Intellectual Disabilities – Differential Treatment Within Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10142/609472
Title:
Intellectual Disabilities – Differential Treatment Within Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Authors:
Tancred, Tania
Abstract:
This research examined the prevalence, differential treatment and demographic and potential risk factors between two groups of offenders with Intellectual Disabilities (ID) and Intellectual Vulnerabilities (IV) and a non-ID/IV group managed by Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements in the South East of England. The sample included 250 offenders, aged between 15 and 70 years, 9 women and 241 men who were managed by level 2 and 3 MAPPA. Two studies were conducted. Study One - The prevalence of the IV group was 25.6%. There were no significant differences between the number of external controls placed on the IV and non-IV groups. There was a significantly greater amount of external controls (police lead orders) placed on the ID group than the non-ID group. The IV group was over 5 times more likely to have language deficits than the non-IV group and twice as likely to have been in care as a child. When controlled for language deficits the IV group were twice as likely to have social skills deficits. Study Two – The MAPPA minutes and files relating to the IV group identified in Study One were examined in more detail. The central issues relating to the IV group were analysed using Thematic Analysis. The main themes and sub themes identified were ‘Intellectual Vulnerability’ and sub themes ‘Mental Health’ and ‘Diversity Considerations,’ ‘Early Life Experiences’ which had sub themes of ‘Abusive Experiences’ and ‘Schooling/Education’ and finally ‘Offending Behaviour’ with the sub themes ‘Substance Misuse’ and ‘Victims Known or Vulnerable.’ The research identifies the issues of diagnosing intellectual disabilities/vulnerabilities accurately and the impact this has on reliable prevalence rates and comparisons. Some recommendations for good practice in working with such offenders within MAPPA are made.
Advisors:
Edelmann, Robert; Crighton, David; Bray, Diane
Publisher:
Roehampton University
Issue Date:
2014
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10142/609472
Type:
Thesis or dissertation
Language:
en
Description:
PsychD
Sponsors:
Ministry of Justice, Psychology Department funded the first three years. This department no longer exists and the remaining years were self-funded
Appears in Collections:
PhD Theses

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.advisorEdelmann, Roberten
dc.contributor.advisorCrighton, Daviden
dc.contributor.advisorBray, Dianeen
dc.contributor.authorTancred, Taniaen
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-16T08:53:19Zen
dc.date.available2016-05-16T08:53:19Zen
dc.date.issued2014en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10142/609472en
dc.descriptionPsychDen
dc.description.abstractThis research examined the prevalence, differential treatment and demographic and potential risk factors between two groups of offenders with Intellectual Disabilities (ID) and Intellectual Vulnerabilities (IV) and a non-ID/IV group managed by Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements in the South East of England. The sample included 250 offenders, aged between 15 and 70 years, 9 women and 241 men who were managed by level 2 and 3 MAPPA. Two studies were conducted. Study One - The prevalence of the IV group was 25.6%. There were no significant differences between the number of external controls placed on the IV and non-IV groups. There was a significantly greater amount of external controls (police lead orders) placed on the ID group than the non-ID group. The IV group was over 5 times more likely to have language deficits than the non-IV group and twice as likely to have been in care as a child. When controlled for language deficits the IV group were twice as likely to have social skills deficits. Study Two – The MAPPA minutes and files relating to the IV group identified in Study One were examined in more detail. The central issues relating to the IV group were analysed using Thematic Analysis. The main themes and sub themes identified were ‘Intellectual Vulnerability’ and sub themes ‘Mental Health’ and ‘Diversity Considerations,’ ‘Early Life Experiences’ which had sub themes of ‘Abusive Experiences’ and ‘Schooling/Education’ and finally ‘Offending Behaviour’ with the sub themes ‘Substance Misuse’ and ‘Victims Known or Vulnerable.’ The research identifies the issues of diagnosing intellectual disabilities/vulnerabilities accurately and the impact this has on reliable prevalence rates and comparisons. Some recommendations for good practice in working with such offenders within MAPPA are made.en
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by Anne Pietsch (a.pietsch@roehampton.ac.uk) on 2016-05-16T08:48:50Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Tancred Tania.pdf: 1317946 bytes, checksum: d1f2bb6d9a0197a7e657dd107bc59c5f (MD5)en
dc.description.provenanceApproved for entry into archive by Anne Pietsch (a.pietsch@roehampton.ac.uk) on 2016-05-16T08:53:18Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Tancred Tania.pdf: 1317946 bytes, checksum: d1f2bb6d9a0197a7e657dd107bc59c5f (MD5)en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2016-05-16T08:53:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Tancred Tania.pdf: 1317946 bytes, checksum: d1f2bb6d9a0197a7e657dd107bc59c5f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014en
dc.description.sponsorshipMinistry of Justice, Psychology Department funded the first three years. This department no longer exists and the remaining years were self-fundeden
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherRoehampton Universityen
dc.subjectIntellectual Disabilitiesen
dc.titleIntellectual Disabilities – Differential Treatment Within Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangementsen
dc.typeThesis or dissertationen
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Psychologyen
dc.type.qualificationnamePhDen
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoralen
All Items in RURR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.