Search

Background: Possessing a strong cultural identity has been shown to protect against mental health symptoms and buffer distress prompted by discrimination. However, no research to date has explored the protective influences of cultural identity and cultural engagement on violent offending. This paper investigates the relationships between cultural identity/engagement and violent recidivism for a cohort of Australian Indigenous people in custody., Methods: A total of 122 adults from 11 prisons in the state of Victoria completed a semi-structured interview comprising cultural identification and cultural engagement material in custody. All official police charges for violent offences were obtained for participants who were released from custody into the community over a period of 2 years., Results: No meaningful relationship between cultural identity and violent recidivism was identified. However a significant association between cultural engagement and violent recidivism was obtained. Further analyses demonstrated that this relationship was significant only for participants with a strong Indigenous cultural identity. Participants with higher levels of cultural engagement took longer to violently re-offend although this association did not reach significance., Conclusions: For Australian Indigenous people in custody, 'cultural engagement' was significantly associated with non-recidivism. The observed protective impact of cultural engagement is a novel finding in a correctional context. Whereas identity alone did not buffer recidivism directly, it may have had an indirect influence given its relationship with cultural engagement. The findings of the study emphasize the importance of culture for Indigenous people in custody and a greater need for correctional institutions to accommodate Indigenous cultural considerations.

The Australian prison population is growing and becoming increasingly diverse. Yet very little research has investigated mental health concerns for multi-cultural prisoners. This mixed methods study aimed to identify the prevalence of mental health factors (wellbeing, distress and coping) in a cohort of 530 prisoners from Indigenous, culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) and English-speaking backgrounds (ESB) at a maximum-security prison in Victoria, Australia. Focus group interviews were also conducted with an additional 40 prisoners. It was found that Indigenous prisoners had significantly higher levels of distress and more symptoms of anxiety and depression than CALD and ESB prisoners. CALD prisoners had a greater sense of 'feeling in control' in prison than ESB prisoners. The focus group interviews also identified several factors that contributed to mental health differences between the groups. Findings reinforce the need for a more individualised approach in addressing mental health issues for prisoners cross-culturally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adolescent females who have engaged in severe and/or chronic offending are an understudied population internationally. The literature on female offending pathways has indeed advanced, and there is a better understanding of how female offending behaviours manifest and how correctional agencies should be responding. However, much of the existing research has focused on the risk factors and retrospective biographical narratives of adult female offenders. The present study focused on thematically exploring the self-reported life experiences and offending pathways of 36 detained adolescent females. Findings identified multiple themes including disconnection from education, early care-giver disruption/family separation, personal and family mental health problems, poly-substance abuse, anti-social peers, victimisation and anger problems. The study identifies that early family disruption is an important factor that may contribute to later offending behaviour and other negative life events. Prevention efforts should begin with the family when it comes to high-risk young females. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forensic mental health practitioners are frequently asked to estimate the risk of future violence. Legal decisions concerning the sentencing, management and disposition of offenders often rely on the advice of such testimony. The burgeoning use of violence risk instruments in these settings undoubtedly injects a level of scientific rigour into forensic evaluations for courts and tribunals. Yet scrutiny of the inherent limitations of both risk instruments and the inferences and formulations drawn from them are often veiled by the discipline's endorsement for such approaches. Misconceptions about the validity and dependability of present-day risk assessments and expert infallibility persist. The furtive influences that shape both the (mis)interpretation and miscommunication of risk instruments in legal settings necessitate discussion. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]