5 results
7 - Female arsonists and firesetters
- from Part I - Theory and research
-
- By Theresa A. Gannon, University of Kent, UK, Nichola Tyler, University of Kent, UK, Magali Barnoux, University of Kent, UK, Afroditi Pina, University of Kent, UK
-
- Book:
- Firesetting and Mental Health
- Published by:
- Royal College of Psychiatrists
- Published online:
- 25 February 2017, pp 126-142
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Understanding the aetiology of arson and firesetting and how to assess and treat individuals who deliberately set fires is a complex process that is still very much ‘work in progress’. However, as with most forensic issues, the research literature examining male individuals who set fires is substantially more developed than that focusing on females. To date, for example, review articles examining the concept of arson and firesetting either focus very little attention on females (e.g., Barnett & Spitzer, 1994; Smith & Short, 1995) or focus solely on males (Gannon & Pina, 2010). The main aim of this chapter is to provide a summary overview of what is currently known regarding women who set fires. It focuses on outlining the key characteristics and features of women who set fires, the aetiology of female-perpetrated firesetting, and the key treatment and risk issues. Where possible, the reported findings on women are compared with what is currently known about males who set fires and women offenders who do not set fires. Throughout this chapter, we generally use the term ‘firesetting’ to refer to any intentional lighting of fires, since ‘arson’ is an arguably narrow and legally constructed term that is unable to account for those whose firesetting remains unapprehended (e.g., firesetting in forensic psychiatry settings). Using the term ‘firesetter’ in relation to women may be especially important, since women appear to be treated more leniently than men by criminal justice officials, perhaps due to childcare responsibilities or other stereotyped preconceptions around females’ risk (Wilbanks, 1986; Steffensmeier & Demuth, 2006). Thus, many females who set a fire may not hold a conviction for ‘arson’ on record. However, taking into account clinical figures, professionals estimate that male firesetters outnumber females at a figure of around 6:1 (Stewart, 1993).
Key characteristics and features
Sociodemographic features
Many of the sociodemographic features noted in male firesetters who come to professional attention (see Gannon & Pina, 2010, for a review) are similar to those noted for females. For example, research suggests that female firesetters who come to professional attention – like other female offenders – are typically of low-average IQ (Tennent et al, 1971; Stewart, 1993; Noblett & Nelson, 2001), have low socioeconomic status and are poorly educated (Tennent et al, 1971; Harmon et al, 1985; Stewart, 1993; Wachi et al, 2007).
Preface
-
- By Geoff Dickens, University of Northampton, UK, Philip Sugarman, University of Northampton, UK, Theresa A. Gannon, University of Kent, UK
-
- Book:
- Firesetting and Mental Health
- Published by:
- Royal College of Psychiatrists
- Published online:
- 25 February 2017, pp viii-x
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Arson and other types of deliberate firesetting have major human and financial costs. People with mental disorder are disproportionately involved, and mental health and criminal justice practitioners are often required to assess, treat and manage this troubling group. The literature on juvenile firesetting is advanced relative to that on adult firesetting but around half of all deliberate fire-related damage is caused by adults, so it is surprising that professionals who want to learn more about adult firesetting have been so poorly served, with no specialist single-subject text until now. This volume aims to provide a fresh, focused look at firesetting, at its interface with mental health and mental disorder; and to bring together research evidence, theory and practitioner advice from multiple perspectives in one accessible volume.
Medico-legal interest in deliberate firesetting can be dated, at least in the United Kingdom, to 1829 when Jonathan Martin the York Minster arsonist was declared not guilty on the grounds of insanity (Balston, 1945). However, interest and research on the subject has been sporadic. Although this means that there are considerable opportunities for future research on the topic, it also means that the existing literature is limited. In the current volume we have taken a decision that individual chapter authors be allowed to develop their ideas using the whole of the available literature. This means that, inevitably, there is some repetition between chapters when referring to theories, definitions and so on. However, this approach has also facilitated a situation where individual chapters all stand on their own merits and without repeated reference to one another.
Terminology
Both firesetting and arson are commonly used terms in the literature. In brief, firesetting describes a particular behaviour (the deliberate setting of fires), while arson is a legal term that varies across jurisdictions in its precise meaning. Although we have preferred firesetting in our title, our approach in commissioning chapters has been to give authors the freedom to use their own preferred terminology, with the proviso that they specify and justify their own definitions.
13 - Firesetting in secure settings: theory, treatment and management
-
- By Theresa Gannon, Director of the Centre of Research and Education in Forensic Psychology and Professor of Forensic Psychology, University of Kent, Nichola Tyler, Postgraduate Researcher, University of Kent, Geoffrey Dickens, Research Manager and Head of Nursing Research, St Andrew's Healthcare, and Professor in Psychiatric Nursing, University of Northampton
- Edited by Geoffrey L. Dickins, Philip Sugarman, Marco Picchioni
-
- Book:
- Handbook of Secure Care
- Published online:
- 02 January 2018
- Print publication:
- 01 July 2015, pp 193-210
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Background and aims
Firesetting confers substantial costs on society. In 2010/2011 there were 36 000 deliberately set fires in Great Britain resulting in 72 fatalities and 1700 non-fatal casualties. Around one in five deliberate fires occur in nondwelling buildings, including hospitals (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2011). While serious fires in psychiatric hospitals are reasonably rare, incidents in UK secure mental health units in recent years, at Stockton Hall in North Yorkshire in 2010 (BBC News, 2010) and Camlet Lodge in London in 2008 (James, 2008), have demonstrated that fire can seriously disrupt service provision and endanger life. Additionally, the total number of incidents in psychiatric hospitals attended by the fire and rescue service is disproportionately greater per bed than in general medical hospitals (Grice, 2012). Around 10% of people admitted to forensic psychiatric services have committed arson (Coid et al, 2001) and many more may have a history of problematic firesetting behaviour (Geller et al, 1992). It is important therefore that staff who work in these services hold sufficient practical and theoretical knowledge to contribute to the prevention of firesetting and to the assessment, treatment and management of firesetters in secure care.
This chapter briefly reviews the epidemiology of firesetting, its relationship with mental disorder and the prevalence of firesetting among particular patient groups who may be resident in secure care. We then describe established theories of firesetting, including motivational typologies, single-factor theories and previous attempts at multifactor theories. We then present a newly developed multi-trajectory theory of adult firesetting (M-TTAF; Gannon et al, 2012a). This theory is important because it proposes different motivational drivers and prominent risk factors for firesetting across various groups, many of whom may be characterised by particular psychopathological features common in secure settings. The implication is that different groups will hold different risk factors and require varying therapeutic approaches. Some psychological treatment interventions delivered in secure settings are then examined. Finally, we discuss aspects of practical risk assessment and management of firesetters in the secure environment.
Rape Treatment: An Overview of Current Knowledge
- Jo Thakker, Theresa A. Gannon
-
- Journal:
- Behaviour Change / Volume 27 / Issue 4 / 01 December 2010
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 22 February 2012, pp. 227-250
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Sexual offending is frequently seen by the lay person as being a result of an innate abnormality that is relatively fixed and unchangeable. Accordingly, sexual offenders are seen as more likely to recidivate than other types of offenders. In fact, this is not the case, and most sexual offenders do not re-offend. Also, contemporary research has shown that treatment programs driven by cognitive behaviour therapy significantly reduce rates of sexual offender recidivism. Nevertheless, while there has been a great deal of research on the treatment of child sexual offenders, the treatment of rapists has received comparatively less attention. Thus, the main aim of this article is to summarise current knowledge of sexual offender treatment, paying specific attention to the needs of rapists. In particular, we pay attention to the content of sexual offender treatment programs, and the relevance of this content to rape. We also discuss therapeutic issues of relevance for rapist treatment that are typically ignored or underestimated in the research literature. Finally, based upon our analysis of the literature, we present a schematic overview of rape treatment and identify important areas for further research.
7 - Female arsonists and firesetters
- from Part I - Theory and research
-
- By Theresa A. Gannon, Reader in Forensic Psychology and Chartered Forensic Psychologist, CORE-FP, School of Psychology, University of Kent, UK, Nichola Tyler, PhD Candidate, CORE-FP, School of Psychology, University of Kent, UK, Magali Barnoux, PhD Candidate, CORE-FP, School of Psychology, University of Kent, UK, Afroditi Pina, Lecturer in Forensic Psychology, CORE-FP, School of Psychology, University of Kent, UK
- Edited by Geoffrey L. Dickins, Philip A. Sugarman, Teresa A. Gannon
-
- Book:
- Firesetting and Mental Health
- Published online:
- 02 January 2018
- Print publication:
- 01 February 2012, pp 126-142
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Understanding the aetiology of arson and firesetting and how to assess and treat individuals who deliberately set fires is a complex process that is still very much ‘work in progress’. However, as with most forensic issues, the research literature examining male individuals who set fires is substantially more developed than that focusing on females. To date, for example, review articles examining the concept of arson and firesetting either focus very little attention on females (e.g., Barnett & Spitzer, 1994; Smith & Short, 1995) or focus solely on males (Gannon & Pina, 2010). The main aim of this chapter is to provide a summary overview of what is currently known regarding women who set fires. It focuses on outlining the key characteristics and features of women who set fires, the aetiology of female-perpetrated firesetting, and the key treatment and risk issues. Where possible, the reported findings on women are compared with what is currently known about males who set fires and women offenders who do not set fires. Throughout this chapter, we generally use the term ‘firesetting’ to refer to any intentional lighting of fires, since ‘arson’ is an arguably narrow and legally constructed term that is unable to account for those whose firesetting remains unapprehended (e.g., firesetting in forensic psychiatry settings). Using the term ‘firesetter’ in relation to women may be especially important, since women appear to be treated more leniently than men by criminal justice officials, perhaps due to childcare responsibilities or other stereotyped preconceptions around females’ risk (Wilbanks, 1986; Steffensmeier & Demuth, 2006). Thus, many females who set a fire may not hold a conviction for ‘arson’ on record. However, taking into account clinical figures, professionals estimate that male firesetters outnumber females at a figure of around 6:1 (Stewart, 1993).
Key characteristics and features
Sociodemographic features
Many of the sociodemographic features noted in male firesetters who come to professional attention (see Gannon & Pina, 2010, for a review) are similar to those noted for females. For example, research suggests that female firesetters who come to professional attention – like other female offenders – are typically of low-average IQ (Tennent et al, 1971; Stewart, 1993; Noblett & Nelson, 2001), have low socioeconomic status and are poorly educated (Tennent et al, 1971; Harmon et al, 1985; Stewart, 1993; Wachi et al, 2007).
![](/core/cambridge-core/public/images/lazy-loader.gif)