Screening for Violence Potential in Light of Virginia Tech

The tragedy that took place at Virginia Tech raises a lot of questions about why people do such things. I have done research on violence for more than twenty years. People use violence for many different reasons, but for the most part violence makes people feel better--bigger and more powerful and better than other people. People who are violent believe victims did something to deserve it. The young man at Virginia Tech who killed so many people was closed off from others and obsessed with fantasies of violence and revenge against people he believed had harmed him. Sometimes the harm they did him was simply being alive, happy and confident. He was under severe stress for years and fantasized about killing people for a long time. He probably thought about murdering people at Virginia Tech for months or longer. He bought one of the semi-automatic pistols a month before he used it on students and professors.

We need to have a nation-wide dialogue about what to do when kids and adults show signs of possibly being violence. Each school, university, and business needs a mental health professional who is trained in assessing the potential for violence. It does no good to kick these people out of schools and workplaces because many come back and kill people.

We need policies and procedures in place to screen for the potential for violence in humane compassionate ways that protects potential victims as well as those persons who are at risk to harm others. The following is a screening tool based on research and theory. I wrote it based on years of research I did and the research of others.

Detecting the Potential
for Violence

General Areas to Assess

precipitating events
patterns of direct statements
patterns of indirect statements
circumstances that increase the likelihood of violence
indirect indicators: signs of cumulative stress, and
indicators that the person has a lowered risk for violence.

Precipitating Events
loss
rejection
emotional setbacks
anniversaries

When persons perceive situations to be real, they are real in their consequences.

Patterns of Direct Communication
Verbal
Written

Patterns of Indirect Communication
Body language ● Grooming
Behavior ● Glee when planning violent acts
Clothing

Circumstances that Increase the Likelihood of Violence
Preoccupation with violence ● Part of a group preoccupied with violence
Means to commit the violence ● Violence in families of origin
Patterns of bullying and being bullied ● Violence in neighborhood
Psychological vulnerability ● Pro-violence beliefs and attitudes

Signs of Cumulative Stress
Emotionally closed ● Substance misuse
Shame and feeling defective ● Self-injurious behaviors
Unshared anger and grief ● Chronic behavior difficulties
“Minor” anti-social behaviors

Indicators of Lowered Risk for Violence
Emotional expressiveness ● Long-term relationship with at least
Empathy for others one pro-social person
Good interpersonal skills ● Desire to emulate the pro-social person
Spends time with friends who are pro-social ● Optimistic about a positive future
Kindness in humor ● Has means & opportunity to achieve future plans

March 2004. With comments and questions, contact Jane Gilgun at jgilgun@umn.edu


Throughout the assessment, look for
factors associated with committing violence
factors that reduce the risks for violence
the balance between risks and moderators of risk

Examples of a situation where risk is probably low

A generally well-adjusted, popular child who in a moment of frustration, rage, or anger threatens another child; this is a one-time event

Principle at work: the child’s strengths far outweigh the risks
Suggestion for practice: In a safe and non-threatening way, be empathic with child’s emotions, suggest other ways to express the emotion, and ask the child not to express the emotion that way in the future. If the child threatens another again, contact parents and teacher to see what stresses the child might be experiencing.

Example of a situation that requires adult attention

Other children tease a child who responds with anger and withdrawal

Principle at work: this teasing is hurting the child and could contribute to a build-up of risks for self-harmful or anti-social behaviors

Suggestions for practice: Gently, firmly set limits on the children who tease; do a mental health assessment on the children who tease if there are indicators that the teasing goes beyond simple insensitivity, work with child who has been teased to help remediate the hurt and restore self-esteem, initiate an education program about teasing including reasons not to tease, how onlookers can respond when they see teasing, how children who are teased can understand teasing (It’s about them and not about you -- though easier said than internalized.)