Fifteen arguments against actuarial risk appraisal.

Abstract

(from the chapter) In issuing this book, the authors are calling on clinicians to do risk appraisal in a new way--a way that is different from that in which most people were trained. What they are advising is not the addition of actuarial methods to existing practice, but rather the complete replacement of existing practice with actuarial methods. The replacement of longstanding clinical practice with new methods has encountered a great deal of resistance and skepticism. This is understandable and appropriate. When is there sufficient evidence of the right kind to warrant a change in clinical practice? The authors argue that there is enough evidence of the right kind to warrant the replacement of clinical prediction of violence by actuarial instruments. They too have encountered a great deal of resistance to their urging the abandonment of unaided clinical judgment in favor of actuarial methods. The resistance has been expressed in many ways. The authors feel that it is instructive to examine these concerns in light of their research. Fifteen arguments against using the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide are presented and discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved) (chapter)