Offending and intellectual disability — structured clinical viva

This is a dual-disability forensic viva combining mild ID, possible function-maintained fire-setting, interview reliability, and pressure for a global unfitness label.[1][3]

Epidemiology honesty. Most people with ID do not offend; method traps inflate claims. Prison diagnosed ID often ~0.5–1.5%. Fire-setting is relatively prominent in some referred IDO samples — relevant context, not destiny.[1][2][6]

Interview. “I just said yes so they would stop” maps to Clare and Gudjonsson: suggestibility, acquiescence, confabulation risk. Flag reliability; recommend supports and legal process review under local principles — no invented sections.[3]

Fitness vs responsibility. Fitness = present-state participation abilities after supports; update adaptive assessment; IQ 62 is not automatic unfitness. Father’s “unfit forever” demand is incorrect — fitness is decision/time-specific and may be restorable with education (Wall). Criminal responsibility is a separate retrospective question.[4]

Formulation. Fire-setting may serve escape from demand and attention/boredom functions; analyse ABC, access to ignition sources, prior fires, substance use, dual diagnosis. Risk tools inform but have limited PPV — formulate scenario-based risk (further fire if bored/demands/access) with protective factors.[5][6]

Management. Safety (fire access control, placement), PBS/environmental redesign, adapted offence-specific and anger/problem-solving work (Willner-type CBT where accessible), substance review, multiagency plan, least-restrictive disposition. Assess bullying/victimisation history as well as offending.[7][8]