Inledning: Syftet med denna studie är att få en bredare kunskap om ett outforskat område; psykodynamiska psykoterapeuters upplevelse av att arbeta med personer dömda för mord eller allvarliga våldsbrott. Frågeställning: Hur upplever psykodynamiska psykoterapeuter det är att arbeta med personer dömda för mord eller allvarliga våldsbrott? Metod: Studien bygger på den halvstrukturerade livsvärldsintervjun med fem terapeuter med erfarenhet av att bedriva psykoterapi med brottsdömda för allvarliga våldsbrott eller mord. Intervjuerna spelades in och bearbetades med tematisk analys. Resultat: Terapeuterna har svårt att känna empati och upplever också ångest och rädsla i terapierna. Terapeuterna försöker att förstå personen och brottet för att kunna arbeta för egen del men också för att kunna behandla patienten. Terapeuten uttrycker behov av stöd genom riskbedömning, utbildning och handledning för denna patienttyp. Diskussion: Terapeuternas upplevelse bekräftade det forskningen visat på; att det är stora känslomässiga påfrestningar i det terapeutiska arbetet med brottsdömda för mord och allvarliga våldsbrott. Terapeuterna hade svårt att erbjuda en empatisk förståelse och bearbetande psykoterapi. Terapeuterna efterfrågade en mer genomtänkt behandlingside för denna patientgrupp från organisationens sida och egen handledning och utbildning för att kunna genomföra det psykoterapeutiska arbetet. / Introductions: The purpose of this study is to achieve a broader knowledge of an area not researched on; psychodynamic psychotherapists experience of working with people convicted of murder or serious violent crimes. Issues: How do psychodynamic psychotherapists experience working with people convicted of murder or serious violent crimes? Method: The study is based on the semi-structured interview with five therapist’s with experience of treatment with people convicted of murder or serious violent crimes. The interviews were recorded and processed using thematic analysis. Result: The therapists have difficulty feeling empathy and they also experience anxiety and fear in the therapies. The therapists try to understand the person and the crime in order to be able to work for their own part but also to be able to treat the patient. The therapists expresses the need for support through risk assessment, training and supervision for this kind of patient. Discussion: The therapist’s experience confirmed what research shows; that there are severe emotional strains in the therapeutic work with those convicted of murder and serious violent crimes. The therapists found it difficult to offer an empathetic understanding and processing psychotherapy. The therapists wished for a more elaborate treatment idea for this patient group on the part of the organization and their own supervision and training to be able to carry out the psychotherapeutic work.

This study analyses judicial approaches to sentencing offenders under the age of 18 convicted of serious crimes and their adult counterparts. It traces sentencing patterns, trends and shifts from 1950 to 2009 with reference to key moments. The study seeks to identify factors that determine the choice of sentence. Indeed, competing penal theories appear to be behind judicial decisions. In this regard it is claimed that although it is difficult to identify the extent of factors considered in sentencing decisions, seriousness of crime seems to carry more weight than the prior record and age factor in the selection of a sentence. The study applied both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, using primary or historical and secondary sources of data collection. This involved studying real court cases, the observation of trials and interviews with Wynberg regional court magistrates, Mitchells Plain regional court magistrates and Cape High Court Judges as part of primary-historical data collected. Penal statistics and data gathered included law reports, penological literature was analysed and computerised, and philosophical interpretation of findings was used. The study concludes that sentencing approaches are still marked by inconsistency and vagueness, which require to be improved by ongoing assessment within the courts in pursuit of balanced sentencing that meets various goals. It is pointed out that there are variations between the courts, and among different regional magistrates and judges, which require to be justified in the light of the divergences in crime seriousness and offenders alike. The study claims that sentencing is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, involving history, law and sociology. It further recommends that persons under the age of 18 convicted of serious crime should be accorded less culpability compared to adults with regard to sentence severity. / Criminology / D. Litt. et Phil. (Penology)

This study analyses judicial approaches to sentencing offenders under the age of 18 convicted of serious crimes and their adult counterparts. It traces sentencing patterns, trends and shifts from 1950 to 2009 with reference to key moments. The study seeks to identify factors that determine the choice of sentence. Indeed, competing penal theories appear to be behind judicial decisions. In this regard it is claimed that although it is difficult to identify the extent of factors considered in sentencing decisions, seriousness of crime seems to carry more weight than the prior record and age factor in the selection of a sentence. The study applied both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, using primary or historical and secondary sources of data collection. This involved studying real court cases, the observation of trials and interviews with Wynberg regional court magistrates, Mitchells Plain regional court magistrates and Cape High Court Judges as part of primary-historical data collected. Penal statistics and data gathered included law reports, penological literature was analysed and computerised, and philosophical interpretation of findings was used. The study concludes that sentencing approaches are still marked by inconsistency and vagueness, which require to be improved by ongoing assessment within the courts in pursuit of balanced sentencing that meets various goals. It is pointed out that there are variations between the courts, and among different regional magistrates and judges, which require to be justified in the light of the divergences in crime seriousness and offenders alike. The study claims that sentencing is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, involving history, law and sociology. It further recommends that persons under the age of 18 convicted of serious crime should be accorded less culpability compared to adults with regard to sentence severity. / Criminology and Security Science / D. Litt. et Phil. (Penology)