Reflecting on the week.... Not sure why policing is so obsessed with the outcome when identifying risk, ie risk of exploitation, slavery, suicide - the factors, such as trauma, which put people at heightened risk of one adverse outcome,may also put them at risk of another .thread
I understand that policing must operate within laws when understanding the outcome, clearly, ie is this person a victim of a crime, so we understand the investigative skills needed but, to be honest if there is a crime is sometimes lost.
We need a clearer understanding of risk factors but one where the outcome matters less than the context. What happens otherwise is we have one assessment saying this is X risk for abuse but another for X for domestic abuse and X exploitation etc
It’s the contextual factors, not the potential outcome which is important but when an outcome has been unfortunately realised a better understanding of what we are dealing with is needed.
In medical terms people are at risk of adverse health outcomes, we don’t obsess about defining the specific outcome as much as policing does. Many factors correlate to heart disease and heart disease covers many conditions
What I’m saying is the risk of a specific harm may never materialise, but another one may, which we miss because we obsessed about a defined outcome. However as many harmful outcomes do not materialise we need to understand the PAT Triangle, as it’s the coming together of
Victim,perpetrator & location that results in the outcome. When two or three of those are known I think we can risk assess specific outcomes Domestic abuse is an example where this may be the case, but ironically this is case where the outcome being risk assessed is less specific
In domestic abuse we don’t assess intimate partner violence, or verbal, physical, sexual abuse separately we assess the risk of general long lasting harm. However this is a situation where we may be able to be more specific in the outcome, such an approach may help victims
By ensuring the right support is delivered to the right people. A recent study on DA made me think about this medscape.org/viewarticle/93…
There are several points about this article I would make. I’ve thought about this post before making it but a counter narrative is needed to address what I feel is a misunderstanding & of the aim here. 1/15
To start, the pt that wherever the police are, there is a risk that if “policing” is not balanced informed, sensitive to context, trauma & procedurally just, we could create an increased likelihood of involvement with the CJ system, which may adversely effect outcomes 2/15
This pt is not lost on many in policing. It may apply outside of the school environment too. The answer to the issues of inequity are complex, education is part of the solution but in my opinion, & of many I work with from education, removing schools officers will not help. 3/15
Now more than ever we need evidence based policies. For too long we have had policy based evidence. We need brave public sector organisations who are prepared to work together, this includes “sharing” data, in order to robustly evaluate what works to address in equalities 1/15
Too often we have evaluated a policy post it’s implementation & often in the isolation of one agency. The police regularly do this. Often the output measured is crime, is it up or down, have there been more or less searches or non-incidents, what’s happening to police demand?2/15
It’s more complex than that, every action by one agency has effects elsewhere in the system for another, changes in health mental health services is an obvious example which could change demand on the police, the police charging suspects creates demand in the court, but also 3/15
Lots of media reporting on this, I recommend reading the actual report👇Both sides of the coin:An inspection of how the police and National Crime Agency consider vulnerable people who are both victims and offenders in ‘county lines’ drug offending -HMICFRS justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/public…
“it would be better to track all the various ways in which people can be vulnerable..rather than considering county lines separately...people can be vulnerable in many ways simultaneously..& can face many forms of exploitation– physical,emotional,financial or sexual” @FLDMissing
I’m also particularly interested in:
Home Office should carry out a review of the quality&extent of information sharing by public bodies for law enforcement purposes&clarify the legal position&identify opportunities to
address the cultural, systemic, procedural, etc barriers