By Kieran McCartan, PH.D., Kasia Uzieblo, Ph/D.,, Sophie King-Hill, Ph.D., & Josie Solle, B.A
On the 30th of January 2024 the Prevent
to protect through support (2PS) project held its second professional
networking and training event in Brussels. The networking event focused on the importance
of understanding risk and risk assessment in the prevention of child sexual abuse.
The context of the event
Risk assessment is often a challenging area of professional
practice because of its links to sentencing, treatment planning, release,
community integration and public protection. Assessing risk is a significant
foundation in modern societies (especially northern hemisphere and westernized
societies) approach to preventing future sexual offending, reducing
victimization and managing challenging, as well as dangerous individuals.
However, it is also a contested area with several different risk assessment approaches
(i.e., the use of actuarial risk assessment scales, structured professional judgment,
clinical insights, etc), several different risk assessment scales and tools, as
well as different professional, cultural and country-based attitudes to and understanding
of good practice. This means that assessing risk and developing good evidence-based
practice looks differently organisationally, nationally and transnationally.
This poses and issue for the development of coherent national and international
standards on the issue. Therefore, we have a challenging and hotly debate landscape
that can be confusing for professionals and policy makers, never mind the
public.
The development of the “Risk & Desistence Hexagon”
For many years the focus of understanding risk was based on
reducing re-offending, managing challenging people in the community and public
protection; however, with increasing conversations and frontline practices
focusing on preventing first time offending the assessing risk conversation has
moved upstream. Preventing first time offending, especially sexual offending,
is challenging at best for many reasons aside for professional attitudes to
risk assessment, including, a lack of information, a lack of guidance, a lack
of an evidence bases to compare the individual back to ands a lack for
professional experience in doing this work. As part of the 2PS project Professor Nicholas
Blagden was tasked to develop a secondary prevention a tool to help
professionals assess the risk of first time offending as well as to understand
the early career offending behaviours of people at risk of committing a sexual
offence. The idea of assessing risk in in the secondary prevention sphere is
challenging. Over the last year Professor Blagden, with colleagues from the 2PS
network, has developed the “Risk
and Desistence Hexagon” which is a professional decision making tool based
on a traffic light system to help professionals understand the risk at their
clients pose and plan their service deliver, interventions or referrals
appropriately. It is a living document that can be revisited and built on
across the professional’s engagement with their client. The aim of the Hexagon
is not to define risk, but rather too assesses the risk that a person
poses and plan accordingly with the aim of preventing offending behaviour
and/or an escalation on offending behaviour.
The event was the first opportunity to road-test the tool to professionals, academics, and practitioners from across Europe; therefore, a good opportunity to gain some insights into the Hexagon and its use.
Academic reflection
Dr Sophie King-Hill: There is something to be said about getting a range of experts in a room, in person, to spend a day picking apart a problem and looking at ways to approach it. The transparency around the tool was useful in relation to its development and intentions. One key point that is pertinent to any assessment/mapping/planning tool for harmful sexual behaviours interventions is the balance between the complexity that is needed to approach a multi-faceted issue coupled with the simplicity that professionals need. This simplicity is required due to lack of training, resources and time. There is no easy solution to this thorny problem. The use of a ‘traffic light system’ is a good example of this – on one hand it is visual, gives key and immediate indicators as to how urgent an issue is and is easy to understand given its application to everyday life. However, the risk with the simplicity of it is that it may wash away the context and the professional judgement needed for such complex issues. There is no easy fix for this. Meeting in Brussels at the 2PS event to discuss the prototype of an important tool gave time for these key issues to be unpicked.
Practitioner reflection
Dr Kasia Uzieblo: Assessing the risk of first-time offending in practice is no simple task; it not only presents practical challenges but also raises important ethical and deontological questions. A fundamental challenge lies in determining when we can realistically speak of a risk group for sexual offending. What signals should practitioners rely on to make such an assessment? Unlike organizations such as Stop it Now!, which often have a clearer (though not always definitive) framework for identifying individuals at risk, many other services may struggle with these questions. How should frontline professionals, social workers, or helpline responders interpret early warning signs, especially in the absence of a concrete offense? This is precisely where the Risk and Desistance Hexagon sharpens these questions from practice. Rather than providing rigid categorizations, it offers an evidence-based tool to facilitate structured decision-making, particularly in areas such as child protection. The Hexagon does not claim to define risk in absolute terms but rather equips professionals with a structured approach to assess potential concerns and determine appropriate actions.
As the coordinator of a frontline helpline for people affected by violence, sexual abuse, and child maltreatment, I see the potential of the Hexagon in certain cases. Its structured framework makes it accessible for professionals in different settings, including frontline services. At the same time, we experience a need for a tool that supports decision-making regarding (acute) risks and advisory processes, particularly based on information obtained solely from victims or their surroundings. These cases present unique challenges, as risk assessment often relies on fragmented information, making structured guidance even more crucial.
In addition, for this tool to have its full
impact, it will be essential to ensure that decision-makers at various levels,
across different settings, are also aware of its existence and application or at least be aware of the evidence base concerning risk
and desistence factors. Developing a shared language and vision across
different settings and professions remains crucial, as continuity in assessing
risks and intervention is key to effectively preventing harm. These discussions
will be instrumental in refining the tool further and exploring its validity
and integration into existing risk management frameworks.
Conclusion
Over the next couple of months, the hexagon will be piloted
across a broad European professional network as part of its development
process. If you would like to learn more or attend a piloting event, please get
in touch with the 2PS team. The next 2PS professional engagement and networking
event will be on the 26th of August in Poznań, Poland as part of the
International Association
for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders (IATSO) conference.
