The predictive validity of the family risk survey and child risk survey for identifying persistent firesetting risk.

Young firesetter behavior poses significant risks to individuals and communities. Intervention is important to mitigate youth firesetting, and treatment needs vary depending on underlying motives. Effective screening of persistent firesetter risk to inform intervention approach is critical to ensure appropriate matching of risk and needs. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of the child risk survey (CRS) and family risk survey (FRS) for predicting persistent firesetting risk, and subsequent triaging of cases toward the appropriate treatment. A total of 61 families engaged with the Firelighting Consequences Awareness Program, Melbourne, Australia, completed the CRS and FRS preintervention, and reported their firesetting behavior 1-year postintervention. The CRS was not effective for correctly predicting persistent and nonpersistent firesetters. The FRS was successful at predicting persistent firesetters 85% of the time, but had a high rate of false positives, overclassifying nonpersistent firesetters as high risk. Finally, the actual rate of firesetters that would be deemed suitable for each of the three recommended interventions based on the CRS and FRS scoring protocols was substantially different to the expected rates described in the accompanying manual. Implications for service provision are discussed.

The development of the Adapted Firesetting Assessment Scale.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for adults who set fires relies upon valid and reliable assessment. Research is needed to ensure self-report measures are available for adults with neurodevelopmental disabilities and that they are robust. METHOD: Qualitative and quantitative data from three rounds of a Delphi exercise with practitioners and a focus group discussion with adults with neurodevelopmental disabilities were used to generate consensus about the accessibility of item adaptations made to the Fire Interest Rating Scale, Fire Attitudes Scale, and the Identification with Fire Questionnaire. RESULTS: Findings suggested the accessibility of current measures could be improved to better meet the needs of adults with neurodevelopmental disabilities and adaptations to all questionnaire items were needed. CONCLUSION: Following feedback, revisions to current measures were implemented leading to the development of the Adapted Firesetting Assessment Scale with improved accessibility for adults with neurodevelopmental disabilities.

An evaluation of a specialist firesetting treatment programme for male and female mentally disordered offenders (the FIP-MO).

Individuals who set deliberate fires are frequently encountered by clinicians working in forensic mental health services. However, little attention has been paid to developing standardised treatment for this behaviour, and few evaluations of treatment have been conducted in forensic mental health services. This study evaluates a new standardised group cognitive behavioural treatment programme for individuals residing in forensic psychiatric hospitals who have engaged in deliberate firesetting (The Firesetting Intervention Programme for Mentally Disordered Offenders; FIP-MO). Sixty-three male and female patients with a history of deliberate firesetting commenced FIP-MO treatment. Patients who met the referral criteria for treatment but who resided at hospitals where FIP-MO treatment was not available were recruited as a treatment as usual comparison group. The treatment group completed a battery of psychometric assessments pre- and post-treatment, with the comparison group completing these at similar time points. Results showed that patients who completed the FIP-MO made significant improvements post-treatment, relative to the comparison group on fire-related measures (e.g., problematic interest and associations with fire) and anger expression. Further, effect size calculations showed that the treatment group made larger pre-post treatment shifts on the majority of outcome measures compared to the comparison group. These findings suggest that FIP-MO treatment is effective for reducing some of the key factors associated with deliberate firesetting.

A comparison of psychopathology and reoffending in female and male convicted firesetters.

Little is known about the psychopathological or criminal history characteristics of female firesetters, or how often women reoffend by firesetting. The current study is one of the few large-scale longitudinal investigations to compare key psychiatric and offending variables in female and male firesetters who are not incarcerated or known to be mentally disordered. In addition, the study aimed to identify the base rate of recidivism for female firesetters compared with males. The study compared all 143 female and 909 male firesetters convicted of arson and fire-related offenses between 2000 and 2009 in Victoria, Australia. The study employed a data linkage approach to compare the psychiatric and criminal histories of participants and reoffending in the sample. Firesetters of both sexes reoffended by firesetting at similar rates (males 5.1%, females 7.0%), and reoffenders shared many characteristics. Compared with male firesetters, female firesetters were found to be less criminally versatile, to have offended less overall, and were less likely to have violent offenses. Females were more often diagnosed with depression, substance misuse, and personality disorder than men. The findings indicate that female firesetters might be suitable for assessment approaches and treatment programs offered to men, but tailored to take account of the personality and psychopathological characteristics seen more often in this group. (PsycINFO Database Record

Developing an assessment of fire-setting to guide treatment in secure settings: the St Andrew's Fire and Arson Risk Instrument (SAFARI).

BACKGROUND: Arson and fire-setting are highly prevalent among patients in secure psychiatric settings but there is an absence of valid and reliable assessment instruments and no evidence of a significant approach to intervention. AIMS: To develop a semi-structured interview assessment specifically for fire-setting to augment structured assessments of risk and need. METHOD: The extant literature was used to frame interview questions relating to the antecedents, behaviour and consequences necessary to formulate a functional analysis. Questions also covered readiness to change, fire-setting self-efficacy, the probability of future fire-setting, barriers to change, and understanding of fire-setting behaviour. The assessment concludes with indications for assessment and a treatment action plan. The inventory was piloted with a sample of women in secure care and was assessed for comprehensibility, reliability and validity. RESULTS: Staff rated the St Andrews Fire and Risk Instrument (SAFARI) as acceptable to patients and easy to administer. SAFARI was found to be comprehensible by over 95% of the general population, to have good acceptance, high internal reliability, substantial test-retest reliability and validity. CONCLUSIONS: SAFARI helps to provide a clear explanation of fire-setting in terms of the complex interplay of antecedents and consequences and facilitates the design of an individually tailored treatment programme in sympathy with a cognitive-behavioural approach. Further studies are needed to verify the reliability and validity of SAFARI with male populations and across settings.

Offending behaviours of child and adolescent firesetters over a 10-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: To assess the postintervention arson recidivism and other offending rates of a group of 182 firesetting children and adolescents referred to the New Zealand Fire Awareness and Intervention Program (FAIP) over a follow-up period of 10 years. To investigate predictors of offending behaviour as well as variables associated with previous involvement in firesetting behaviour and offending severity. METHOD: Data collected at the time of the FAIP intervention was provided by the New Zealand Fire Service and the offence histories of the sample were accessed from the New Zealand Police database (NIA). Data were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. RESULTS: Although the arson recidivism rate was low (2%), rates of general offending were high, with 59% of the sample having committed an offence during the follow-up period. Fifteen percent of the sample was classified as severe offenders, 40% as moderate and 4% as minor. Of offenders, 12.6% had been imprisoned during the follow-up period. Offending was predicted by experience of abuse and a previous firesetting behaviour at the time of the FAIP intervention. Living with both parents at the time of intervention decreased the probability of an individual engaging in future offending behaviour. The presence of family stress and a diagnosis of Attention Deficit Disorder or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADD/ADHD) were associated with previous firesetting behaviour. In addition, involvement with family violence (as a perpetrator, complainant or victim) was associated with more severe offending behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: In light of existing research, the findings of this study indicate that many firesetters are at risk for future offending and that identification of high-risk individuals is therefore an important consideration for any organization involved with firesetters. To minimize this risk, there is a need for a collaborative, multiagency approach to firesetting behaviour involving comprehensive risk assessment and appropriate referral for at-risk individuals.

Mental illness and psychiatric treatment amongst firesetters, other offenders and the general community.

OBJECTIVE: Firesetting is often reported to be associated with psychopathology, but frequently these conclusions are based on studies reliant on selective forensic psychiatric samples without the use of comparison groups. The aim of the study was to examine the rates of mental illness, substance use disorders, personality pathology and psychiatric service usage in a population of convicted firesetters compared with other offenders and community controls. METHOD: Using a data-linkage design, the study examined the psychiatric histories and usage of public mental health services by 1328 arsonists convicted between 2000 and 2009 in Victoria, Australia. These were compared with 1328 matched community controls and 421 non-firesetting offenders. RESULTS: Firesetters were significantly more likely to have been registered with psychiatric services (37%) compared with other offenders (29.3%) and community controls (8.7%). The firesetters were also more likely to have utilised a diverse range of public mental health services. Firesetters attracted psychiatric diagnoses more often than community controls and other offenders, particularly affective, substance use, and personality disorders. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that there is a link between firesetting and psychopathology, suggesting that there is a role for the psychiatric screening of known firesetters, and a need to consider psychopathology in formulating the risk for further firesetting.

Intervention for Firesetting Offenders: A Case Study.

There is little research on treatment for firesetting, especially for those who were incarcerated for their offenses. Of the treatment programs that do exist, there are limitations to feasibly implementing these in correctional settings. We propose a short-term (eight-session) program, Intervention for Firesetting Offenses (INFO), based on techniques that have been empirically supported for this population, including psychoeducation, motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioral therapy-based strategies, and relapse prevention. We provide a description of INFO using the case study of Mr. A, a man who was incarcerated for an arson offense. Overall, INFO was feasibly and effectively implemented, as the individual improved his understanding of firesetting in general and his own motivations and risk factors for engaging in firesetting and developed a relapse prevention plan to avoid future offending behaviors.

Juvenile Firesetting.

Juvenile firesetting is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Male gender, substance use, history of maltreatment, interest in fire, and psychiatric illness are commonly reported risk factors. Interventions that have been shown to be effective in juveniles who set fires include cognitive behavior therapy and educational interventions, whereas satiation has not been shown to be an effective intervention. Forensic assessments can assist the legal community in adjudicating youth with effective interventions. Future studies should focus on consistent assessment and outcome measures to create more evidence for directing evaluation and treatment of juvenile firesetters.

Specialist group therapy for psychological factors associated with firesetting: Evidence of a treatment effect from a non-randomized trial with male prisoners.

Despite huge societal costs associated with firesetting, no standardized therapy has been developed to address this hugely damaging behavior. This study reports the evaluation of the first standardized CBT group designed specifically to target deliberate firesetting in male prisoners (the Firesetting Intervention Programme for Prisoners; FIPP). Fifty-four male prisoners who had set a deliberate fire were referred for FIPP treatment by their prison establishment and psychologically assessed at baseline, immediately post treatment, and three-months post treatment. Prisoners who were treatment eligible yet resided at prison establishments not identified for FIPP treatment were recruited as Treatment as Usual controls and tested at equivalent time-points. Results showed that FIPP participants improved on one of three primary outcomes (i.e., problematic fire interest and associations with fire), and made some improvement on secondary outcomes (i.e., attitudes towards violence and antisocial attitudes) post treatment relative to controls. Most notable gains were made on the primary outcome of fire interest and associations with fire and individuals who gained in this area tended to self-report more serious firesetting behavior. FIPP participants maintained all key improvements at three-month follow up. These outcomes suggest that specialist CBT should be targeted at those holding the most serious firesetting history.

A Practical Guide to Assessing Adult Firesetters' Fire-Specific Treatment Needs Using the Four Factor Fire Scales.

OBJECTIVE: Practitioners working with offenders who have set fires have access to very few measures examining fire-specific treatment needs (e.g., fire interest, fire attitudes). In this article we examine the new Four Factor Fire Scales (Ó Ciardha et al., 2015), which may be used by practitioners to examine fire-specific treatment needs for offenders who have set deliberate fires. We present a standardized scoring procedure when using these scales, as well as an associated scoring template for practitioner use. METHOD: Norm data are based on male and female firesetters (n = 378) and nonfiresetters (n = 187) recruited from 19 prison establishments (including six female establishments, one young offender institution) and 12 secure mixed-gender mental health settings. RESULTS: We present a full overview of all data we have collected to date relating to the Four Factor Fire Scales across prison, mental health, and young offending participants. For each population, we present mean scores as well as associated cutoff scores and reliable change indices to aid practitioners in their interpretation of scores. CONCLUSIONS: The Four Factor Fire Scales provide professionals working in the area with a robust template for administering, scoring, and interpreting the fire-specific factors currently identified as playing a role in deliberate firesetting behavior. Strengths and limitations of the measure are discussed.

Arson in review. From profit to pathology.

Arson is a crime committed by thousands of people throughout our nation for nearly every reason, justification or excuse known to mankind ... Arson is one of the easiest crimes to commit but the hardest to prevent or prove ... Arson is a crime which involves little skill, as the weapon used is legally carried and too readily available ... Unlike many other covert criminal activities, the impact of increased major arsons has a direct visible effect on the lives of the average citizen. Insurance premiums are raised, property is destroyed, people are killed or maimed, and the quality of life in the area affected by arson is diminished considerably. These statements, taken from US Senate hearings on arson in the late 1970s, are as true and as troubling today as they were over a decade ago. Many who set fires need mental health services of some kind, a fact alluded to even in popular literature. Dick Francis, a well-known author of British mysteries, writes, "There are people in this world who cause trouble because it makes them feel important. They're ineffectual, eh? in their lives. So they burn things ..." But nobody wants these arsonists in their midst. Psychiatric facilities do not want them so they end up in prison: Yet another case has been reported of a mentally disordered person being sent to prison because there is no other institution willing to receive her ... a severely mentally disordered woman aged 22 [was sentenced] to life imprisonment for arson ... in default of other appropriate facilities ... to protect the public. And general hospital emergency rooms cannot find anyplace to send them: "The hardest patients to sell are the repeaters with bad reputations, the firesetters and those who are potentially violent." Any arson episode is an act the magnitude of which the perpetrator cannot predict accurately. Once set, the fire is no longer responsive to the desires or dictates of the firesetter. To address the problem of arson in our times, arson investigators for law enforcement agencies and for insurance companies, fire chiefs, and mental health professionals must develop a joint commitment to public education, cooperative plans for prevention and intervention, and a shared research agenda.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Juvenile firesetting: a unique syndrome or an advanced level of antisocial behavior?

The current study examined whether juvenile firesetting represents a unique syndrome or an advanced level of antisocial behavior. Thirty-six incarcerated juvenile delinquents, all of whom met criteria for a diagnosis of Conduct Disorder, served as subjects and were categorized into one of three groups: firesetters, non-firesetters but comparable to firesetters in number of conduct disorder symptoms, and non-firesetters who displayed fewer conduct disorder symptoms than the other two groups. Caregivers completed the Child Behavior Checklist on the youth to provide information about the severity and range of psychopathology. The results indicated that firesetters and non-firesetters who had a comparable number of symptoms did not differ from one another on the CBCL subscales of adolescent psychopathology but both differed from the group with fewer symptoms. These results suggest that firesetting does represent an advanced level of antisocial behavior, but that firesetting is not a unique syndrome, at least not in terms of caretakers' perceptions of the youths' problematic behavior. Implications for treatment of firesetters are presented.

Satiation in the treatment of inappropriate fire setting.

This paper concerns the treatment of a 7-yr-old boy, who exhibited multiple behavioral disorders, and was treated in a residential setting for inappropriate fire setting by a satiation procedure. Throughout treatment the number of adult interventions at home to "correct him about fire" were recorded. Treatment consisted of 100 30-min sessions in the residential setting during which he was free to light as many matches as he wished. Contrary to earlier studies, the number of matches lit per therapy session did not decrease. However, the number of "corrections about fire" at home completely ceased midway through treatment, and did not recur through the 24-month follow-up period.

Application of a work penalty threat in the treatment of a case of juvenile fire setting.

The treatment of a juvenile fire setter is described. A work penalty was utilized, in which the child was to do 1 hr of hard labor for each incident of fire setting or fire related activity. Immediate and complete suppression of the behavior occurred, with no recurrence at 6 month follow-up.

Multicomponent parental treatment of firesetting in a six year old boy.

The case is presented of a 6-yr-old developmentally-disabled boy who was referred for the treatment of home firesetting behavior. The mother was trained to implement an intervention program consisting of negative practice with corrective consequences and token reinforcement in order to satiate and teach proper control of the behavior. This intervention was associated with the elimination of the firesetting behavior and suppression of another problem behavior, namely, fighting with the sister. Both of these behavioral improvements were maintained at 15-month follow-up. The benefits of multicomponent behavioral interventions and change agents in the natural environment are discussed.

Comprehensive treatment of chronic fire setting in a severely disordered boy.

A comprehensive, multidimensional treatment strategy was designed for a severely behaviorally disordered 10-year-old boy with a 7-year history of setting fires. The study replicates a previous study designed to suppress fire setting, teach appropriate substitute behavior and increase awareness of the consequences of fire setting. Three additional components were added to the original treatment program: relaxation training, a response cost for fire setting, and a visit to a hospital burn unit (overt sensitization). Follow-up data 1 year later indicate that treatment was successful in extinguishing all fire-setting behaviors. The additional treatment components presented in this paper may add to the efficacy and sustained durability of treatment gains in difficult, low frequency fire setting behavior.

Pathological fire-setting 1951-1991: a review.

The purpose of this article is to review the whole literature on pathological fire-setting and related fields since 1951 in order to present a state of the art picture of our contemporary knowledge about this phenomenon. Papers were initially selected by using a Medline search. From the articles obtained in this way the references had to be pursued, because many relevant papers and books in this research field of different scientific and practical disciplines are not listed in conventional literature services. Finally, only those contributions were selected which provided new information when published, by original research, theoretical interpretation or practical implications. The last forty years have brought a growing body of data and understanding--especially concerning pathological fire-setting by children--etiology, and therapy, which often proves successful. The situation remains unclear for arson by psychologically disturbed adults and we still have a poor understanding of arson without apparent motive. There is a conflict of opinion as to whether adult fire-setters are suitable for therapy and therapeutic efforts dealing with psychologically disturbed adults are rare. With increasing knowledge about child fire-setting and its successful treatment, etiological and therapeutic models for adult fire-setting behaviour may be developed. Research into the latter area should focus on both biographical and social conditions of development from childhood on as well as biological measures. Both will be reviewed here.

Forging a transference relationship with a self-destructive preschooler.

A three-and-a-half-year-old boy was referred for treatment because of his inability to engage adequately in school activities and his absorption in fantasy and episodically charged and homicidal wishes. A few months after therapy was initiated, the boy revealed fantasies of a self-destructive nature. Through the development of the transference relationship, the patient was able to elaborate further, understand the implications of such fantasies, and validate his perceptions regarding feelings that were until then suppressed and isolated.

Intervention with children who set fires.

A technique to interrupt firesetting behavior in children has been described. This technique sequentially correlates events, feelings, and behavior on a line graph. This is done in full view of the patient and his family. The most important function of this procedure is to help the patient become aware of the cause-effect relationship between feelings and behavior. The initial feeling is utilized as a signal that he is at risk to set a fire. This awareness lets him substitute an acceptable behavior. Twenty-nine patients have been treated thus far and only two have set subsequent fires. Follow-up periods varied from six months to eight years with an average duration of two-and-a-half years.