Skip to main content
×
×
Home

People with learning disabilities in a low secure in-patient unit: comparison of offenders and non-offenders

  • Suzie Reed (a1), Ailsa Russell (a2), Kiriakos Xenitidis (a2) and Declan G. M. Murphy (a2)
Abstract
Background

People with learning disability who exhibit challenging behaviour are frequently segregated from services and local teams are often reluctant to receive them back into their care. This situation is worse in those whose challenging behaviour includes a forensic history, but the difference between those labelled as challenging and those treated as offenders is not clear, and there is a lack of evidence about treatment effectiveness.

Aims

To test between-group differences in aggression and treatment outcome in people with learning disability and challenging behaviour, with and without a forensic history.

Method

Clinical records of 86 former in-patients (45 offenders and 41 non-offenders) of a specialist unit were compared on measures of behavioural disturbance and placement outcome.

Results

People in the offenders group were significantly less likely to be aggressive to others and to use weapons, but significantly more likely to harm themselves compared with the non-offenders group. Both groups had a significant reduction in their challenging behaviour during admission, and there was no significant difference in treatment outcome.

Conclusions

The negative reputation of people with learning disabilities who offend needs to be reconsidered.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      People with learning disabilities in a low secure in-patient unit: comparison of offenders and non-offenders
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      People with learning disabilities in a low secure in-patient unit: comparison of offenders and non-offenders
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      People with learning disabilities in a low secure in-patient unit: comparison of offenders and non-offenders
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
Suzie Reed, Research Nurse, Institute of Psychiatry, The David Goldberg Centre for Health Services Research, Section of Psychiatric Nursing, Box PO30, De Crespigny Park, London SE5 8AF, UK. E-mail: S.Reed@iop.kcl.ac.uk
Footnotes
Hide All

Declaration of interest

The authors are or have been part of the clinical team at the specialist unit evaluated.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Agarwal, M. & Roberts, M. (1996) Violence among psychiatric inpatients at an interim secure unit: changes in patterns over a two-year period. Medicine, Science and the Law, 36, 3136.
Alborz, A. (2003) Transitions: placing a son or daughter with intellectual disability and challenging behaviour in alternative residential accommodation. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 16, 7588.
Aquilina, C. (1991) Violence by psychiatric inpatients. Medicine, Science and the Law, 31, 306312.
Badger, D., Nursten, J., Williams, P., et al (1999) Systematic Review of the International Literature on the Epidemiology of Mentally Disordered Offenders. CRD Report 15. Executive Summary. York: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination.
Clare, I. & Murphy, G. (1993) MIETS: a service option for people with mild mental handicaps and challenging behaviour and/or psychiatric problems, III. Follow-up of the first six clients to be discharged: diverse measures of the effectiveness of the service. Mental Handicap Research, 6, 7091.
Department of Health (1993) The Mansell Report: Services for People with Learning Difficulties and Challenging Behaviours or Mental Health Needs. London: HMSO.
Department of Health (2001) Valuing People: A New Strategy for Learning Disability for the 21st Century. CM 5086. London: Stationery Office.
Department of Health (2003) Fulfilling Lives: Inspection of Social Care Services for People with Learning Disabilities. London: Stationery Office.
Department of Health & Home Office (1992) Review of Health and Social Services for Mentally Disordered Offenders and Others Requiring Similar Services. Final Summary Report (the Reed Report). Cmnd 2088. London: HMSO.
Gaskell, G., Dockrell, J. & Rehman, H. (1995) Community care for people with challenging behaviours and mild learning disability: an evaluation of an assessment and treatment unit. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 34, 383395.
Gudjonsson, G. H., Rabe-Hesketh, S. & Wilson, C. (2000) Violent incidents on a medium secure unit: the targets of assault and the management of incidents. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 11, 105118.
Hakeem, A. & Fitzgerald, B. (2002) A survey of violent and threatening behaviours within an in-patient learning disability unit. Psychiatric Bulletin, 26, 424427.
Haw, C., Hawton, K., Houston, K., et al (2001) Psychiatric and personality disorders in deliberate self-harm patients. British Journal of Psychiatry, 178, 4854.
Hillbrand, M., Young, J. & Krsytal, J. (1996) Recurrent self-injurious behaviour. Psychiatric Quarterly, 67, 3345.
Holland, T., Clare, I. C. H. & Mukhopadhyay, T. (2002) Prevalence of ‘criminal offending’ by men and women with intellectual disability and the characteristics of offenders': implications for research and service development. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 46 (suppl. 1), 620.
Home Office (1990) Provision for Mentally Disordered Offenders. Home Office Circular 66/90. London: Home Office.
Home Office (1995) Provision for Mentally Disordered Offenders. Home Office Circular 12/95. London: Home Office.
Kearns, A. (2001) Forensic services and people with learning disability: in the shadow of the Reed Report. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 12, 812.
Lelliot, P., Wing, J. & Clifford, P. (1994) A national audit of new long-stay patients. I: Method and description of the cohort. British Journal of Psychiatry, 165, 160169.
Linaker, O. M. (1994) Assaultiveness among institutionalised adults with mental retardation. British Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 6268.
Lyall, I., Holland, A. J. & Collins, S. (1995) Offending by adults with learning disabilities and the attitudes of staff to offending behaviour: implications for service development. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 39, 501508.
Murphy, G. & Clare, I. (1991) MIETS: a service option for people with mild mental handicaps and challenging behaviour or psychiatric problems, III. Assessment, treatment, and outcome for service users and service effectiveness. Mental Handicap Research, 4, 180206.
Murphy, G., Holland, A., Fowler, P., et al (1991) MIETS: a service option for people with mild mental handicaps and challenging behaviour or psychiatric problems, I. Philosophy, service, and service users. Mental Handicap Research, 4, 4166.
Netten, A. P., Rees, T. & Harrison, G. (2001) Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2001. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit (PSSRU).
Rangecroft, M. E. H., Tyrer, S. P. & Berney, T. P. (1997) The use of seclusion and emergency medication in a hospital for people with learning disability. British Journal of Psychiatry, 170, 273277.
Silver, J. M. & Yudofsky, S. C. (1987) Documentation of aggression in the assessment of the violent patient. Psychiatric Annals, 17, 375384.
SPSS (1999) Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, version 8.0 (1989–1999). Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
Stata Corp (2001) STATA 7.0 for Windows (1984–2001). College Station, TX: Stata Corp.
Vaughan, P. J. (1999) A consortium approach to commissioning services for mentally disordered offenders. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 10, 553566.
Vaughan, P. J., Pullen, N. & Kelly, M. (2000) Services for mentally disordered offenders in community psychiatry teams. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 11, 571586.
Watts, R. V., Richold, P. & Berney, T. P. (2000) Delay in the discharge of psychiatric in-patients with learning disabilities. Psychiatric Bulletin, 24, 179181.
Winchel, R. M. & Stanley, M. (1991) Self-injurious behavior: a review of the behavior and biology of self-mutilation. American Journal of Psychiatry, 148, 306317.
World Health Organization (1992) International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD–10). Geneva: WHO
Xenitidis, K., Henry, J., Russell, A., et al (1999) An in patient treatment model for adults with mild intellectual disability and challenging behaviour. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 43, 128134.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The British Journal of Psychiatry
  • ISSN: 0007-1250
  • EISSN: 1472-1465
  • URL: /core/journals/the-british-journal-of-psychiatry
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 8
Total number of PDF views: 30 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 137 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 16th August 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

People with learning disabilities in a low secure in-patient unit: comparison of offenders and non-offenders

  • Suzie Reed (a1), Ailsa Russell (a2), Kiriakos Xenitidis (a2) and Declan G. M. Murphy (a2)
Submit a response

eLetters

Confusion aroung inconsistency in the results

Thomas Marshall, LD Psychiatrist
17 December 2004

Dear Sir/Madam,

I found this study fascinating, as it demonstrates the apparently random nature of a forensic label in our patients. It is clearly not to dowith risk. I am confused by some of the results. The whole gist of the argument is that the offender group are less violent than their non-offender counterparts.However, it is stated that in the offenders group the challenging behaviour diminishes from 0.79 incidents per week to 0.36 and that for thenon-offender group from 0.23 to 0.11. This is challenging behaviour generally, but this suggests the offender group exhibit greater challenging behaviour throughout their stay than the non-offender group. Table 2 states the opposite.I would be interested to see how this inconsistency can be explained. ... More

Conflict of interest: None Declared

Write a reply

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *