Oral Presentation (max 25mins) The National Suicide Prevention Conference 2024

Suicide prevention in youth justice detention settings: An expert consensus study. (101537)

Sanne Dr Oostermeijer 1
  1. The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VICTORIA, Australia

Background. Incarcerated young people present with significant and complex mental health and social problems, both contributing to their elevated risk of suicide and suicide-related behaviours (1,2). Being within a youth justice environment is itself a stressful life event and may further increase the risk for suicide-related behaviours (3,4). Youth justice detention is a unique setting in which youth justice staff are responsible for the care, support and supervision of incarcerated young people, who do not have access to suicide prevention measures such as telephone-, school-, or family-based support (5). Staff play a critical role in the identification of suicide-related behaviours. Despite elevated risks, the unique setting and ongoing concerns about current responses, there is a lack of evidence on suicide prevention in youth justice detention settings (6).  

Aim. The current study addressed this gap by conducting an expert consensus study to establish evidence-based suicide prevention guidelines for youth justice detention staff.

Method. The Delphi method is a systematic way of determining expert consensus that has previously been used to develop best-practice guidelines and interventions for various mental health problems (7). Consensus among expert panel members is established through three rounds of surveys. Endorsement ratings will be calculated for each item by adding the percentage of panellists rating the item as ‘important’ or ‘essential’. Items that are rated as ‘essential’ or ‘important’ by 80% or more of panellists will be considered as endorsed. Items that are rated as ‘essential’ or ‘important’ by less than 80% but more than 70% of panellists will be re-rated in the subsequent survey round. Two expert panels have been included: youth justice staff members with at least 1 year of experience (including unit staff and forensic mental health staff) and people with lived experience.

Results. Preliminary findings of the Delphi-study will be presented. Results from the round 1 survey are currently being analysed. It is expected that survey results from round 2 and 3 will be analysed by March 2024. Items endorsed by both panels will be incorporated into guidelines describing appropriate actions and responses for youth justice detention staff.

Discussion. The findings will contribute to an evidence base informing and improving future policies related to suicide prevention in youth justice detention. Furthermore, the guidelines will form the basis for the development of a staff training workshop, which will be developed and piloted in 2024.

  1. 1. Hughes N, Ungar M, Fagan A, Murray J, Atilola O, Nichols K, et al. Health determinants of adolescent criminalisation. The Lancet Child Adolescent Health. 2020;4(2):151-62.
  2. 2. Youth Parole Board Annual Report 2020-21. 1 Treasury Place, Melbourne.: Department of Justice and Community Safety, Safety DoJaC; 2021 September 2021.
  3. 3. Armytage P, Ogloff J. Youth justice review and strategy: Meeting needs and reducing offending. 2017.
  4. 4. Dwyer M, Oostermeijer S. (2023). A Model for the Design of Youth Custodial Facilities: Key Characteristics to Promote Effective Treatment. The Palgrave Handbook of Prison Design: Springer; p. 339-83. 14.
  5. 5. Robinson J, Bailey E, Browne V, Cox G, Hooper C. Raising the bar for youth suicide prevention. Melbourne Orygen, The National Centre of Excellence in Youth Mental Health; 2016.
  6. 6. Carter A, Butler A, Willoughby M, Janca E, Kinner SA, Southalan L, et al. Interventions to reduce suicidal thoughts and behaviours among people in contact with the criminal justice system: A global systematic review. EClinicalMedicine. 2022;44:101266.
  7. 7. Jorm AF. Using the Delphi expert consensus method in mental health research. Australian New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. 2015;49(10):887-97.