Abstract

The HCR-20^V3 is a violence risk assessment tool that is widely used in forensic clinical practice for risk management planning. The predictive value of the tool, when used in court for legal decision-making, is not yet intensively been studied and questions about legal admissibility may arise. This article aims to provide legal and mental health practitioners with an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the HCR-20^V3 when applied in legal settings. The HCR-20^V3 is described and discussed with respect to its psychometric properties for different groups and settings. Issues involving legal admissibility and potential biases when conducting violence risk assessments with the HCR-20^V3 are outlined. To explore legal admissibility challenges with respect to the HCR-20^V3, we searched case law databases since 2013 from Australia, Canada, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the UK, and the USA. In total, we found 546 cases referring to the HCR-20/HCR-20^V3. In these cases, the tool was rarely challenged (4.03%), and when challenged, it never resulted in a court decision that the risk assessment was inadmissible. Finally, we provide recommendations for legal practitioners for the cross-examination of risk assessments and recommendations for mental health professionals who conduct risk assessments and report to the court. We conclude with suggestions for future research with the HCR-20^V3 to strengthen the evidence base for use of the instrument in legal contexts.

摘要

HCR-20 ^V3是一种暴力风险评估工具，广泛用于法医临床实践中进行风险管理规划。该工具在法庭上用于法律决策时的预测价值尚未得到深入研究，可能会出现有关法律可受理性的问题。^{本文旨在为法律和心理健康从业者概述 HCR-20 V3}在法律环境中应用时的优缺点。描述和讨论了HCR-20 ^V3针对不同组和设置的心理测量特性。^{使用 HCR-20 V3}进行暴力风险评估时涉及法律可接受性和潜在偏见的问题被概述。^{为了探索 HCR-20 V3}的法律可受理性挑战，我们从 2013 年起搜索了澳大利亚、加拿大、爱尔兰、荷兰、新西兰、英国和美国的判例法数据库。我们总共发现了 546 例涉及 HCR-20/HCR-20 ^V3的案例。在这些案例中，该工具很少受到质疑（4.03%），当受到质疑时，它从未导致法院裁定风险评估不可接受。最后，我们为法律从业者提供风险评估交叉询问的建议，并为进行风险评估并向法院报告的精神卫生专业人员提供建议。^{最后，我们对 HCR-20 V3}的未来研究提出建议加强在法律背景下使用该文书的证据基础。