Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Decisions on disclosure to third parties made at MAPP meetings: opinions and practice

  • Catherine Penny (a1) and Jackie Craissati (a2)
Abstract
Aims and method

We investigated how decisions regarding disclosure of an offender's history to a third party without the offender's consent are made at Multi-Agency Public Protection (MAPP) meetings. Ten questionnaires were sent to a level 2 MAPP meeting in each of the 33 police and probation areas in London, with a request that the MAPP meeting administrator hand them out to up to 10 regular attendees.

Results

Of 321 questionnaires handed out, 196 were returned, giving a response rate of 61.1%. Seventy-six participants (37%) had made a disclosure without a MAPP meeting discussion in the past 12 months. A total of 109 participants (55.9%) reported that in their experience it had always been possible to reach a consensus on disclosure at MAPP meetings, but participants' responses to five hypothetical scenarios indicated a wide spread of opinions about when a disclosure should be made. Significant proportions of participants endorsed statements suggesting that people have a right to know offenders' histories.

Clinical implications

Training on the evidence base, law and guidance relevant to disclosure decisions is necessary, and a governance system to monitor and improve decision-making should be considered. Advocacy for offenders may also improve practice.

  • 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.

      Decisions on disclosure to third parties made at MAPP meetings: opinions and practice
      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.

      Decisions on disclosure to third parties made at MAPP meetings: opinions and practice
      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.

      Decisions on disclosure to third parties made at MAPP meetings: opinions and practice
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Corresponding author
Catherine Penny (cpenny@nhs.net)
Footnotes
Hide All

Declaration of interest

None.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
1 Ward, T, Stewart, C. Criminogenic needs and human needs: a theoretical model. Psychol Crime Law 2003; 9: 125–43.
2 Cann, J. Assessing the Extent of Discretionary Disclosure under the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements. Home Office, 2007.
3 National Offender Management Service Public Protection Team. MAPPA Guidance, Version 3.0. Ministry of Justice, 2009 (http://www.justice.gov.uk/offenders/public-protection-manual).
4 Megan's Law (1996). Available at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c104:H.R.2137.ENR: (see Section 1).
5 Fitch, K. Megan's Law: Does it Protect Children? NSPCC, 2006.
6 Kemshall, H, Wood, J. Child Sex Offender Review Public Disclosure Pilots: A Process Evaluation (2nd edn). Home Office, 2010.
7 Chan, V, Homes, A, Murray, L, Treanor, S. Evaluation of the Sex Offender Community Disclosure Pilot. Scottish Government Crime and Justice Research, 2010.
8 Coco v. AN Clark (Engineers) [1968] FSR 415.
9 Department of Health. Confidentiality: NHS Code of Practice. Department of Health, 2003.
10 Department of Health. Confidentiality: NHS Code of Practice – Supplementary Guidance: Public Interest Disclosures. Department of Health, 2010.
11 General Medical Council. Confidentiality. GMC, 2009.
12 R (on the application of Thorpe) v. Chief Constable of North Wales [1997] 4 All ER 691.
13 Osman v. United Kingdom (23452/94) [2000] 29 EHRR 245.
14 R (on the application of Pewter) v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2010] unreported.
15 HMI Probation, HMI Constabulary. Thematic Inspection Report: Putting the Pieces Together. An Inspection of Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements. HMI Probation and HMI Constabulary, 2011.
16 Morin, JW, Levenson, JS. Exhibitionism: assessment and treatment. In Sexual Deviance: Theory, Assessment and Treatment (eds Laws, DR, O'Donohue, WT): 76107. Guilford Press, 2008.
17 Hanson, RK, Harris, AJR, Scott, T-L, Helmus, L. Assessing the Risk of Sexual Offenders on Community Supervision: The Dynamic Supervision Project (User Report 2007-05). Public Safety Canada, 2007.
18 Mann, R, Hanson, K, Thornton, D. Assessing risk for sexual recidivism: some proposals on the nature of psychologically meaningful risk factors. Sex Abuse 2010; 20: 127.
19 Hanson, K, Harris, A. Dynamic Predictors of Sexual Recidivism. Department of the Solicitor General Canada, 1998.
Recommend this journal

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

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 1758-3209
  • EISSN: 1758-3217
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
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: 0
Total number of PDF views: 3 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 60 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 15th July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Decisions on disclosure to third parties made at MAPP meetings: opinions and practice

  • Catherine Penny (a1) and Jackie Craissati (a2)
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *