Ismael Loinaz

The description of risk factors of justice-involved youths is a target for researchers and public agencies with preventive objectives. This paper analyzes the risk profile of 1.317 youth involved in the criminal justice system from 2012 to 2021. Sex differences and differences related to family risk factors were analyzed. Results showed that family risk factors were related to an increased prevalence of risk factors among juvenile offenders. Family drug problems, family offending, and family mental health problems, in this order, showed higher numbers of differences between the groups. Nevertheless, none of these classifications exhibited differences in the perpetration of violent crimes. Differences related to the presence of violence at home and between the sexes were the less frequent, although violence at home was the only influence on the perpetration of violent crime. Females were more prevalent in the family offending, family mental health problems, and social-services use groups, while males only exhibited more drug use. Family variables are shown to be a differentiating risk factor in the study of juvenile offenders, indicating the need for family-centered intervention and prevention plans.

Like other forms of domestic violence, child-to-parent violence (CPV) is a social and health-related problem. The identification of risk factors has preventive and therapeutic implications. This paper analyzes the risk profiles and gender differences of 206 CPV cases between 12 and 28 years of age (58% males) from clinical and judicial contexts in Spain, assessed using the Child to Parent Violence Risk (CPVR) Assessment tool. Two profiles were compared according to the extent of their violence: those using only CPV (specialist, 64.1%) and those also using other types of violence (generalist, 35.9%), as coded by professionals working with the cases. Generalist perpetrators had a significantly higher prevalence in terms of the bidirectionality of the violence (being victims at home), bullying victimization, empathy problems, anger management issues, attitudes justifying violence, antisocial behavior, failure of previous interventions, violence between parents, cohabitation problems other than CPV, problematic education style, and inversion of the hierarchy. Females were less likely to be generalists, and, in the case of female specialists, violence from parents and issues in the family context may have been among the main explanations for their violence. The results suggest differences between groups, which is consistent with previous research, but also the need for more accurate typological classification methods.

La violencia filio-parental (VFP) ha suscitado un enorme interés académico. Pese a ello, pocos estudios comparan los factores de riesgo de chicos y chicas implicados en estas agresiones a sus progenitores. El presente trabajo compara 56 chicos y 35 chicas agresores evaluados con la Guía para la Valoración del Riesgo de Violencia Filio-Parental (RVFP). Las chicas provenían de forma significativa de contextos más problemáticos (con bidireccionalidad de la violencia, violencia entre los progenitores, problemas de convivencia y problemas en los progenitores) y tenían significativamente menos autoestima. Los chicos presentaron significativamente más historial de problemas de abusos de sustancias y mayor escalada en la violencia. En conjunto, ambos sexos presentaban prevalencias similares en la mayoría de las variables, su violencia era comparable (aunque las lesiones a los padres fueron exclusivas de los chicos) y las familias eran más problemáticas en ellas. La predicción de las lesiones a la madre con la puntuación del RVFP fue significativa en el caso de los varones (AUC = ,842) pero no en el caso de ellas (AUC = ,660). Los resultados justifican el uso de tratamientos y herramientas comunes en chicos y chicas implicados en VFP, aunque se discuten desarrollos aún necesarios en la materia. Child-to-parent violence (CPV) has attracted enormous academic interest. Despite this, few studies compare the risk factors between female and male perpetrators of this abuse toward parents. This paper compares 56 male and 35 female CPV offenders, evaluated with the Child-to-Parent Violence Risk assessment tool (CPVR). Results show that girls came from significantly more problematic contexts (with bidirectionality of violence, violence between parents, cohabitation problems and personal problems of parents, and had significantly lower self-esteem. Boys had significantly more histories of substance abuse issues and greater rates of escalation of violence. Overall, both sexes had similar prevalence rates for most variables, the type of violence committed was comparable (although injuries toward fathers were only perpetrated by boys), and female perpetrators had more problematic families than their male counterparts. CPVR scores significantly predicted injuries toward the mother for male offenders (AUC = .842), but not for female offenders (AUC = .660). These results support the use of common treatments and tools for female and male CPV offenders. Future steps and developments in the field are also discussed.

Child-to-parent violence takes different forms (physical, psychological or economic) and can be addressed in the judicial system or in clinical practice. The current paper compares 61 clinical and 30 judicialized cases that were evaluated using the Child-to-Parent Violence Risk assessment tool (CPVR). Results showed a higher prevalence of risk factors in the judicialsample. This group of aggressors had worse profiles of violence (bidirectionality of the parent/child violence, violenceother than CPV, and more CPV complaints), more psychological issues (low frustration tolerance, little anger management,narcissism, and violent attitudes) and, most notably, more dysfunctional families (violence between parents, cohabitationproblems, inversion of the hierarchy, non-violent conflicts, and even criminal history of the parents). Logistic regressionshowed that narcissism, attitudes justifying violence, violence between parents, and problems of parents themselves(such mental disorders or drug abuse) allowed for correct classification of 89.4% of cases. Total CPVR scores differedbetween groups (25.8 vs. 14.2), and classification was good for both type of group (AUC = .830) and injuries to mother (AUC= .764). A cut-off score between 22 and 23 showed the best results in prediction of group and injuries to mother. Utility ofthe CPVR, and next steps in its development are discussed. La Violencia Filio-Parental (VFP) puede manifestarse de distintas formas (física, psicológica o económica) y su abordaje puede hacerse desde el sistema judicial o desde la práctica clínica. El presente estudio compara 61 casos clínicos (no judicializados) y 30 judicializados que fueron evaluados con la Guía para la Valoración del Riesgo de Violencia Filio-Parental (RVFP).Los resultados mostraron una mayor prevalencia de los factores de riesgo en la muestra judicial, con un perfil de violenciapeor (más bidireccionalidad, más violencia distinta a la VFP y más denuncias por VFP), más complicaciones psicológicas enlos agresores (baja tolerancia a la frustración, poco control de la ira, narcisismo y actitudes violentas) y, en especial, un perfilfamiliar más disfuncional (violencia entre los padres, problemas de convivencia, inversión de jerarquía, conflictos e inclusoantecedentes delictivos en los padres). Una regresión logística puso de manifiesto que el narcisismo, las actitudes que justifican la violencia, la violencia entre los progenitores y los problemas de los padres (como trastorno mental o abuso de drogas)permitían clasificar correctamente al 89.4% de los casos. El grupo midió diferencias en la puntuación en la Guía RVFP (25.8vs. 14.2) y la clasificación fue buena para el tipo de grupo (AUC = .830) y lesiones a la madre (AUC = .764). Un punto de corteentre 22 y 23 mostró los mejores resultados en la predicción del grupo y las lesiones a la madre. Se discute la utilidad de laRVFP y los siguientes pasos en su desarrollo.

La prevención de la violencia contra la pareja supone un problema que ha suscitado gran interés a nivel internacional. El homicidio de pareja es el exponente más grave, aunque su prevalencia sea baja y su etiología compleja. Este trabajo revisa brevemente la descripción del problema desde la perspectiva de género y la existencia de asimetría, la perspectiva de la violencia y su descripción de factores de riesgo diferenciales y el modelo ecológico que relaciona variables personales, contextuales y comunitarias, presentando una propuesta más integradora. Se describen los estudios que analizan y comparan perfiles de homicidas, así como la situación en materia de evaluación del riesgo, todo ello con especial atención a las implicaciones para el contexto español. Por último, por su relevancia se discute la existencia de tipologías de homicidas y perfiles más próximos a patrones o dinámicas suicidas (en los homicidios diádicos y los familicidios). La información disponible pone de manifiesto la necesidad de ampliar el estudio de los homicidas de pareja y la dificultad de anticipar muchos de estos casos.

The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context Vol. . Num. . :Risk Factors of Female Intimate Partner and Non-Intimate Partner Homicides

The assessment and treatment of emotional variables is a priority in the rehabilitation of offenders. Although theoretical proposals suggest a clear relationship between violence and self-esteem, attachment, and empathy, the research carried out to date has reached contradictory results due mainly to differences in the measurements used, the reliability of self-reports, or even to problems with the definition of the constructs. The present study analyzed these three variables in a prison sample of sexual offenders (n = 48) and partner-violent men (n = 68), using the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, the Rape Empathy Measure, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and the Adult Attachment Questionnaire. Results confirmed the low utility of nonspecific empathy, the predominance of high self-esteem, and the difficulty of identifying an insecure attachment. The implications of the use of these variables in the treatment of offenders, and the need to improve the assessment tools, are discussed.

ResumenLa violencia filio-parental (VFP) es un tipo de violencia familiar, caracterizada por agresiones de distinta índole dirigidas hacia progenitores o personas que ocupen su lu­gar. Este trabajo describe la creación de la primera he­rramienta de evaluación del riesgo de VFP, desarrollada a través de la revisión bibliográfica, la opinión de exper­tos y aplicaciones piloto en contexto clínico. Se analiza­ron 112 respuestas de profesionales sobre la adecuación de 28 factores de riesgo. También se valoró el interés/utilidad/necesidad de la propuesta de una guía para la valoración del riesgo de VFP. Los resultados mostraron un gran acuerdo entre profesionales, así como una valo­ración positiva de la propuesta. Tras la aplicación piloto de la guía en siete casos y la discusión con expertos, se ela­boró la versión final compuesta por 24 factores de riesgo, seis de protección y 15 variables incluidas en una sección inicial. AbstractChild-to-parent violence (CPV), also known as adoles­cent-to-parent abuse (APA), is a type of family violence characterized by different kinds aggressions directed to­wards parents or people in their place. This paper de­scribes the development of the first CPV risk assessment tool, derived from bibliographic review, expert opinion, and pilot applications in clinical context. Responses of 112 professionals about the adequacy of 28 factors as well as the interest/utility/need of the proposal of a risk assessment tool for CPV were analyzed. Results showed a great agreement among professionals, as well as a pos­itive evaluation of the proposal. After the pilot applica­tion of the tool in 7 cases and discussion with experts, the final version was composed of 24 risk factors and 6 pro­tective factors, as well as 15 variables included in an ini­tial section.

ResumenEl tratamiento de mujeres delincuentes supone un reto para los profesionales de la justicia, la psicología y la intervención social. El incremento de detenciones y condenas ha supuesto la necesidad de ofrecer servicios para mujeres procesadas por delitos violentos. Sin embargo, el conocimiento disponible, la oferta de programas y las herramientas validadas son limitados en el contexto español. La presente revisión analiza la situación internacional sobre la intervención con mujeres delincuentes violentas, centrando la atención en la violencia de pareja y la violencia sexual. La bibliografía señala que la baja prevalencia limita los estudios sobre efectividad de las intervenciones, la victimización parece una variable relevante para el tratamiento, la evaluación del riesgo es muy complicada debido a las bajas cifras de reincidencia y, al igual que ocurre en varones, son frecuentes los abandonos en los programas. Se discuten las implicaciones para el desarrollo de la materia en el contexto español.AbstractTreating female offenders is a major challenge of criminal justice, psychology, and social intervention practitioners. The rates of arrests and convictions have increased, leading to a need to provide services for women prosecuted for violent crimes. However, the available knowledge, intervention programs, and validated tools are limited in the Spanish context. This review aims to provide an overview of the international context regarding the intervention with violent female offenders, focusing on the case of intimate partner violence and sexual violence. The literature shows that low prevalences limit studies about the effectiveness of interventions, victimization seems a relevant topic in the treatment of female offenders, risk assessment is very complicated due to the low recidivism, and attrition in programs is very common as it is in men. The implications for the development of the topic in the Spanish context are discussed