Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This examination analyzes cases where ASPD served as a standalone diagnosis for SVP commitments, indicating significant evaluative shortcomings.
Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) statutes permit post-prison civil commitment of sex offenders. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that evaluators must distinguish the sexually dangerous person from the ordinary criminal recidivist. Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) as the sole qualifying diagnosis has been controversial. In 4,585 SVP California referrals from July 1, 2012, to June 30, 2017 we found few cases where evaluators opined ASPD to be the SVP qualifying condition (16/4,585 or 0.35%). In evaluators’ consideration of ASPD as qualifying or not, we observed shortcomings in clinical reasoning and analysis. We discuss implications for SVP practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
DiCiro et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: