3.7. Risk
assessment and management processes must NOT be used to decide whether
or not to conduct an effective investigation or in place of an effective
investigation.
3.8. Identification
of established risk factors should be undertaken by all police staff
at all stages of a domestic violence investigation and should be
taken into account when making any decision, with appropriate documentation
and notification to relevant police personnel and other police staff.
3.9. Effective
processes of assessing and managing risk in the context of policing
domestic violence require information from and consultation with
the victim, children and other vulnerable persons.
3.10. Information
from and intelligence relating to the suspect acquired during an
effective investigation (particularly at the stage of interview
with the suspect) should be used in assessing and managing risk
3.11. Assessing
and managing risk effectively cannot be undertaken by the police
service in isolation and must be a process undertaken in partnership
with other relevant agencies and based on a shared understanding
of the nature of risk. In cases where risk is identified as particularly
high it is useful to have arrangements in place for multi agency
case conferences.
3.12. Effective
multi-agency information sharing is crucial to a comprehensive process
of risk assessment and risk management. There is a positive duty
to share information. The decision process to share information
should be careful, balanced and should always focus upon ensuring
the safety of the victims.
3.13. The
responsibility for assessing and managing the risk posed by suspects
is held by agencies not victims.
3.14. The
process of assessing and managing risk in the context of domestic
violence is dynamic and complex. Particular domestic violence situations
can undergo rapid and frequent change. All systems for assessing
and managing risk must reflect this reality.
3.15. Any
intervention by police officers or others, including the process
of assessing and managing risk, has the potential to increase the
risk of harm to adult and child victims and others. The possibility
of increased risk must be acknowledged within risk assessment and
management processes.
3.16. All
mechanisms and processes to assess and manage risk must have a sound
knowledge and evidence base and be monitored and evaluated from
the outset. This is an obligation on the police service and enhances
service to the public.
3.17. Safety
planning describes a structured method whereby victims may consult
with other agencies to enable them to make use of their existing
and available resources in order to understand the risk posed by
the suspect and increase their safety and that of their children.
This process should be separated from the investigation process
and risk assessment, although an effective investigation and risk
assessment should inform a victim’s safety plan.
4.
Objectives/Outcomes
The processes of assessing
and managing risk in the context of domestic violence are intended
to achieve the following:
4.1. For
the victim, children and other vulnerable persons
4.1.1. To
inform decisions and actions by the police and other agencies to
protect the victim, children and other vulnerable persons.
4.1.2. To
reduce repeat victimisation.
4.1.3. To
inform and build upon the safety planning processes of the victim,
children and other vulnerable persons.
4.1.4. To
assist in delivering effective multi-agency support for the victim,
children and other vulnerable persons
4.1.5. To
contribute to increased victim satisfaction in police responses
to domestic violence
4.2. For
the police service
4.2.1. To
assist in the processes of the police protecting the following;
- adult victim
(s)
- child victims (s)
- possible future victims of domestic violence
- others who may be at risk. This could include police staff and
officers, members of staff from all agencies, members of the public,
and domestic violence suspects (e.g. if injured or killed when
the victim acts on self defence)
4.2.2. To
inform child protection processes, including assistance in the fulfilment
of legal obligations and commitments to other agencies (e.g. child
protection enquiries, referrals of children to social services,
information sharing protocols, Multi-Agency Public Protection Panels
and other similar arrangements).
4.2.3. To
prevent and reduce homicides and serious injury (including domestic
homicides, child homicides and intimate partner homicides)
4.2.4. To
mainstream the understanding and use of established risk factors
in domestic violence and child abuse cases. (Note that particular
issues of risk in child protection cases are not covered in this
document)
4.2.5. To
inform police decision-making and action, including effective investigation
and evidence gathering.
4.2.6. To
inform the tasking and co-ordinating process at strategic and tactical
level (see National Intelligence Model).
4.2.7. To
prevent and reduce repeat victimisation.
4.2.8. To
prevent and reduce repeat and chronic offending.
4.2.9. To
increase reporting of domestic violence to the police.
4.2.10.
To increase public confidence and the confidence of victims, their
families and other agencies in the police response to domestic violence.
4.3. For
other criminal justice and partner agencies
4.3.1. To
inform the decision-making processes within the criminal justice
system. Many criminal justice decisions depend on information about
the public interest and risk to victims and others (including historical
information, recent events and risks identified). These include
decisions relating to rules of evidence, public interest and case
specific issues (e.g. charge, bail and remand, prosecution and sentencing).
4.3.2. To
inform the decision-making processes within and between partner
agencies (e.g. ACPC’s, multi agency public protection arrangements).
4.3.3. To
inform the process of information sharing according to local information
sharing protocols, including, in some cases, providing ‘prompts’
or opportunities to share information.
4.3.4. To
increase public confidence in the criminal justice and multi agency
responses to domestic violence
4.3.5. To
increase the understanding of domestic violence and risk in the
context of the UK.
5.
Effective Risk Assessment and Risk Management Processes
5.1. Each
police force should decide, in consultation with other agencies,
victims and other service users, how to comply with the principles
and achieve the objectives/outcomes outlined above.
5.2. Effective
risk assessment and risk management processes in the context of
policing domestic violence require full knowledge and a shared understanding
of the nature of risk, domestic violence, positive action/intervention
strategies and safety planning among:
- all police
staff (including front desk staff, call takers, first response
officers, specialist domestic violence and child abuse investigation
staff, investigating officers, custody staff, all supervisors,
managers and strategic level leaders)
- all partner agencies including CPS, the courts, social services,
providers of refuge, outreach and independent victim advocacy
services, health practitioners, education and housing providers,
probation service, prison service,
- all victims of domestic violence
- the general public
5.3. Examples
of methods of achieving the required knowledge and understanding
are:
a. Domestic
violence staff training programmes to provide knowledge and a
shared understanding of domestic violence, the nature of risk
(including common risk factors), intervention strategies and safety
planning.
b. Public
education materials to explain the nature of risk to victims,
children and others together with safety planning advice and suggestions.
This should include reference to issues facing all victims including
those who remain living with the abuser. It should also include
details of refuge, outreach and independent victim advocacy services
including those which provide services to women and other particular
groups of victims (e.g. those in same sex relationships, male
victims and victims from minority ethnic groups). Such materials
should be produced in a range of different languages.
c. Aide
Memoirs for all police and staff in partner agencies to remind
them of the established risk factors.
d. Supporting
guidance for all police and multi-agency staff with explanations
of the background and evidence base of identification of established
risk factors. Any guidance should be under-pinned by appropriate
training.
e. Operational
support and supervision should be provided by specialist domestic
violence officers, supervisors and managers to advise and assist
staff in their decision-making. Any risk assessments should be
monitored and reviewed by police domestic violence co-ordinators.
5.4. In
the context of policing domestic violence the fulfilment of legal
obligations to do all that is reasonable to prevent further offences
and protect adult and child victims should be met by the implementation
of the above measures. There are many different tools, models and
systems which include formal requirements to identify and, in some
cases, categorise risk. For example;
a. Risk identification
system which may accompany aide memoirs and requires staff to
record the existence of, and sometimes details of, established
risk factors. This approach may be used to structure professional
judgements and decision-making to ensure that all relevant issues
are covered.
b. Risk
categorisation system which requires staff to allot risk to categories
using information available about the existence of a number of
risk factors and their ‘professional knowledge’ about
domestic violence cases. Categories of risk can include ‘high’,
‘medium’, and ‘standard’ or can use only
a ‘high risk’ category.
c. Risk
categorisation system accompanied by numerical scoring in which
each risk factor is given a ‘weighting’ and a ‘score’
indicates whether a case is ‘high’, ‘medium’
or ‘standard’ risk with discretion for staff to categorise
a case as ‘standard’ ‘medium’ or ‘high’
where ‘professional knowledge’ indicates.
5.5. Any
force using or developing any of the above systems should consider
the following:
a. Any such
systems must be implemented on a firm evidence base and should
be designed to capture emerging local and national information
and research. Such systems should also undergo an independent
evaluation of the process and its implementation.
b. Risk
assessment and management are processes that can only be effective
if full information is obtained about the parties involved and
identified risk factors (including the recording of the source
of the information and the date the information was obtained).
c. Police
information about risk is limited to that held on police and criminal
justice information systems and that which the victim and/or other
individuals and agencies are able or willing to disclose. Victims
and others may restrict the information given to all criminal
justice agencies.
d. Risk
assessment and management are dynamic processes. Information about
risk factors (along with the date collected and source) can be
useful at all stages in the risk assessment and risk management
processes. Any formal risk assessment in individual cases must
be reviewed and updated regularly in order to increase safety
and comply with positive obligations to protect in the Human Rights
Act and the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998. For
example, one piece of information could alter the level of risk
in a particular case.
e. Any
specialist domestic violence officers who are required to categorise
risk using information gathered must have full understanding and
knowledge of how such decisions are made and how to justify a
particular categorisation of risk.
f. Simplification
of the complex issue of risk in the context of policing domestic
violence by assigning categories of risk (e.g. ‘high’,
‘medium’, ‘standard’) may be misleading
and potentially unsafe, particularly if it is not accompanied
by detailed supporting training, information about the nature
of the risk, guidance as to how to categorise risk and the consequences/meaning
of different categories of risk. It is important to remember that
risk can always change.
g. All
risk assessment tools/models should be in accessible language
to both staff and victims with clear information about why certain
issues are relevant.
h. Staff
should have access to specialist advice and training relating
to matters of diversity, including gender, culture, age, religion
and sexuality, which may impact on the needs of victims and matters
of risk assessment and management.
i. Mechanisms
should exist to inform victims of the nature of risk, of risk
identification, assessment and management systems and any assessments
that relate to their particular situation. It is not uncommon
for victims to underestimate the level of danger that they face.
There is an obligation to share information with victims that
could increase their safety and failure to do so could leave a
force vulnerable to challenge. Bearing in mind that risk categorisation
in any system may change overnight, communication with victims
must be regularly updated.
j. Appropriate
support should be available to all staff involved in policing
domestic violence and assessing risk in order to safeguard the
welfare of staff in a particularly stressful area of work.
k. There
is a need for all models/tools/systems and their implementation
to be kept under a constant process of review.
Glossary
of Terms
Aide Memoir: Document
for officers dealing with incidents and offences, incorporating
relevant definitions, policies and guidance, to promote and encourage
thorough investigation and provide knowledge about established risk
factors.
Checklists:
Structured guidelines used by all officers to ensure uniformity
in the initial reporting process of domestic violence incidents
which forms a standard means of testing to ensure and verify accuracy
of detail.
Domestic
Violence:
ACPO/ Home Office /CPS
Definition: “threatening behaviour, violence or abuse (psychological,
physical, sexual, financial or emotional) between adults (aged 18
or over) who are or have been intimate partners or are family members,
regardless of gender or sexuality.”
CPS Working
Definition: “any criminal offence arising out of physical,
sexual, psychological, emotional or financial abuse by one person
against a current or former partner in a close relationship, or
against a current or former family member.”
NB:
This definition is not restricted to adults
Domestic homicide: The
killing (including murder, manslaughter and infanticide) by one
family member of another (including killings by and of children)
or by a current/former partner.
Effective
evidence gathering: This term is preferred to ‘enhanced evidence
gathering’ and refers to methods of good practice in proactively
gathering evidence in relation to a particular domestic violence
incident.
Guidance:
Detailed information to supplement aide memoirs and check lists
which explains the evidence-base for particular risk factors, and
gives advice about putting particular risk assessment and risk management
systems into operation. This outlines a flexible procedure which
allows variation - within set limits - in actions taken to achieve
the purpose of a policy.
Intimate
partner homicide: A sub category of domestic homicide which includes
homicide by a current or former partner of the victim.
Operational
support: Support and guidance available to officers on a case-by-case
basis relating to crime prevention, investigation (including interviewing,
evidence gathering, crime scene management and forensic medical
evidence) and other aspects of policing domestic violence.
Repeat Victimisation:
Where a person experiences more than one incident of domestic violence
in a rolling 12 month period following the date when the incident
was first reported to the police.
Risk includes
risk of future harm (including psychological and physical injury
and homicide) to the adult victim, children, family members, agency
staff or any other person.
Kemshall
(1996): “uncertain prediction about future behaviour, with
a chance that the future outcome of the behaviour will be harmful
or negative”.
Risk assessment:
Estimating and regularly reviewing the likelihood and nature of
the risk posed by the suspect to particular adult and child victims
and more generally.
Kemshall
(1996): “probability calculation that a harmful behaviour
or event will occur, and involves an assessment about the frequency
of the behaviour/event, its likely impact and who it will affect”.
Risk factors
(described in the Appendix) are behaviour and characteristics of
the suspect, environment or victim which assist in understanding
the nature of risk posed by a particular domestic violence suspect.
Risk identification:
Identifying, in individual cases, the existence of particular established
risk factors.
Risk management:
Managing responses to risk identification and risk assessment to
ensure that risk of harm by the suspect is minimised. This will
often include guidance to direct appropriate police and multi agency
interventions/action plans as the result of risk identification
and risk assessment focussing on reducing risk posed by the suspect.
Safety Planning:
A process (sometimes semi structured) by which the victim may consult
with an appropriate agency to discuss increasing personal safety
and the safety of children. This may include an assessment of risk
level, developing a crisis plan and a plan for the future, both
short and longer term.
SARA (Spousal Assault Risk Assessment): An assessment guide or framework
developed as a screening tool for risk factors in domestic violence
as a means of ensuring that pertinent information is considered
and weighed by the assessor. It is an aide to assessment not an
assessment tool. SARA is subject to copyright. Unless a licence
has been purchased, or accredited training received, its use is
prohibited.
Appendix
Established
Risk FactorsCurrent
knowledge about risk factors to identify domestic violence cases
in which there is a high risk of future harm (including repeat victimisation,
serious harm and homicide to adults and children) is relatively
weak and it is generally accepted that a scientific “predictive
formula” is not possible. Most published research focuses
on risk in the context of male perpetrators and female victims.
Some risk factors, such as separation, are not the same if sex of
victim and suspect change; for others, evidence is not available.
There are
many issues that may be relevant in assessing risk in domestic violence
cases. For example, research from different countries suggests that
there are a number of socio-demographic factors associated with
domestic homicide including “the age of offender and victim,
age disparity, poverty, socio-economic class, ethnicity and type
of relationship”. The current information we have about each
of these socio-demographic factors generally and in the specific
context of domestic violence in Britain makes it difficult to incorporate
such knowledge into police decision-making in relation to individual
cases.
The focus
of the list below and on most existing police risk assessment is
on contextual and situational factors which may apply in a particular
domestic violence case and which may assist in indicating the likelihood
of future harm (including serious injury and homicide) by a particular
suspect to a particular victim or more generally. The factors listed
below are particularly relevant to assessing and managing risk in
the context of policing domestic violence. Some correlate with risk
of general criminality and violence and future research studies,
such as the Murder in Britain study should provide more information
about the differences between those who murder intimate partners
and those who kill strangers. Some of the factors listed below may
appear to be obvious. However, the evidence suggests that these
factors are not routinely identified or recorded in the context
of policing domestic violence. The factors are divided into two
parts, (A) behaviour and circumstances of the suspect and (B) circumstances
of the victim.
A.
Behaviour and circumstances of the suspect
Future research may assist
us in understanding the risk posed by a domestic violence suspect
in the context of, for example, their age, religion, culture and
whether they experienced/witnessed violence as a child. However,
for the purposes of the current policing of domestic violence the
focus is on the actual behaviour and circumstances of the suspect
that provides information about risk factors. This information can
come from police or other agency records, from the suspect, from
other people and from the victim.
1. Previous
physical assault by the suspect
In one review
of research relating to risk in domestic violence cases, previous
assault has been described as “one of the most robust, simple
and straightforward risk factors for domestic violence.” The
British Crime Survey 2000 found that 57% of domestic violence victims
were repeat victims and that “no other type of crime has a
rate of repeat victimisation as high as that for domestic violence.”
The SARA risk assessment tool recognises past assault of family
members or strangers or acquaintances as well as of a current/former
partner as a risk factor for future domestic violence. Specialising
in violence against women may also be an important risk factor for
the murder of an intimate partner. Abuse of animals by the suspect
may also indicate a risk of future harm.
2. Previous
sexual assault by the suspect
Studies
suggest that rape by a partner often involves extreme violence.
The Understanding and Responding to Hate Crime Project, which analysed
domestic sexual assault cases in the Metropolitan police area for
three months in 2001 found that the injuries experienced by victims
were more serious than those experienced in assaults by strangers.
Previous sexual assault is a risk factor for future violence.
3. Escalation
and severity of violence, including use of weapons and attempts
at strangulation
One review
of the literature states that “assaults are likely to increase
in severity unless there is a change of circumstances” and
in US research on domestic homicide, one antecedent to the killings
is listed as escalating domestic violence. However, this may not
always be the case and violence may previously have remained at
a constant level and yet then resulted in homicide. It is important
that escalating violence, including the use of weapons and attempts
at strangulation are recorded for the purposes of assessing risk.
Strangulation or ‘choking’ is a common method of killing
by male perpetrators of female victims.
4. Child
abuse by the suspect
Walby and
Myhill conclude that there is “robust evidence” of co-occurrence
of child abuse and adult domestic violence. Websdale outlines three
antecedents to child homicide: prior history of child abuse; prior
agency contact; and a history of adult domestic violence in the
family. In a recent analysis of serious review cases of child deaths,
one of the commonly reoccurring features was the existence of domestic
violence. Research has suggested links between domestic violence
and child physical and sexual abuse and there is evidence that living
with violence has psychological, behavioural and emotional effects
on children. The NCH Action for Children study notes that children
living with domestic violence often experienced direct physical
and sexual assault and that 10% had witnessed their mother being
sexually assaulted. One study found that in 90% of domestic violence
cases involving parents, children had been in the same or an adjacent
room when a violent assault took place. It is for this reason that
automatic screening for domestic violence in all child abuse cases
and vice versa is advisable.
5. Suspect’s
possessiveness, jealousy or ‘stalking’ behaviour
A suspect’s
obsessive possessiveness and morbid jealousy, has been listed as
one antecedent to domestic homicide. Possessiveness, jealousy and
‘stalking’ behaviour include following the victim, persistent
telephone calls, visits, texting, and sending letters. Across all
jurisdictions studied, a large proportion of harassment and ‘stalking’
cases involve former partners and there are clear links between
this behaviour and domestic violence and domestic homicide by men
against women.
6. Threats/attempts
to commit suicide by the suspect
Threats
from a suspect to commit suicide have been highlighted as a factor
in domestic homicide and one researcher recommends that in the context
of domestic violence “a person who is suicidal should also
be considered homicidal.”
7. Threats/fantasies
of committing homicide by the suspect
One British
review of the criminal histories of murders found that offences
of threats/incitement to murder were a risk factor for a subsequent
violence conviction including murder of a family member. US research
has also highlighted threats to commit homicide as an antecedent
to domestic homicide.
8. Previous
criminality and /or breach of civil/criminal court order/bail conditions
by the suspect
The SARA
risk assessment aide recognises past breach of a probation order,
of licence upon release from prison or other court order as a risk
factor for future violence. In the US the existence of a protective
civil court order and/or history of criminal behaviour has been
listed as one antecedent to domestic murder. One US study demonstrated
that suspects who left the scene of a domestic violence incident
before the police arrived had twice the recidivism rate of those
who were still present.
9. Suspect’s
psychological and emotional abuse of the victim (including denial/minimisation
of violence)
Studies
of perpetrators suggest that psychological and emotional abuse,
in particular dominance and isolation, is a useful variable in predicting
repeat and severe violence. Men who also sexually and physically
assault their partners have been found to be particularly dangerous.
10. Suspect’s
misuse of illegal/prescription drugs and/or alcohol or mental health
problems
Whilst it
is clear from research that misuse of drugs and alcohol are not
the cause of domestic violence , as with all violent crime they
might be a risk of further harm.
B.
The Victim’s Circumstances
The factors outlined below
can assist police staff and others to understand the victim’s
circumstances in order to assess the nature of their vulnerability
to future harm. Consideration of the victim’s vulnerability
to harm based on information about, for example, whether they have
experienced/witnessed violence as a child or experienced violence
from a previous partner, is not relevant as a risk factor. To raise
such issues may be to risk being perceived by the victim or others
as ‘victim blaming’.
1. Victim’s
perception that they are at risk of future harm
Research
supports the use of survivors’ perceptions of risk as an important
element that should be included in risk assessments. Whilst we know
that victims of domestic violence often underestimate their risk
of harm from perpetrators of domestic violence, it is important
that fears for their own safety are integral in assessing the risk
to them.
2. Current
or imminent separation from the suspect
Women’s
attempts to end a relationship are strongly linked to intimate partner
homicide and it has been stated that “attempts to leave violent
men are one of the most significant correlates with domestic death.”
On the basis of their review of the literature, Browne et al conclude
that “the greatest risk factor for partner homicide by men
appears to be estrangement and prior assaultive and controlling
behaviour.” Despite the common assumption that leaving a violent
relationship will end violence, we also know that women who separate
from their partner are at a higher risk of physical violence and
sexual assault as well as murder. In the context of a recent Canadian
study, researchers concluded that violence that continues after
separation tends to be more serious and obsessive, is more likely
to involve ‘stalking’ type behaviour, to involve female
victims, and to lead to homicide. The early stages of separation
(particularly the first three months) are particularly dangerous.
It is important to note that a child contact dispute can indicate
particular risk to both the partner and children.
3. Pregnancy
of the victim
There appears
to be a correlation between pregnancy and domestic violence, but
this may be because youth is a risk factor with women aged 16 to
24 significantly more at risk than women of other ages, rather than
indicating a causal link. Pregnancy may increase the isolation and
dependency of the victim and poses risks in terms of miscarriage
and foetal abnormality as well as additional risks to the lives
of women themselves. For example, domestic violence was disclosed
as a feature of the lives of women in at least 12% of maternal deaths
in the UK during 1997-1999. One study in London found that one in
twenty incidents of domestic violence reported to one police service
involved a victim who was pregnant. One US study has indicated that
homicide was the leading cause of death for pregnant women. In a
UK study of the prevalence of domestic violence in pregnancy, 2.5%
of women had experienced domestic violence in their current pregnancy.
Violence during pregnancy and following the recent birth of a child
are both indicators of high risk of future harm.
4. Disability
and/or mental/physical ill health of the victim
Physical
and mental ill health does appear to increase the risk of domestic
violence, but again conclusions relating to causation are complex
as the health issues may be the results of the violence. Disability
and issues of physical and mental ill health (for example depression
and/or suicidal feelings) can be important in assessing the victim’s
vulnerability to future harm. Alcohol and drugs misuse can also
relate to mental and physical ill health and can also be a response
to continued abuse.
5. Social isolation and particular vulnerability of the Victim
In one US
study the increased entrapment of the victim is included in a list
of antecedents to domestic homicide. Women who are unemployed or
housewives have been found to have the highest risk of domestic
violence, but there are a number of ways this could link to vulnerability.
These include lack of financial resources to leave, greater social
isolation, less access to informal and formal support networks and
potentially more forms of abuse available to the suspect. Victims
may also be particularly vulnerable to future harm if they live
in a physically isolated community (e.g. in a rural area) or socially
isolated community (e.g. traveller community or lesbian, gay, bisexual
or transgender community). Some victims from minority ethnic groups
may experience particular social isolation due to perceived and
actual racism, homophobia, language, and cultural, religious or
immigration issues that can all be barriers to help seeking and
reporting violence. Police officers should be aware of the impact
which all of these issues can have on the social isolation and vulnerability
to risk of harm of a particular victim.
