Developmental factors in forensic assessments of children over the minimum age of criminal responsibility: A study of forensic reports in Norway 2013–2024
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the international recognition of children's evolving capacities and the importance of incorporating these factors into forensic assessments, there is limited research on forensic practices specific to children above the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR). The current study is part of a larger project examining legal and forensic assessments related to children's criminal unaccountability (criminal insanity) in Norway. The aim of the current study was to examine how forensic assessments of children above the MACR are conducted in Norway, and to what extent developmental factors are considered in these assessments. Drawing on existing literature, we first propose a set of principles for developmentally informed forensic assessments of children. The principles address direct expert-child interaction; structured assessment procedures; collateral/contextual information; cultural responsiveness; and the qualifications of forensic experts. We then evaluated 122 forensic assessments of children aged 15 to 18 years according to the proposed principles. Our findings revealed significant gaps, including minimal direct engagement with the child, low usage of structured assessment tools, limited collateral information from caregivers and schools, lack of cultural considerations and a concerning lack of child-specific expertise among forensic experts. These shortcomings underscore the need for more rigorous and developmentally sensitive practices. Recommendations include enhanced training, incorporating developmental principles into curricula, and establishing standardized protocols integrating structured assessment tools and comprehensive contextual information. While conducted in a Norwegian context, our study calls for further research in other jurisdictions to develop international guidelines that accommodate the unique developmental needs of children in forensic settings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".