Evidence-Based Treatment in Forensic Settings

  • Norbert Schalast
  • Conni Lebbing
  • Birgit VöllmEmail author


Standards and guidelines of forensic psychiatric care and treatment have not been agreed upon in the European Community respectively, and are only insufficiently established in a small number of European states. The legal situation of forensic care differs between countries, affecting different legal frameworks for care and treatment. Treatment concepts which were internationally discussed over the last decades have been recognized, but not acknowledged as guidelines. Concepts which do play a role in the professional debate are the RNR approach and the good lives approach. In practice, there has been a tradition of psychodynamic and psychoanalytic thinking even with regard to offender treatment in European countries, which is not outdated. Attachment theory and the concept of mentalization have revitalized this perspective and strengthened a focus on therapeutic relationship issues. However, effective treatment must include efforts of guiding the integration of patients into society and a supportive network of supervision and aftercare.


  1. 1.
    Council of Europe. Developing a methodology for drawing up guidelines on best medical practices. Recommendation 13 adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Council of Europe Publishing; 2001.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Salize HJ, Dreßing H, Kief C. Placement and treatment of mentally ill offenders–legislation and practice in EU member states. Mannheim, Germany: Central Institute of Mental Health; 2005.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Salize HJ, Lepping P, Dressing H. How harmonized are we? Forensic mental health legislation and service provision in the European Union. Crim Behav Ment Health. 2005;15:143–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grann M, Fazel S. Substance misuse and violent crime: Swedish population study. BMJ. 2004;328:1233–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Edworthy R, Sampson S, Völlm B. Inpatient forensic-psychiatric care: Legal frameworks and service provision in three European countries. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2016;47:18–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barbui C, Saraceno B. Closing forensic psychiatric hospitals in Italy: a new revolution begins? Br J Psychiatry. 2015;206:445–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andrews DA, Bonta J, Hoge RD. Classification for effective rehabilitation: rediscovering psychology. Crim Justice Behav. 1990;17:19–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Craig LA, Dixon L, Gannon TA, editors. What works in offender rehabilitation: an evidence based approach to assessment and treatment. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Andrews B, Bonta J. Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 2010;16:30-55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gannon TA, Ward T. Where has all the psychology gone?: a critical review of evidence-based psychological practice in correctional settings. Aggress Violent Behav. 2014;19:435–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Whitehead PR, Ward T, Collie RM. Time for a change: applying the good lives model of rehabilitation to a high-risk violent offender. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2007;51:578–98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Andrews DA, Bonta J, Wormith JS. The risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model: does adding the good lives model contribute to effective crime prevention? Crim Justice Behav. 2011;38:735–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Franqué F v, Briken P. Das “good lives model. Forensische Psychiatrie, Psychologie und Kriminologie. 2013;7:22–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Göbbels S, Ward T, Willis GM. Die Rehabilitation von Straftätern. Das “Good-Lives”-Modell (offender rehabilitation—the good lives model). Forensische Psychiatrie, Psychologie, Kriminologie. 2013;7:122–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hoffmann K. Psychoanalytisch begründete Ansätze in der forensischen Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie (Psychoanalytically based approaches in forensic psychiatry and psychotherapy). Forum der Psychoanalyse. 2012;27:1–18.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grubin D. Editorial: treatment for mentally disordered offenders. Crim Behav Ment Health. 2001;11:109–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Beech A, Oliver C, Fisher D, Beckett R. STEP 4: The Sex Offender Treatment Programme in prison: addressing the offending behaviour of rapists and sexual murderers. London: Home Office; 2005.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ross RR, Fabiano EA, Ross RD. (Re)habilitation through education: a cognitive model for corrections. J Correct Educ. 1988;39:44–7.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ross RR, Fabiano E, Ross RD. The R&R-Program. (undated). Last accesses 1 Apr 2017.
  20. 20.
    Berman AH. Enhancing health among drug users in prison. Health Equity Studies No 3. CHESS Karolinska Institutet; 2004.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Joy Tong LS, Farrington DP. How effective is the “Reasoning and Rehabilitation” programme in reducing reoffending? A meta-analysis of evaluations in four countries. Psychol Crime Law. 2006;12:3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cullen AE, Clarke AY, Kuipers E, Hodgins S, Dean K, Fahy T. A multi-site randomized controlled trial of a cognitive skills program for male mentally disordered offenders: social–cognitive outcomes. Psychol Med. 2012;42:557–69.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Friendship C, Mann RE, Beech AR. Evaluation of a national prison-based treatment program for sexual offenders in England and Wales. J Interpers Violence. 2003;18:744–59.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Feil MG, Knecht G. SOPT im Maßregelvollzug–Erste Erfahrungen (SOPT in hospital order treatment – first experiences). Sexualstraftäter behandeln mit Psychotherapie und Medikamenten. Köln: Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag; 2007. p. 69–83.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schmucker M. Therapie von Sexualstraftätern (treatment of sex offenders). In:Lehrbuch Rechtspsychologie. Bern: Huber; 2014. p. 470–88.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim B, Benekos PJ, Merlo AV. Sex offender recidivism revisited: review of recent meta-analyses on the effects of sex offender treatment. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2016;17:105–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mann R, Barnett G. Victim empathy intervention with sexual offenders: rehabilitation, punishment, or correctional quackery? Sex Abuse. 2013;25:282–301.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mann RE, Hanson RK, Thornton D. Assessing risk for sexual recidivism: some proposals on the nature of psychologically meaningful risk factors. Sex Abuse. 2010;22:191–217.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Braham L, Jones D, Hollin CR. The Violent Offender Treatment Program (VOTP): development of a treatment program for violent patients in a high security psychiatric hospital. Int J Forens Ment Health. 2008;7:157–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wong SCP, Gordon A, Gu D. Assessment and treatment of violence-prone forensic clients: an integrated approach. Br J Psychiatry. 2007;190(suppl 49):s66–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Serin R, Gobeil R, Preston DL. Evaluation of the persistently violent offender treatment program. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2009;53:57–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kemshall H, Wilkinson B, Kelly G, Hilder S. What works with violent offenders: an overview. SOMEC; 2015., Last accessed 6 Mar 2017.
  33. 33.
    Leichsenring F, Rabung S. Effectiveness of long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy. A meta analysis. JAMA. 2008;300:1551–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shedler J. The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. In: Levy RA, Ablon JS, Kaechele H, editors. Psychodynamic psychotherapy research. Heidelberg: Springer/Humana Press; 2012. p. 9–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schott M. Psychoanalyse im Maßregelvollzug (psychoanalysis in forensic hospital order treatment). Recht Psychiatr. 2009;27:20–6.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ward T. Addressing the dual relationship problem in forensic and correctional practice. Aggress Violent Behav. 2013;18:92–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Young JE. Cognitive therapy for personality disorders: a schema-focused approach. Saratosa: Professional Ressource Press; 1994.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Elsner K, König A. Schemaorientierte Psychotherapie mit forensischen Patienten (Schema oriented psychotherapy (SOPT) with forensic patients). Forensische Psychiatrie, Psychologie, Kriminologie. 2016;10:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ansbro M. Using attachment theory with offenders. Probat J. 2008;55:231–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fonagy P, Bateman AW. Mechanisms of change in mentalization-based treatment of BPD. J Clin Psychol. 2006;62:411–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Linehan MM, Armstrong HE, Suarez A, Allmon D, Heard HL. Cognitive-behavioral treatment of chronically parasuicidal borderline patients. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1991;48:1060–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Berzins LG, Trestman RL. The development and implementation of dialectical behavior therapy in forensic settings. Int J Forens Ment Health. 2004;3:93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wix S. Dialectical behaviour therapy observed. Br J Forensic Pract. 2003;5:3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Van den Bosch LMC, Hysaj M, Jacobs P. DBT in an outpatient forensic setting. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2012;35(4):311–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Oermann A, Brück R, Bohus M. Die Übertragung der Dialektisch - Behavioralen Therapie auf die Behandlung der Antisozialen Persönlichkeitsstörung in der Forensik (transfer of DBT on the treatment of ASPD in forensic psychiatry). In: Schmidt-Quernheim F, Hax-Schoppenhorst T, editors. Professionelle forensische Psychiatrie. Bern: Hans Huber; 2008. p. 201–16.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Schmucker M, Lösel F. The effects of sexual offender treatment on recidivism: an international meta-analysis of sound quality evaluations. J Exp Criminol. 2015;11:597–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Heinze M. Forensische und allgemeine Psychiatrie auf getrennten Wegen (Forensic and general psychiatry on different tracks). Die Kerbe. 2013;31:8–12.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Laub JH, Sampson RJ. Understanding desistance from crime. Crime Justice. 2001;28:1–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Norbert Schalast
    • 1
  • Conni Lebbing
    • 1
  • Birgit Völlm
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Institute of Forensic Psychiatry, University Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Psychiatry and Applied PsychologySchool of Medicine, University of NottinghamNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations