Abstract :
[en] Assessment and intervention with justice-involved youth is a central concern of juvenile justice. Several countries use risk assessment tools to predict the reoffending risk more accurately and to intervene appropriately with youths (Bonta & al., 2008; Koehler & al., 2013; Miller & Maloney, 2013). The emphasis is set on risk, leaving less place for consideration of the positive aspects of youths (Case & Haines, 2016; McNeill, 2006).
In French-speaking Belgium, the University of Liège has been working on integrating strengths alongside risk factors in the justice-involved youth assessment within the Strengths/Structured Assessment for Youth (S/SAY), taking the form of a structured assessment instrument. A strength references to « a skill, attitude, exploited or not, present within each individual or his community at large, which can potentially be mobilized in order to adopt a pro-social behavior, to improve his well-being, while reducing the likelihood of harming others or oneself » (Miny, 2020, p.9). The innovative characteristic of the strength concept is its difference with the protection factor in that it offers a primary vision of justice-involved youth’s positive side. Strengths precede protection factors because they don’t play yet protective effect. Recent research into the implementation of risk/needs assessment instruments has revealed that probation officers are reappropriating evidence-based practice guidelines (Viglione, 2019; Viglione & al., 2018). This observation highlights the need to examine the perception of social workers in addition to studies on psychometric properties. In consequence, the social validity (Schwartz & Baer, 1991) of a new assessment tool appears essential.
Nine semi-structured interviews with Belgian social workers (77.78% female and 22.22% male, average age 36.56) who use S/SAY in three youth justice facilities will be presented. A thematic analysis following the principles of Miles & Huberman (2019) was carried out and a thematic tree will be developed.
70% of these social workers have already experience in justice-involved youth but no previous use of structured assessment instrument.
Since the formal inclusion of strengths, they recognize the usefulness of the structured assessment, beside their clinical judgment, to gain in objectivity. Moreover, they pointed out the relevance of the evaluation of the strengths as concrete skills of the youth. They link the formal identification of these strengths to an engine of change for youth. These preliminary results encourage further inclusion of the youths’ positive aspects within the actuarial assessment.
In conclusion, a fair and accurate assessment of the justice-involved youths’ strengths, through an innovative tool, is an important issue both from a safety society and from the youth desistance. The way social workers perceive and use a tool to assess their strengths will have a direct impact on the quality of treatment and the positive effects expected.
