Abstract
The relationships between offenders under probation supervision and their managers are never more important than when trying to understand and assess the risk of suicide. While there has been extensive research on suicide risk in prisons in the UK and elsewhere, resulting in the introduction of suicide prevention strategies for staff managing vulnerable prisoners, and a marked decrease in self-inflicted deaths of prisoners during the last decade, there has been very little research on suicide and self-harm relevant to offenders in community settings (see Mackenzie et al., 2013). A collaboration between the London Probation Trust and the University of Westminster attempted to fill this gap, focusing on three areas of research, described briefly below.
The findings of the first study from this collaboration were published in Legal and Criminological Psychology in December 2013 (Cook and Borrill, 2013). This study focused on the factors that probation staff take into account when addressing the difficult task of rating suicide risk. The risk ratings of 38,910 offenders within the LPT area were analysed along with demographic, clinical, offence related, historical and situational factors. Twelve per cent of cases were identified as previously or currently at risk of suicide. This highlights that working with suicidal offenders is a regular element of probation practice (and the percentage is likely to be an underestimate of actual risk). Logistic regression identified seven factors that reliably predicted staff judgements about suicide risk. Not surprisingly, a history of previous self-harm, attempted suicide or suicidal thoughts was the strongest predictor of a judgement of risk made. This is appropriate, as although self-harm is not necessarily carried out with suicidal intent, it is a significant predictor of increased future suicide in most settings. Other factors which had a small impact on judgements and which fit with the literature on suicide included history of psychiatric treatment, coping skills, childhood abuse, attitudes to self, and problems in close relationships. However, the findings also indicated that staff judgements of risk were not strongly influenced by other factors which have been identified as important in related populations, including alcohol misuse, gender, and social support. This study recognizes the complexity of risk assessment and confirms that probation staff are required to make difficult judgements about behaviour which can never be totally predictable. The findings strengthen the current call for suicide awareness training for all staff, to enhance knowledge and provide support.
The limitation of the study summarized above is that it does not examine the actual outcomes of the decisions made, and cannot therefore establish the extent to which a judgement of risk of suicide might affect the relationship with the offender and the appropriateness of actions taken. This is being addressed in two ongoing studies, and some emerging findings may be briefly mentioned at this stage. The first of these is a review of completed suicides by offenders under supervision within London Probation Trust, using information from OASys and Delius records over a three year period. The research is examining personal factors and events that may have contributed to the suicide, the supervision relationship, and the impact of supervision requirements and legal processes, such as management of non-attendance, warning letters and court appearances. The findings of this study are already demonstrating very clearly that the risk factors for suicides by offenders under community supervision tend to be very different to those identified with prisoners. For example, relationship problems in the community setting have a different impact on the offender’s behaviour than the problems faced by prisoners at a distance from their families. An important early finding is that, in contrast to prisons, community-based offenders with non-violent ‘minor’ offences are by no means necessarily low risk for suicide, which has important implications for the government’s planned changes in offender supervision.
Finally, a qualitative PhD study is exploring the experiences of offenders under supervision, including clients who have survived a suicide attempt, and the perspectives of offender managers on supervising clients with or without previous suicidal behaviours. The emerging findings from interviews with probation staff emphasize the variations in knowledge and confidence expressed by staff , their concerns about how best to support potentially suicidal clients, their needs with regard to specific training, and the support needs of staff themselves. The interviews with clients are currently exploring the motives and triggers for those who attempted suicide, the changes they experience over time, and the perceptions of all clients of the supervision process.
When completed, we aim to disseminate the key findings from these studies for discussion in relation to training, policy and practice. We also hope that the findings will be useful to NOMS with regard to the revision of procedures for monitoring deaths in custody.
For further information on the audit of deaths please contact Jo Borrill (