental

In Fortin et al.'s (2018) Episodes-and-Obstacles model, what is Episode 1?:

:Legal p*******y

What are the four MST principles emphasised in the tutorial?:

:Finding the Fit, Strength Focused, Targeting Sequences, Generalisation

What systems are primarily targeted by MST?::

Family, Peers, School, Community

What is the difference between Adolescent-Limited and Life-Course Persistent offenders?::

AL offend mainly during adolescence and desist; LCP begin early and persist into adulthood

Which youth justice response is the most formal?:

:Youth Court

What are the six pillars of reintegration?::

Accommodation, Employment, Training and Education, Skills for Life, Whānau/Community Support, Oranga

What is offence-paralleling behaviour?:

:Behaviour that mirrors previous offending patterns or risk factors

What is the most common IPV type in Johnson's typology?:

:Situational Couple Violence

What three elements are required for coercive control?:

:Intent, Perception, Credible Threat

Which IPV assessment tool uses Structured Professional Judgement?::

SARA

Which IPV assessment tools are actuarial?:

:ODARA and DVRAG

SAFVR assesses what type of factors?:

:Static

DYRA assesses what type of factors?:

:Dynamic

According to the Duluth Model, what is the primary cause of IPV?:

:Power and Control

Which approach has stronger evidence than Duluth-only programmes?::

CBT

What are the main drivers of CSEM use?:

:Sexual interest in children, sexual gratification, offence-supportive cognitions, maladaptive coping, pornography use, childhood experiences, accidental exposure

What factors increase risk of progressing from CSEM use to contact offending?:

:Sexual interest in children, severe/frequent CSEM use, communication with children, networking with offenders, prior offending, cognitive distortions

ASR-S

based on Static99R

estimates likelihood of reoffence on child and adult 5 - 10 years post release recidivism risk

ASRS-R increase or decrease s/o risk score

s/o against males increases risk score

10 year risk approximately non contact offending 19.3% (high)

VRS-SO

each item has a “state of change”

VRS-SO Static and Dynamic Risk Factors example

static - intrafamiliar offending

dynamic 3 subgroups (sexual deviance, criminality, response to treatment) 2 factors (how much emotion with offending, and ability to have a healthy intimate relationship

ward and Keenans 1999 5 justifications

1. children as sexual objective

2. nature of harm

3. uncontrolibility

4. entitlement

5. dangerous world

MST

entire ecological system

1) finding the fit

2) positive and strength based

5) targeting sequence

9) generalisation

risk

treatment matched to risk

need

focus on criminogenic needs

responsivity

tailor style and delivery to context of the offender

most common youth offence (% of male?)

theft, burglary, assault - 70%

tiered systems

1) police processing

2) family-group conference

3) youth court (most formal)

what increase does youth court have on offending

d - 0.10 - 0.20 (small increase)

Situational act theory and control example

personal criminal propensity + immediate criminogenic environment = cause criminal act

• effective control - suspicious parents (less likely to offend)

• ineffective control - more likely to offend

protective factors and examples

personal resources - flexible tmerpermant, positive SE

social resources - openess and autonomy in social relationships, low conflict, high levels of support

parental - warmth, authoritative, great autonomy

what works and what doesn’t - youth offending

outdoor (0.30), mentoring (0.2-0.3) family (0.2-0.4)

scared straight (increases by 10%), bootcamp (no impact at best), formal processing at youth court

STU programmes (HIPP for men) 3

Short violence prevention programme

individual treatment

some MIP (MIRP, MIPP:CSO)

STU Principles

connectedness, openness, respect, responsibly - uses operant behaviour rocep

process of treatment at prison (4)

1) whanaungatang (safety and containment)

2) control and regulation

3) explorations and change (longest phase)

4) integration and synthesis

effectiveness of stu

32% reoffend from programme versus 62% no programme

Values of SSF (4)

1) self-determination

2) social connection

3) growth

4) respect

6 pillars of reintegration

1) accomedation

2) training and education

3) skills for life

4) whanau

5) employment

6) oranga

rehab versus reintergratation stats

40.8% resentenced, 28.9% reconvicted in past 12 months, jumps to 59.2% in 2 years

• practical stability creates the foundation for change

RNR with violent offenders

risk - assessment and support scaled to individual

need - unemployment, substance use, and antisocial networks

responsively - adaptable/flexible to individual, tailored to strenghths, and culturally responsive

family violence stats and types

• 2025 1.4% of adults reported fv

• 40,000 IPV, 30,000 other (only the reported cases and 17+)

• 20% report fv across lifetime

• less than half report to the police

• elder abuse (psychological abuse and negelect mainly, least is physical)

• child-parent (property abuse “nz invisible form of fv)

• sibiling (1. rivarly 2. agression 3. abuse)

Johnsons typology influences and 3

influences - central 8, social learning, intergenerational trauma, colonisation, IPV theories

1. situational couples violence

2. coercive control violence (intimate terrosim)

3. resistance violence

stalking def

knowledge of causing/likey to cause distress to someone 2x in 2 years

1. rejection

2. resent

3. intimacy seeking

4. incompetent sutior

5. predatory

• 76% of women killed by partners stalked in past 12 month

Sara

structured professional jusdgemnet toolado

odara vs dvrag

• both aucturial

• o = used by police on scene

• d = used by psychologists

safer vs dyra

s = static

d = dynamic

• both better at rulling low risk that identify high risk

Duluth vs cat

d = fememist theory, power and control wheel - lots of limitaions

cbt = modest but significant

CSEM

• 15,000% increase in material in 15 years (AI)

• 2021, 82% material was pre pubescent children

CSEM driver

developmental - negative childhood experiences, sexual interest in children

motivational - desire for sexual gratification

situational/facilitational - accidental exposure, sexual arrosal, maladaptive coping

crossover and contact offending

• previous offending is characterised as a risk factor BUT doesn’t automatically mean that everyone who also uses CSEM will contact offend

• cross over 0.8-12%

Contact offending risk factors (3)

• behavioural - greater severity/frequency of CSEM engagement, trying to make contact with children, networking with other CSEM offenders

• individual - sexual interest in children, cognitive distortions (Johnsons typology)

• criminal - criminal record

What are CSEM users?

heterogenous

• made up of different, mixed or disimillar parts rather than all being the same