Lagniappe

I remember listening to a keynote speaker at an ATAP conference about ten years ago who talked about conducting threat assessments without meeting the subject, instead relying on third-party information, police reports, and sometimes interview transcripts, or watching the interview from afar. This was a nuanced concept for me at the time. I had always seen the benefit of asking questions directly to the subject, reading their responses, and moving the interview forward based

The most preventable moment when assessing the potential for violence is usually before a situation crystallizes into an emergency. The most important work hinges on low-threshold sharing of small, ambiguous pieces of a puzzle (leakage, fixation, grievance signals, destabilization, access to means, accelerating stressors) that only become a clear picture when they’re named early and combined across observers. If your threat team’s name implies punishment, investigation, or la

If you’ve done threat assessment interviews long enough, you’ve asked some version of the classic question: “Have you thought about hurting yourself or someone else?”   It’s a reasonable question. It’s on the checklist. It’s part of the spine of almost every structured interview. And when someone says  yes , our antennae do what they’re supposed to do; they stand up.   But here’s the catch, and it’s a big one: not everyone hears that question the same way. And when your inter

There are questions in an interview that feel like a trapdoor. One moment you’re walking along in a human conversation, and the next you’re asking about suicide, firearms, hallucinations, or whether someone is hearing voices. These questions are essential. They’re not optional, not “nice to have,” not something we save for the end if we have time. They are load-bearing beams in a risk assessment. But here’s the catch: even when the question is clinically perfect, the  transit

Every interviewer eventually meets the checklist. It arrives like a well-meaning chaperone at a middle school dance, hands folded, eyes scanning the room, whispering:  “Don’t forget question #7.”  And honestly, thank goodness for it. In threat assessment work, the checklist keeps us oriented when the conversation starts wandering. It gives us the threat spine, those core questions we need to touch on, no matter what story walks into the room. But if the spine is all we ever i

If you do this work long enough, every threat assessment interview starts to feel a little like sitting down to play a board game where the other person keeps quietly swapping out the rules. One minute, you think you’re playing Monopoly. The next minute, they’ve pulled out Uno cards, flipped the board, and are insisting it’s Texas Hold ’Em.   It’s tempting, in that moment, to go full authoritarian: push all your chips in, remind them who’s in charge, and demand that they play

If you’ve done threat assessment interviews for any length of time, you’ve had that conversation, the one that starts as a simple “tell us what happened” and somehow turns into a two-hour TED Talk on geopolitics, academic freedom, childhood trauma, and the decline of Western civilization. You walk out with 17 pages of notes… and realize you never actually asked if the person has access to a gun.   That’s where the idea of a risk spine earns its keep.   The risk spine is simpl

When you’re in an interview, it’s easy to focus only on what the person is saying and forget that half the story is playing out in how they’re saying it. If you’re only listening to the words, it’s like hearing the soundtrack without watching the movie; you’re missing a lot of the plot. Nonverbal cues in threat assessment interviews matter. They can tell you when a topic lands hard, when someone is anxious, ashamed, overwhelmed, or just done with your questions. But they’re a

If you’ve ever watched a brand-new threat assessor in action, you’ve probably seen some version of this scene: they sit down, open their notebook, clear their throat, and say, without taking a single emotional temperature, “Do you own any weapons? Have you thought about killing yourself, and how much do you drink?” Technically, those are good, necessary questions. Practically, it’s like proposing marriage on the first date while you’re still standing in the doorway holding yo

If you’ve ever watched a two-person threat assessment interview with zero preplanning, you know the vibe: it starts as a professional meeting and slowly morphs into an improv show no one auditioned for. One person is trying to build rapport, the other is flipping through papers like they’re hunting for a lost tax form, and the subject is swiveling back and forth like they’re watching tennis in hell.   Let’s talk about why preplanning matters when you’ve got two people in the

If you’ve ever watched your own interview recording and thought, “Wow, I basically asked the same question five times,” I have good news: that might have been your best clinical move of the day. One of the most underrated tools in threat assessment interviewing is intentional repetition, asking the same question in different ways at different points in the conversation. Not because we’re trying to play “Gotcha!” attorney, but because humans are complicated, guarded, impressio

There’s a moment, while discussing almost every threat or violence risk assessment, when the room quietly loses the plot. Someone says, “Can you just take a look at this person and tell us if it’s safe for them to come back?” And before you know it, the conversation has drifted to their teaching style, student evaluations, personality quirks, wardrobe, politics, childhood, and whether they should really be in this profession at all.   Meanwhile, the actual question that start

Online interviews for threat assessment are a little like doing heart surgery via webcam, while hoping the Wi-Fi doesn’t cut out. You’re trying to build rapport, read nonverbals, assess risk, and keep your own face from freezing in a mid-blink horror shot. It’s impressive we get anything done at all. But online threat assessment and BIT/CARE interviews don’t have to feel like a consolation prize for “real” in-person work. When we pay attention to the small stuff, like lightin

So, do you own a gun? If you’ve ever asked, “Do you have access to any firearms?” and gotten a tight smile, a quick “No,” and a sudden change of subject… congratulations, you’ve just met impression management. Firearm access is one of the most critical pieces of information in a threat assessment interview, and ironically, it’s also one of the easiest areas to shut down with a single clumsy question. People know guns are a hot topic. They know there can be consequences—legal,

If you spend any time in threat assessment or behavioral intervention work, you’ve probably had a moment where you ask a straightforward question, and instead of a straightforward answer, the person across from you says something like: “I feel like I’m tied to the tracks and the train’s already coming.” “I’m just this rusted signpost no one reads anymore.” “It’s like there’s an earthquake and I’m the only one taking it seriously.”   Or my personal favorite: “ The administrati

Great interviews live in the balance between planning and responsiveness. You need structure, case history, starting questions, role assignments, and safety protocols. But those first few minutes with a subject can upend even the best plan. A powerhouse opening with a clear script and crisp goals loses value if the first interaction reveals high defensiveness, evasiveness, or disorganized, manic speech. Adaptive threat assessment interviewing is an exercise in rapid alignment

Think of the interview like a road with turnoffs. Most of the time, you’re cruising the main route: open prompts, reflective summaries, steady pace. But every so often, you hit a fork where the person goes quiet, dodges, or bristles. That’s your cue to change lanes, not floor it. Columbo’s “just one more thing…” works on TV because it’s timed and tailored. He reads the room, notices what didn’t land, and asks the right next question, not the loudest one. Threat work needs the

Rapport rupture in a threat assessment interview usually doesn’t arrive with a dramatic bang. It slips in as a pause that lasts a beat too long, an answer that shrinks to one syllable, a jaw that tightens when you reference policy or police. You’re halfway through your script before you realize you’ve stopped collecting reliable information and started collecting resistance. The problem may have little to do with you personally; it’s often the interviewee’s history with autho