Psychopathology and violent extremism The need for primary data and assessment of countering violent extremism (CVE) policies

This dissertation aims to contribute to our knowledge on the prevalence and relevance of psychopathology in violent extremist samples. It also adds empirical research on whether gender and psychopathology correlate to higher levels of violent extremism in the case of radicalising individuals. The latter information is incorporated in research on Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) policies to better understand challenges concerning psychopathology. As a result, this work contributes to a more balanced approach to the goal of lowering the chances of mentally ill persons committing violent extremist actions without harming and stigmatising the vast majority of mentally ill non-violent individuals (with extremist ideas). The findings in this dissertation show that psychopathology cannot be used as a predictor for violent extremism in the general population. In very rare cases in the general population, mental disorders could be relevant for highly individualised pathways which, combined with other factors, may ultimately culminate in violent extremist activity. However, once mental disorders are present, their roles may vary or be irrelevant. Additionally, although individualised gender-responsive approaches seem needed, no evidence is found that psychopathological profiles of radicalising women differ from their male counterparts. Finally, this dissertation displays how heterogeneous psychopathological roles could complicate the CVE-assessment of (potential) mentally ill violent extremists. This complexity runs through practitioners’ challenges in CVE about case-inclusion, case-management and case-outflow. Some Dutch practitioners, for instance, express concerns on whether they can ethically include severely mentally ill individuals in CVE-programmes. These conclusions act as springboards for renewed consultation within CVE-approaches and research agendas.