Setting the Record Straight Regarding Tools That Assess Risk for Youth with Sexually Abusive Behavior.

Abstract

This critique alerts practicing professionals of the multiple misleading statements in the recently published article entitled, "A compendium of risk and needs tools for assessing male youths at-risk to and/or who have engaged in sexually abusive behaviors." This critique corrects the erroneous information contained in Jung and Thomas' article, providing current accurate information related to the important distinct differences of available standardized risk assessment tools used in forensic settings with youths who have engaged in sexually abusive behaviors. Erroneous statements by other researchers and authors in the field are also discussed. Forensic cases are distinctively different from others seen in clinical settings, requiring specific knowledge and skill set, a notable distinction not often mentioned in research literature.