In this project, I study the police's methodology in what is known as person-oriented prevention.
Historically, the work has been unstructured and with few legal restrictions in practice. A large degree of discretion, combined with potentially intrusive measures has led to calls for increased regulation and e.g., guidelines.
Standardized methods are thought to reduce subjective assessments characterized by bias and arbitrariness. A specific example is the risk assessment tool SARA:SV, a checklist with evidence-based risk factors used to assess the risk level for future partner violence.
However, research shows that the practical implementation and use of evidence-based methods and tools are inadequate. This indicates that a knowledge-based approach must also recognize that there will be variations in practice, which emphasizes the importance of studying local contexts and dilemmas.
Empirically, I study person-oriented prevention in Oslo police district where crime prevention units have developed a new methodology for assessing and following up young people who are considered to be at risk or have committed crimes. What are the benefits and pitfalls with procedural guidelines in this work? The data material consists of interviews and observations of the practical work and is analyzed based on theories of professional judgment and legal consciousness.
Supervisor: Anders Molander (OsloMet).
Co-supervisors: Jon Strype (Norwegian Police University College) and Helene O. I. Gundhus (University of Oslo).
