Youth firesetting behavior is a largely misunderstood and a poorly documented segment of the fire problem in the United States. While youth-set fires draw the operational attention of uniformed fire service personnel (and sometimes law enforcement and juvenile justice), it is more often considered a criminal or delinquency issue, rather than a societal problem that requires a deliberate approach to addressing the underlying behavioral motivations driving the act.
Causes for Youth Firesetting
Interest in fire is an innate human characteristic. Most people, beginning in childhood, have some curiosity in fire – an interest encouraged by the many ritualistic and celebratory elements of our society that showcase fire: those with candles (weddings, birthdays, religious services, holidays, etc.); fireworks used to celebrate our nation’s birth or other major celebrations; or the beautiful fireplaces that are built into homes for comfort and aesthetics.
However, firesetting behavior, especially among youth, is not normal. It is a learned behavior that is most often driven by the surrounding environment. This environment is most often controlled by caregivers who fail to realize the power of their example of misusing fire. Lack of supervision and access to ignition devices (matches and lighters primarily) are common factors in youth-set fires, as are the lack of understanding of the power of fire and access to media misrepresentations of fire behavior.
Youth firesetting behavior is often driven by their needs. The needs can range from a lack of knowledge or understanding of appropriate fire use (often driven by caregiver example), to deep-seated pathology. Other motivations may be connected to physical health, mental health, and behavioral health. Only a thorough and comprehensive evaluation will determine what the youth needs in order to return to a safe and productive lifestyle.
Screening and Assessment Considerations
A variety of instruments are available to determine the depth of the fire involvement that youth experience and their risk level for repeating the behavior. Many of these are standard instruments used by the mental health community; however, general mental health assessments may not ask about fire at all, which limits the opportunity to put this behavior into a treatment plan.
Meanwhile, thefire service has had assessment/screening tools available since the mid 1970s. But due to their level of training (which is very different than that of mental health professionals), fire service specialists working with youth firesetting behaviors use a more basic tool that should not be confused with a mental health assessment. The fire service tools are intended to ask a variety of questions to gather responses from the youth and caregiver, and blend that information with the physical facts of the fire incident (whether provided by the caregiver, witnesses, or an official fire response report). Through this process, warning signs in behavior or responses are scored to help establish a disposition for the youth and their behavior.
Fire service tools characterize the disposition as “risk.” High risk categories require a referral to a mental health professional. Low risk categories may only require fire safety education. Risk categories used to be connected to chronological age, but this type of categorization may fail to take into account neurological or intellectual disabilities possessed by the youth. Care must also be taken when communicating these categorizations to professionals in other disciplines (mental health, juvenile justice, child welfare, law enforcement, burn treatment, etc.) in order to avoid a misinterpretation of the firesetting profile. It is important for mental health professionals to understand that fire service screenings are very different than complete mental health assessments.
It should be noted that all fire use, no matter how legitimate, carries risk. Many more fires are carelessly started by adults across the United States every year than by youth. With firesetting behavior, it can be more productive to focus on the needs of the youth:
- For example, a youth engaged in using a lighter, and has ignited household items such as candles or incense, may be imitating the behavior of a caregiver or sibling. Because it looks easy and negative consequences are few, the youth believes they can replicate the behavior safely. This may be inappropriate and indicates a need for education about appropriate fire use and fire science. Caregivers and siblings must be included in this education in order to effect a change. Therefore the “need” is education rather than the associated “risk” of the behavior.
In another example, a youth may be the subject of physical abuse. If they find that firesetting distracts the abuser or disrupts the family dynamic enough to cause the abuse to stop, they may continue to set fires as a result. In this case, the “need” is a safe environment away from the abuser. The “risk” might be high or low, depending on the course the situation takes but if the youth’s needs are met, the likelihood of the firesetting behavior abating are good. An associated need may be education and mental health support. A comprehensive intervention, including all the necessary disciplines, will best determine the list of the child’s needs and how they can best be met.
Intervention and Treatment Strategies
Youth firesetting behavior is not only a fire service problem; it is a community problem. An effective structured intervention program will need the support of all associated community services – including the fire service, law enforcement, mental health, juvenile justice, burn treatment, and child welfare (depending on the community, this list can be longer or shorter). Each discipline brings a different treatment strategy to the table and to avoid overlap, those services should be coordinated. (In some programs, for example, a case manager can play this coordination role.)
Open communication is important since youth can enter a system from any of the professional gateways. For example, a youth with a history of firesetting may be known by the fire department, but unless the question is asked of the youth/family, a mental health provider working with them may have no idea firesetting has occurred.
The point is, the collection of services and professional relationships that constitute a successful youth fire intervention program must be established prior to a youth entering the program in order to serve their needs with efficiency and effectiveness.
Additional information can be found on the YFIRES web site at www.YFIRES.com. This web site offers a comprehensive array of information on youth firesetting behavior and intervention. Many communities also have intervention programs, many of which are housed with the fire service. However, not all fire agencies provide this service. Youth firesetting intervention can only be provided by specialists trained on this specific issue; most fire service personnel do not receive this training.
Conclusion
Youth firesetting behavior is a complex, community-based challenge. Solutions are more likely to be successful when a structured intervention program has participation from all of the necessary professional disciplines. When working together, all of these disciplines can begin to exchange effective dialogue and communication about the needs of each youth/family. This can lead to a reduction in recidivist firesetting behavior and a safer community.
Don Porth is a fire and life safety consultant, having retired from 31 years in the uniformed fire service. He spent 27 years with Portland (OR) Fire & Rescue, specializing in youth firesetting behavior and public education/outreach. Other involvements include heading the non-profit “SOS FIRES: Youth Intervention Programs,” providing over one hundred trainings to professionals across the United States and Canada. He serves as a principal staff member for the Youth Firesetting Intervention Repository & Evaluation System (YFIRES), a national data and case management system specifically designed for youth firesetting intervention programming.
Jerrod Brown, MA, MS, MS, MS, is the Treatment Director for Pathways Counseling Center, Inc., which provides programs and services benefiting individuals impacted by mental illness and addictions. Jerrod is also the founder and CEO of the American Institute for the Advancement of Forensic Studies (AIAFS), and the Editor-in-Chief of Forensic Scholars Today (FST). He is in the dissertation phase of a doctorate degree program in psychology. Among other specialties, Jerrod is certified as a Youth Firesetter Prevention/Intervention Specialist.
Kathi Osmonson is Deputy State Fire Marshal for Minnesota, and coordinates the state’s Youth Fire Intervention Team (YFIT). YFIT partners with law enforcement, mental health, justice and social agencies to sustain a network of professionals who collaborate to provide intervention. Her career includes volunteer and career firefighting with specialties in fire prevention education and youth firesetting intervention. She is an adjunct instructor for the FEMA National Fire Academy and a stakeholder in YFIRES, and presents at national and international conferences.
