Diagnostic procedures and classification of antisocial behavior in Norwegian inmates in preventive detention

Henning Vaeroy

Department of Psychiatric R & D, Akershus University Hospital, L?renskog, Norway.

DOI: 10.4236/ojpsych.2012.23027                

Abstract

In official Norwegian government reports’ prison statistics, it is claimed that the prevalence of Dissocial Personality Disorder (DPD) or Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) among inmates in preventive detention is approximately 50%. Furthermore, previous findings have described a practice in which forensic examiners use the DSM SCID axis II for APD to confirm an ICD 10 diagnosis of DPD. Clinical investigation supported by the use of SCID Axis II for quality assurance was performed on almost half the population of inmates (46.4%) in preventive detention at a high security prison. The inmates had all committed severe violent acts including murder. All the information obtained by applying the DSM IV-TR criteria was tested against the ICD-10 Research Criteria (ICD-10-RC) for Dissocial Personality Disorder (ICD-10, DPD). It was found that all inmates met the ICD-10-RC for (DPD) and the DSM-IV-TR definition for Adult Antisocial Behavior (AAB). On the other hand, none met the DSM-IV-TR criteria for (APD). The SCID Axis II failed to identify inmates with APD because the DSM-IV-TR C-criteria, referring to symptoms of childhood Conduct Disorder (CD), were not met. These findings raise important questions since the choice of diagnostic system may influence whether a person’s clinically described antisocial behaviour should be classified as a personality disorder or not. For the inmates, a diagnosis of APD or DPD may compromise their legal rights and affect decisions on prolongation of the preventive detention. Studies have shown that combining the DSM and the ICD diagnostic systems may have consequences for the reliability of the diagnosis.

Keywords

Antisocial Personality Disorder; Adult Antisocial Behavior; Forensic Psychiatry; Prisoners; Preventive Detention

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Grondahl, P., Vaeroy, H. and Dahl, A.A. (2009) A study of amnesia in homicide cases and forensic psychiatric experts’ examination of such claims. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32, 281-287.
[2]	First, M.B., Gibbon, M., Spitzer, R.I., Williams, J.B.W. and Benjamin, L.S. (1997) Structureed clinical interview for DSM-IV axis II personality disorders (SCID-II). American Psychiatric Press, Washington DC.
[3]	World Health Organization (WHO) International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. 10th Revision (ICD 10).
[4]	Bronich, T. and Mombour, W. (1994) Comparison of a diagnostic checklist with a structured interview for the assessment of DSM-III-R and ICD-10 personality disorders. Psychopathology, 27, 312-320. doi:10.1159/000284889
[5]	Sara, G., Raven, P. and Mann, A (1996) A comparison of DSM-III-R and ICD-10 personality disorder criteria in an out-patients population. Psychological Medicine, 26, 151-160. doi:10.1017/S0033291700033791
[6]	Starcevic, V., Bogojevic, G. and Kelin, K. (1997) Diagnostic agreement between the DSM-IV and ICD-10 DCR personality disorders. Psychopathology, 30, 328-334. doi:10.1159/000285078
[7]	Ottosen, H., Ekselius, L., Grann, M. and Kullgren, G. (2002) Cross-system concordance of personality disorder diagnosis of DSM-IV and diagnostic criteria for research of ICD 10. Journal of Personality Disorders, 16, 283-292. doi:10.1521/pedi.16.3.283.22537
[8]	Beltran, R.O., Silove, D. and Llewellyn, G.M. (2009) Comparison of ICD-10 diagnostic guidelines and research criteria for enduring personality change after catastrophic experiences. Psychopathology, 42, 113-118. doi:10.1159/000204761
[9]	Frances, A.J. and Widiger, T. (2012) Psychiatric diagnosis: Lessons from the DSM-IV past and cautions for the DSM-5 future. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 8, 109-130. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032511-143102
[10]	American Psychiatric Association. (2000) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th Edition, American Psychiatric Association, Washington DC.
[11]	Vaeroy, H., Andresen, K. and Mowinkel, P. (2011) The likelihood of successful crime prevention: Norwegian detainees on preventive detention views on programmes and services organized and provided by the criminal justice system. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 18, 240- 247. doi:10.1080/13218719.2010.501780
[12]	Vaeroy, H. (2011) Depression, anxiety and history of substance abuse among Norwegian inmates on preventive detention: Reasons to worry? BMC Psychiatry, 11, 40. doi:10.1186/1471-244X-11-40
[13]	Tiihonen, J., Eronen, M. and Hakola, P. (1993) Criminality associated with mental disorders and intellectual deficiency, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 11, 917-918. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820230087010
[14]	Martins, de Barros, D., De Padua and Serafin, A, (2008) Association between personality disorder and violent behavior pattern. Forensic Science International, 179, 19-22.
[15]	Maelandutvalget (2008) See also Appendix III. http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/JD/Vedlegg/Rapporter/G-0400_Maeland.pdf
[16]	Sartorius, N., Ustun, T.B., Korten, A., Cooper, J.E. and Van Drimmelen, J. (1995) Progress toward achieving a common language in psychiatry. II. Results from the international field trials of the ICD-10 diagnostic criteria for research for mental and behavioral disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 1427-1437.
[17]	Roysamb, E., Kendler, K.S., Tambs, K., Orstavik, R.E., Neale, M.C., Aggen, S.H., et al. (2011) The joint structure of DSM IV axis I and axis II disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 120, 198-209. doi:10.1037/a0021660