‘Everybody Knows that the Prisoner is Going Nowhere’: Parole Board Members’ Views about Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder in England and Wales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Dangerous Severe Personality Disorder (DSPD) Programme has been a controversial initiative in England and Wales. First introduced in 1999, DSPD became a highly contested operational as opposed to diagnostic term, used to define a population convicted of violent offences who were admitted for treatment within one of four high security units established for men. The aim of this paper is to explore the outcomes of Parole Board (PB) reviews with DSPD prisoners and investigate PB members’ views about DSPD. Nearly all PB members observed that the high security location of the DSPD units was more influential to their decision-making than the label of DSPD. PB members highlighted their expectation that DSPD prisoners make a journey through different levels of security before release is an appropriate consideration. A key finding was that admission to DSPD services could be seen to have disrupted a prisoner’s progression and challenged PB members’ conceptions of the appropriate (and likely) future progression pathways available to prisoners. These findings have implications not only for the development of the new offender personality disorder pathway in England and Wales but also for other jurisdictions seeking to respond to the long-standing question of how to respond to high risk offenders with personality disorder.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".