Subtyping male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) based ontheir generality of violence could facilitate the difficult task of matchingperpetrator subtype with efficient risk management strategies. As such, theaim of the present study was to compare antisocial and family-only maleperpetrators of interpersonal violence in terms of (a) demographic andlegal characteristics, (b) risk factors for violence, and (c) assessed risk andthe importance of specific risk factors for violence. A quantitative designwas used in this retrospective register study on data obtained from theSwedish police. Risk assessments performed with the Swedish version ofthe Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER) andpolice registers were used. A sample of 657 male alleged IPV perpetratorswere classified as antisocial (n = 341) or family-only (n = 316) based on theirgenerality of violence. The results showed that the antisocial perpetratorswere significantly younger, as well as more psychologically abusive. Antisocialperpetrators also had significantly more present risk factors for IPV, and wereassessed with a significantly higher risk for acute and severe or deadly IPV, compared with the family-only perpetrators. The subtypes also evidencedunique risk factors with a significant impact on elevated risk for acute andsevere or deadly such violence. Key findings in the present study concernedthe subtypes evidencing unique risk factors increasing the risk for acute andsevere or deadly IPV. Major implications of this study include the findings ofsuch unique “red flag” risk factors for each subtype. To prevent future IPV,it is vital for the risk assessor to be aware of these red flags when makingdecisions about risk, as well as risk management strategies.

There is emerging recognition that positive or pro-social characteristics may lessen criminal propensity. There are now several adult and youth forensic instruments that include protective or strength components. Yet evidence supporting the protective capacities of these instruments with youth offending populations is still developing. This study aimed to identity the prevalence of strength items on the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory tool, and their relationships with risk and re-offending for a cohort of 212 multi-cultural Australian juveniles in custody. The prevalence of strengths in the sample was low, and differed by cultural group. Young people who possessed a strength yielded lower instrument total and domain scores and were more likely to be afforded a lower level of risk compared to youth without a strength. Moreover, youth who possessed a strength were significantly more likely to desist from re-offending. This association remained after controlling for level of risk. Findings point to the importance of strengths when assessing a young person’s risk for re-offending.

This article presents the first systematic review of family-only intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators (as originally proposed by Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart). The aims of the present review were to summarize and describe the prevalence of the family-only perpetrator subtype, as well as to investigate what characteristics were associated with perpetrators within this subtype. Electronic literature searches in several databases (e.g., PsychINFO, Web of Science, and PubMed) were carried out. Of the 3,434 studies identified, 30 studies met the inclusion criteria as well as the methodological quality criteria. Thematic analyses were conducted, where several themes and subthemes were identified. The proportion of family-only perpetrators, averaged across sample types, was 47.5%. Drawing on the thematic analyses of the reviewed studies, family-only perpetrators presented as a less violent subtype, displaying several pro-social personality traits, as well as a lower degree of psychopathology. The findings were inline with Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart’s predictions. The findings also demonstrated the utility of a 2-fold typology, consisting of a family-only and a generally violent (GV) subtype, as well as the need to reconsider the one-size-fits-all approach to IPV treatment. We also included a discussion of the terminology of the subtypes and propose an adoption of the terms “partner onlyviolent” and “generally violent” subtypes.

This study compared the severity of intimate partner violence (IPV) and the relationship between risk factors for IPV and overall risk judgments of future IPV in urban, rural, and remote areas. IPV risk assessments conducted by the Swedish police between 2010 and 2014 in urban (n = 564), rural (n = 456), and remote (n = 196) areas were examined. Rurality was associated with the severity of IPV reported, as well as the presence of risk factors and their relationship to overall risk judgments. Cases in remote areas included more severe IPV as well as more risk factors.

The knowledge of same-sex intimate partner violence (IPV) is limited. This study aims to investigate the perception of seriousness of same-sex IPV. A vignette study was undertaken among 248 police students (69% males and 31% females) in Sweden. The vignettes portrayed an intimate partner relationship between two people and were available in four versions with the sex of the offender and victim being alternated. Perceptions of IPV were measured using the Opinions of Domestic Violence Scale (Ahmed et al., 2013). The results showed that regardless of gender, IPV was considered serious; however, same-sex IPV was perceived as less serious than victimization of a heterosexual female but more serious than victimization of a heterosexual male. Police interventions were found to be less needed for same-sex victims than for heterosexual female victims.

Restraining orders can be used as a risk management strategy to reduce the likelihood of intimate partner violence (IPV) re-victimisation. The aim of this study was to examine how prosecutors work with cases of IPV, with a focus on their collaboration with police, use of violence risk assessment and implementation of restraining orders. A qualitative analysis was conducted based on semi-structured interviews with five prosecutors operating in two northern police districts in Sweden in 2016. Data were analysed using latent content analysis. Three overarching themes arose: The case, Organization of resources and Interpretation of the law. Each theme was discussed in the context of the prosecutors’ work with IPV. Prosecutors pointed to several inadequacies in the legislation and offered potential solutions that would ameliorate their work. Results also showed that prosecutors seldom used violence risk assessments conducted by police as a basis for issuing restraining orders. The primary reason for this was a lack of clear routines governing cooperation between police and prosecutors in the application process. The results from this study can be used when training criminal justice personnel in order to obtain a better understanding of the difficulties that prosecutors face when trying to protect victims of IPV.

This study assessed the reliability and validity of the Guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM), a structured professional judgment measure for assessing stalking risks. The SAM was completed retrospectively from file review for 146 adult stalkers (90.4% male) referred to a community-based forensic mental health service. Interrater reliability (IRR) was initially poor, but developing a strict definition of stalking currency and rescoring the SAM led to improvement. Based on the updated scoring, IRR was moderate for judgments about whether stalking was ongoing at the time of assessment, and fair to moderate for summary risk judgments. Both case prioritization (area under the curve [AUC] = .69) and risk for continued stalking (AUC = .76) ratings discriminated between groups, with high-risk stalkers 5-9 times as likely as low-risk stalkers to reoffend by stalking their original victims. Lifetime SAM total scores (AUC = .70) also featured moderate to good discrimination. Follow-up analyses suggested that this was driven mainly by the recent presence of risk markers and the nature of any ongoing stalking situation rather than historical or individual factors. Findings support the use of the SAM to structure risk judgments made by those with experience in assessing stalking. Current results also imply that IRR might be improved by introducing (a) a fixed definition of stalking currency and (b) usage guidelines for specific contexts.