Search

This article presents results of an evaluation of an online Youth Ambassador (YA) program designed to promote internet resources for mental health in an adolescent population. Results suggest that an online YA program delivered in school is useful in improving mental health awareness for workshop participants. (Contains 1 table.)

The yshareit project aims to increase awareness of and access to reputable e-mental health resources among young people. This is achieved by developing peer support networks, supported by e-mental health resources including the triage website, http://www.yshareit.com. Young people involved in the evaluation of the project described in this paper completed a range of activities aimed at enhancing communication skills and developing ideas for promoting e-mental health resources. (Contains 7 tables and 2 notes.)

With the increasing number of individuals accessing online child sexual exploitation material (CSEM), there is an urgent need for primary prevention strategies to supplement the traditional focus on arrest and prosecution. We examined whether online warning messages would dissuade individuals from visiting a honeypot website purporting to contain barely legal pornography. Participants (n = 419) seeking the site were randomly assigned to one of five conditions; they went straight to the landing page (control; n = 100) or encountered a warning message advising of the potential harm to viewers (n = 74), potential harm to victims (n = 65), ability of police to track IP addresses (n = 81), or possible illegality of such pornography (n = 99). We measured the attempted click-through to the site. Attrition rates for the warning message conditions were 38% to 52%, compared with 27% for the control group. The most effective messages were those that warned that IP addresses can be traced (odds ratio [OR] = 2.64) and that the pornography may be illegal (OR = 2.99). We argue that warning messages offer a valuable and cost-effective strategy that can be scaled up to help reduce the accessing of CSEM online. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A plea of guilty is a long-accepted factor mitigating sentence in many countries, including Australia, although academic debate over the merits and application of the discount is ongoing. This paper presents findings from a national Australian study on public opinion on the guilty plea sentencing discount, with a particular focus on sexual offences. Survey data were drawn from 989 jurors in cases that resulted in a guilty verdict and 450 unempanelled jurors and 306 online respondents who were provided with vignettes based on real cases. A third of the respondents would have supported a discount in their case if the offender had pleaded guilty. In contrast, more than one half of the respondents surveyed, who had received a vignette with a guilty plea scenario, supported an increment in sentence if the offender had gone to trial. There was more support for a discount in cases involving non-sexual violent offences versus sexual offences and adult versus child victims. Where a discount was supported, this most commonly was a reduction in the length of custodial sentence, with online respondents allocating the least generous discounts. Willingness to accept a sentencing discount was predicted by a range of variables including gender, education, punitive attitudes, offence type and offence seriousness. We conclude by considering the implications of our findings for sentencing law and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Law and ethics require that risk assessment should be cross-culturally valid and fair, but Australian research in this regard is underdeveloped. A logical first step in progressing the work required to build a strong evidence base on culturally sensitive risk assessment in Australia is to determine the expert views of those in the field. We interviewed 13 Australian evaluators who assess Indigenous sexual offenders' recidivism risk to determine their perceptions of the risk assessment instruments they use and the attributes they believe evaluators doing cross-cultural assessments should have. Our central findings are that evaluators use the available instruments because they believe that the same factors predict sexual recidivism for Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders, but that they do so cautiously knowing the limitations of the instruments. Evaluators nevertheless want more research data to guide them when they use the available instruments to assess people from cultures that differ from those of people in the normative sample. Participants acknowledge that the unique challenges of assessing Indigenous sexual offenders require non-Indigenous evaluators to be culturally competent and confident. These findings should be valuable to evaluators and those who train or supervise evaluators and/or intend to establish or improve the validity of risk instruments in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The social conditions triggered by the global COVID-19 pandemic have been described as a 'perfect storm', which could incite and exacerbate incidences of family violence (FV). This article proposes strategies to reduce the anticipated impact of COVID-19 on FV based on lessons learnt from available evidence. The evidence base on factors linking pandemics, conflicts, and disasters with violence against women and children (VAW/C) as well as risk and protective factors for FV is examined. This reveals several overlapping factors associated with changes in vulnerability to FV, which would likely be worsened during and possibly beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies are then proposed to counteract the effects of the current pandemic on these overlapping factors. It is anticipated that these strategies may be effective both during and after the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent times, parliaments have introduced legislation directing judges to take defined purposes into account when sentencing. At the same time, judges and politicians also acknowledge that sentencing should vindicate the values of the community. This article compares the views on the purposes of sentencing of three major participants in the criminal justice system: legislators who pass sentencing statutes, judges who impose and justify sentences and jurors who represent the community. A total of 987 Australian jurors in the Victorian Jury Sentencing Study (2013–2015) were asked to sentence the offender in their trial and to choose the purpose that best justified the sentence. The judges' sentencing remarks were coded and the results were compared with the jurors' surveys. The research shows that, in this jurisdiction, the views of the judges, the jurors and the legislators are not always well aligned. Judges relied on general deterrence much more than jurors and jurors selected incapacitation as the primary purpose in only about a fifth of 'serious offender' cases where parliament has provided that community protection must be the principal purpose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]