Treatment of Sex Offenders

More documents

Recommendations

Info

7 The Strengths of Treatment for Sexual Offending 171 In this chapter, we have argued that some aspects of current sexual offending programmes could be described as evidence informed, although few can be termed “evidence based”. The mixed findings for treatment effectiveness likely reflect a combination of poor quality studies, programme aims or techniques that lack internal coherence or consistency (e.g. a mixture of rehabilitative and punitive aims), weak adherence to the RNR model and the iatrogenic effect of hostile cultures outside the treatment environment. These issues vary in the extent to which they are in the control of treatment providers. The content of treatment programmes is obviously important but is not the only thing that determines whether a person convicted of a sexual offence is likely to desist from further offending. Our aim in this chapter was to consider what aspects of current or typical sexual offending programmes can be considered evidence based or, at a minimum, evidence informed. Our summary shows that it is possible to select appropriate targets for a treatment programme based on robust research. However, effective treatment methods and techniques have been less robustly established or, in some cases, not established at all. It is not possible to conclude that treatment programmes for people convicted of sexual offences constitute evidence-based practice, yet, but the jigsaw is being assembled. To ensure that sexual offending treatment is as strong as it can be, we must continue to research our practice, evaluate our efforts and be prepared to adjust our approach when evidence indicates this is necessary. References Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2006). The psychology of criminal conduct (4th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson. Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New Jersey: Matthew Bender. Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Hoge, R. D. (1990). Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17 , 19–52. Andrews, D. A., & Dowden, C. (2006). Risk principles of case classification in correctional treatment: A meta-analytic investigation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50 , 88–100. Aos, S., Miller, M., & Drake, E. (2006). Evidence-based adult corrections programs: What works and what does not . Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy. APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice. (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology. American Psychologist, 61 , 271–285. Barnett, G. D. (2011). What is grievance thinking and how can we measure this in sexual offenders? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 16 (1), 37–61. Barnett, G., Wakeling, H., & Howard, P. (2010). An examination of the predictive validity of the Risk Matrix 2000 in England and Wales. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 22 , 443–470. Beech, A. R., Bartels, R. M., & Dixon, L. (2013). Assessment and treatment of distorted schemas in sexual offenders. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 14 (1), 54–66. Beech, A., & Fordham, A. S. (1997). Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 9 , 219–237. Beech, A., & Harkins, L. (2012). DSM-IV paraphilia: Descriptions, demographics and treatment interventions. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, 17 , 527–539.
172 A.J. Carter and R.E. Mann Bickley, J. A., & Beech, A. R. (2003). Implications for treatment of sexual offenders of the Ward and Hudson model of relapse. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 15 (2), 121–134. Blagden, N., Winder, B., & Hames, C. (2014). “They treat us like human beings”—Experiencing a therapeutic sex offenders prison impact on prisoners and staff and implications for treatment. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology , 0306624X14553227. Bonta, J., Wallace-Capretta, S., & Rooney, R. (2000). A quasi-experimental evaluation of an intensive rehabilitation supervision program. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27 , 312–329. Borduin, C. M., Henggeler, S. W., Blaske, D. M., & Stein, R. J. (1990). Multisystemic treatment of adolescent sexual offenders. International Journal, 996 (3), 1. Bumby, K. M. (1996). Assessing the cognitive distortions of child molesters and rapists: Development and validation of the MOLEST and RAPE scales. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 8 (1), 37–54. Carter, A. J. (2014). Sexual offending treatment programs: The importance of evidence-informed practice. In K. McCartan (Ed.), Responding to sexual offending: Perceptions, risk management and public protection (pp. 111–127). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Carter, A. J., & Mann, R. E. (in press). Organising principles for an integrated model of change for the treatment of sexual offending. In Beech, A. R., & Ward, T. (Eds.). The Wiley Blackwell Handbook on assessment, treatment and theories of sexual offending (Vol. 1) . Chichester: Wiley. Crighton, D., & Towl, G. (2007). Experimental interventions with sex offenders: A brief review of their efficacy. Evidence-Based Mental Health, 10 , 35–37. Dennis, J. A., Khan, O., Ferriter, M., Huband, N., Powney, M. J., & Duggan, C. (2012). Psychological interventions for adults who have sexually offended or are at risk of offending. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews , 12 , CD007507 Earls, C. M., & Castonguay, L. G. (1989). The evaluation of olfactory aversion for a bisexual pedophile with a single case study multiple baseline design. Behaviour Therapy, 20 , 137–146. Eccleston, L., & Owen, K. (2007). Cognitive treatment “Just for Rapists”: Recent developments. In T. A. Gannon, T. Ward, A. R. Beech, & D. Fisher (Eds.), Aggressive offenders’ cognition: Theory, research, and practice (p. 135). Oxford: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Hall, G. C. (1995). Sexual offender recidivism revisited: A meta-analysis of recent treatment studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63 (5), 805–809. Hanson, R. K., Bourgon, G., Helmus, L., & Hodgson, S. (2009). The principles of effective correctional treatment also apply to sexual offenders; A meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36 , 865–891. Hanson, R. K., & Bussière, M. T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sex offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66 , 348–362. Hanson, R. K., & Harris, A. J. R. (2000). Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sexual offense recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27 , 6–35. Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73 , 1154–1163. Helmus, L., Hanson, R. K., Babchishim, K. M., & Mann, R. E. (2013). Attitudes supportive of sexual offending predict recidivism: A meta-analysis. Trauma Violence Abuse, 14 , 34–53. Helmus, L., Hanson, R. K., Thornton, D., Babchishin, K., & Harris, A. (2012). Absolute recidivism rates predicted by Static-99R and Static 2002R sex offender risk assessment tools vary across samples: A meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39 , 1148–1171. Ho, D. K., & Ross, C. C. (2012). Cognitive behaviour therapy for sex offenders: Too good to be true? Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 22 , 1–6. Kazdin, A. E. (2008). Evidence-based treatment and practice: New opportunities to bridge clinical research and practice, enhance the knowledge base, and improve patient care. American Psychologist, 63 (3), 146. Långström, N., Enebrink, P., Laurén, E.-M., Lindblom, J., Werkö, S., & Hanson, R. K. (2013). Preventing sexual violence against children: Systematic review of medical and psychological interventions. BMJ, 347 , f4630. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f4630 . Laws, D. R. (1989). Relapse prevention with sex offenders . New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Page 1 and 2:
D. Richard Laws · William O'Donohu
Page 4 and 5:
D. Richard Laws • William O’Don
Page 6 and 7:
Pref ace It can be wise for a field
Page 8 and 9:
Contents 1 Problems in the Classifi
Page 10 and 11:
Contributors Adam J. Carter , Ph.D.
Page 12 and 13:
Chapter 1 Problems in the Classific
Page 14 and 15:
1 Problems in the Classification an
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
20 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger O
Page 32 and 33:
Table 2.1 Glueck and Glueck’s ( 1
Page 34 and 35:
24 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger w
Page 36 and 37:
26 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger L
Page 38 and 39:
28 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger T
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
32 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger b
Page 44 and 45:
34 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger (
Page 46 and 47:
36 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger r
Page 48 and 49:
38 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger v
Page 50 and 51:
40 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger C
Page 52 and 53:
42 L.A. Craig and M. Rettenberger H
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
46 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. at reducin
Page 58 and 59:
48 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. Certain pa
Page 60 and 61:
50 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. these cons
Page 62 and 63:
52 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. to other m
Page 64 and 65:
54 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. Developing
Page 66 and 67:
56 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. ( d = 0.67
Page 68 and 69:
58 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. justified
Page 70 and 71:
60 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. (any convi
Page 72 and 73:
62 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. press ) fo
Page 74 and 75:
64 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. Importantl
Page 76 and 77:
66 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. United Sta
Page 78 and 79:
68 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. offenders
Page 80 and 81:
70 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. A good def
Page 82 and 83:
72 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. Conclusion
Page 84 and 85:
74 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. Babchishin
Page 86 and 87:
76 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. Grove, W.
Page 88 and 89:
78 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. Hilton, N.
Page 90 and 91:
80 R.J.B. Lehmann et al. Pedneault,
Page 92 and 93:
Chapter 4 Risk Formulation: The New
Page 94 and 95:
4 Risk Formulation: The New Frontie
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
108 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner Conv
Page 118 and 119:
110 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner Circ
Page 120 and 121:
112 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner Visu
Page 122 and 123:
114 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner gyne
Page 124 and 125:
116 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner View
Page 126 and 127:
118 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner comp
Page 128 and 129: 120 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner stim
Page 130 and 131: 122 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner sign
Page 132 and 133: 124 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner In t
Page 134 and 135: 126 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner sexu
Page 136 and 137: 128 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner Babc
Page 138 and 139: 130 R.J. Wilson and M.H. Miner King
Page 140 and 141: Chapter 6 Polygraph Testing of Sex
Page 142 and 143: 6 Polygraph Testing of Sex Offender
Page 164 and 165: Chapter 7 The Strengths of Treatmen
Page 166 and 167: 7 The Strengths of Treatment for Se
Page 182 and 183: Chapter 8 Responsivity Dynamic Risk
Page 184 and 185: 8 Responsivity Dynamic Risk Factors
Page 198 and 199: Chapter 9 Early Detection and Inter
Page 200 and 201: 9 Early Detection and Intervention
Page 228 and 229:
9 Early Detection and Intervention
Page 230 and 231:
Chapter 10 Community Control of Sex
Page 232 and 233:
10 Community Control of Sex Offende
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
244 K.N. Daly SVP laws were passed
Page 252 and 253:
246 K.N. Daly 750. 338 b. The condu
Page 254 and 255:
248 K.N. Daly had largely been a re
Page 256 and 257:
250 K.N. Daly By contrast successfu
Page 258 and 259:
252 K.N. Daly In reaching his concu
Page 260 and 261:
254 K.N. Daly with no accompanying
Page 262 and 263:
256 K.N. Daly legal significance of
Page 264 and 265:
258 K.N. Daly law which has caused
Page 266 and 267:
Chapter 12 The Shortcomings of Sexu
Page 268 and 269:
12 The Shortcomings of Sexual Offen
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
282 P. Lussier practitioners have r
Page 288 and 289:
284 P. Lussier refers to someone vo
Page 290 and 291:
286 P. Lussier Morton, & Harris, 20
Page 292 and 293:
288 P. Lussier The authors compared
Page 294 and 295:
290 P. Lussier relatively stable ch
Page 296 and 297:
292 P. Lussier Offending Trajectori
Page 298 and 299:
294 P. Lussier impact or a limited
Page 300 and 301:
296 P. Lussier especially those han
Page 302 and 303:
298 P. Lussier the role of social f
Page 304 and 305:
300 P. Lussier Mulvey, 2009 ). In f
Page 306 and 307:
302 P. Lussier opportunities and re
Page 308 and 309:
304 P. Lussier Peer Influence While
Page 310 and 311:
306 P. Lussier of offending. For ex
Page 312 and 313:
308 P. Lussier Aging, self-identity
Page 314 and 315:
310 P. Lussier & Rice, 2007 ; Lussi
Page 316 and 317:
312 P. Lussier Individual and Socia
Page 318 and 319:
314 P. Lussier als subject to incre
Page 320 and 321:
316 P. Lussier opportunities extent
Page 322 and 323:
318 P. Lussier Corrado, R. R., Cohe
Page 324 and 325:
320 P. Lussier Lussier, P., & Blokl
Page 326 and 327:
322 P. Lussier Stouthamer-Loeber, M
Page 328 and 329:
324 J. Tabachnick et al. community
Page 330 and 331:
326 J. Tabachnick et al. Fig. 14.1
Page 332 and 333:
328 J. Tabachnick et al. The Need f
Page 334 and 335:
330 J. Tabachnick et al. The CDC de
Page 336 and 337:
332 J. Tabachnick et al. Practical
Page 338 and 339:
334 J. Tabachnick et al. (e.g., tru
Page 340 and 341:
336 J. Tabachnick et al. Unfortunat
Page 342 and 343:
338 J. Tabachnick et al. Banyard, V
Page 344 and 345:
340 J. Tabachnick et al. Humphries,
Page 346 and 347:
342 J. Tabachnick et al. Tharp, A.
Page 348 and 349:
344 Index Adolescent sexually abusi
Page 350 and 351:
346 Index Offense-supportive attitu
Page 352:
348 Index Structured assessment of
show all

Treatment of Sex Offenders

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?