Evaluating Sex Offender Programs - Research Paper Example

 Sex offender program Introduction Sex offenders are individuals who confess to or have been convicted of carrying out a sex crime such as rape and child molestation. In the 1990s, many states in USA embraced strict tracking and residence laws in order to protect the society especially children from sex offenders (Chapman, 2010). Incarceration within penal institutions never deters sexually violent predators or even the proliferation of sexual violence because years of research show various issues that punishment suppresses like deviant behaviour instead of eradicating it. For several decades, a lot of studies have shown relevant information with regard to assessing, treating and containing sex offenders which eventually enhances public safety. Therefore, there has been progress in understanding the features of effective sex offender programs, whose purpose is modifying both cognitive distortions as well as the deviant sexual behaviours in order to decrease the likelihood of re-offending. According to Craig et al (2003), cognitive-behavioural treatment emerges as the main form of sex offender treatment aimed at deviant arousal, increasing suitable sexual desires, changing distorted thinking as well as improving interpersonal coping skills. A study by Craig et al (2003) indicates that various studies carried since 1995 demonstrated positive effects and by use of methodological principals established effective ways of decreasing sexual reoffending. The scholars in this study contend that even though sex offender programs appear to decrease sex offense recidivism, it remains unclear if it is specific to certain forms of sex offenders that can in turn be limited to certain modalities of treatment. Treatment and rehabilitation of offenders is an essential component of correction; however, issues arise because research on sex offender treatment is sparse and usually employs small samples of undifferentiated groups of sex offenders. Therefore, studies against sex offender programs claim that studies on effectiveness of the programs to be unreliable because most of the offenders used in the study samples are not categorised. Moreover, measures of recidivism used in determining a program’s effectiveness may not be useful since many sex offences go undetected (MacKenzie et al, 2006). According to MacKenzie et al, (2006), systematic review of studies on sex offender programs resulted in prison and non-prison-based programs and the studies used a measure of recidivism to assess effectiveness. The findings showed that non-prison-based programs that employ cognitive-behavioural model were to certain extend effective in decreasing recidivism compared to prison-based programs. Nevertheless, the study could not examine the influence of programs on specific offenders because of the small sample of rapists as well as the failure of researches to examine influences of treatment on various forms of offenders. However, regardless of the deficiency of specific researches on the forms of offenders, the overall findings show that sex offender programs decrease recidivism for sex offenders with cognitive behavioural programs being the most effective ones (MacKenzie et al, 2006). Aims and effectiveness of the program The main aim of sex offender programs involves the protection and safety of the society and usually involves evaluating a state’s power in managing and imposing criminal penalties in order to force the offender to live a fulfilling life, especially with the understanding that criminal justice system rarely possess enough resources to achieve this. Therefore, to achieve a fulfilling life for the offenders, non-coercive agencies from the field of health, education, mental health and welfare devote their skills and resources in preventing the occurrence of sex offences. In Texas, specialized programs enhance successful integration of offenders through effective programming, procedures, utilization of both contracted and non-contracted vendors as well as community resources (Texas Department of Criminal Justice, n.d). Various studies on sex offender programs offer evidence that suggests that the programs used are effective because evaluations of different therapeutic approaches indicate that cognitive-behavioural treatment holds the promise of decreasing sex offender recidivism. Cognitive and behavioural treatment provides a group setting that aim at dealing with the cognitive distortions, deviant sexual preferences and lack of victim empathy in the sex offender. Studies show that sex offenders under rehabilitation programs tend to have increase percentage of being either dropped from or even expelled from the program. Although there has been little work in determining the ability of laws to protect the public, sex offender laws like community notification and registries are popular strategies useful in managing sex offenders. For instance, Texas legislature embraced laws that require adult as well as juvenile sex offenders to register with their enforcement agencies when condemned of sex offenses. This registration of sex offenders as well as the notification laws aims at offering information regarding sex offenders to the public in order to promote safety in community and help law enforcement when investigating sex offenses (Febalo, 1998). Moreover, sex offenders in El Paso Texas face additional restrictions if they are on probation for sex offense involving a child that make sure that the offenders do not possess anything in their homes capable of enticing children. Sex offender programs require comprehensive and demanding interventions that can go beyond the imposed punishment. Instead of avoiding risks, programs because of moral underpinning necessitate offenders to realize their life-goals, develop a plan of achieving them and behave in a consistent manner as well as show virtues like prudence to indicate they are influenced by right motives. Punishment for offender’s own good can be justified by paternalistic consideration although the therapists have to be wary of ethical pitfalls like coercively inflicting their attitudes and values on the offender. It has been shown through various studies that less coercive programs for sex offenders are essential; however, a more rewarding way of life for an offender does not guarantee that the offender will desist from reoffending (Harrison, & Rainey, 2013). Studies indicate that cognitive distortions can be influenced by treatment interventions and recent studies show that even within the smallest samples, recidivism in treated sex offenders is low compared to recidivism rate in untreated sex offenders. The studies suggest current treatments decrease recidivism through the commonly used cognitive behavioural model that is founded on the belief that an individual’s attitude can initiate and even maintain sexually abusive behaviour. The behavioural treatment model endeavours to dismantle, challenge and restructure cognitive distortions within sex offenders as well as their deviant thinking that enhances sexual offenses. Studies on this model show sex offenders following this model show reduced distortions in the sex offenders. As well, assessment of pro-offending attitudes before and after the treatment programs found a decrease in cognitive distortion, which is also associated with decreased rate of reoffending (Jung & Gulayets, 2011). Deficit in empathy is noted as an element of sex offenders; however, study on sex offender treatment programs report that many of the programs incorporate empathy as a component of training in order to enhance the understanding of the harm offenders inflict in their victims. Studies show that sex offender treatment programs can influence the offender’s level of empathy since there are significant improvements with regard to empathetic concern for victims following a treatment program. Since sex offender treatments usually concentrate on increased understanding of events that lead to sexual offence, it is expected that offenders accept responsibility for their offence after the treatment. Denying elements of sexual offence by the offender associated with increased risk of reoffending; although the claim is often disputed. Nevertheless, studies show that sex offenders who have undergone treatment programs tend to take more responsibility for their action compared to untreated men (Jung & Gulayets, 2011). It has been argues that sex offender treatment improves the offender’s ability to internalize events; which enable them to be more apt in perceiving events as a result of their behaviour. The significant tenet of sex offender programs involves enhancing their understanding of the influence of one’s behaviour toward others. The goal of the specialised programs to sex offenders involves offering a system that addresses resolution of sex offense, responsibility of an offender and improvement of safety within the community as well as protecting the victims. The approach promotes best practices within sex offense and correctly resolving the case while addressing the victim, offender and community. Among all the US states that are civilly managing their committed sexual offenders, Texas is the only state that does not secure offenders within a secure facility. The Texas civil commitment to sex offenders results in mandated outpatient treatment and supervision within the community instead of being within an inpatient facility. Prison-based sex offender program face many challenges beyond those of developing and delivering quality program in a community-based setting (Chapman, 2010). Although community-based sex offender programs offer a better way of dealing with sex offenders who show the desire to change and be integrated into the society, the approach like in the case of Texas has special problems. One of the challenges facing community-based programs for sex offenders is that many dangerous offenders reside in neighbourhoods instead of institutions. While there is debate regarding the authenticity of community notifications in lessening the risk, clinics have to demonstrate their commitment to safety and some of the ways are experimental, which raises concern for community-based sex offender programs. Moreover, opponents of community-based sex offender programs point out that the community knows offenders not only by sense of personal familiarity but also by their single group of deeds. Moreover, neighbours as well as families of potential victims remain apprehensive to the offenders living within their living proximity; even though, friends and family members of the offenders are comfortable. As well, various issues result from within the community with regard to the reactions of the outpatient program because community notifications engender heated controversy both in legal and treatment communities. With regard to adolescent offenders, critics of sex offender programs point out researchers have been unable to validate a model capable of explaining development of adolescent sexual deviance. This results from the fact that most of the research on sex offenders focus on adults; in addition, studies on medical interventions in adults indicate mixed results. Moreover, studies on psychosocial interventions in adult offenders also offer mixed results with some studies showing positive results in behavioural treatments. For treatment of sex offenders to be effective in decreasing recidivism, the providers of the treatment have to assess the risks and needs of the offenders in an accurate way (Chapman, 2010). Besides, studies show that inappropriate matching of risks and needs can increase recidivism within offenders. Opponents of sex offender programs point out behavioural models of treatment are limited in their scope because they concentrate on single elements regarding deviant behaviour. Critics of public notification as well as the listing of information of registered sex offenders point out various issues because not all states are consistent with the information posted. Some states post all registered sex offenders while other states list offenders regarded to be a high risk creating a situation in some states where an individual registered as a sex offenders becomes identified as such by the public. Moreover, sex offender registration occasionally results in unintended consequences because there are incidences of violence recorded after sex offenders addresses are listed on the web site. Most programs for adolescent sex offenders focus on preventing further offenses instead of primary prevention; moreover, many programs currently are limited to yet unproven focus on cognitive strategies that entail identification and replacement of thinking errors. As well, programs involve linkage of events, feelings, thoughts and conduct that result in sexual misconduct. Young offenders are taught to replace inappropriate sexual fantasies with consensual sex between peers by encouraging them to feel good about being moral. Cognitive-behavioural programs for treating sex offenders offer encouragement for continued application as well as the development of such programs (D'Emilio & Foster, 2013). Regardless of the critic regarding Sex offender programs, these programs are offered by the designated institutions in order to assist effective management of the population of sex offenders y offering services that decrease the population’s risk of re-offense . Goal of sex offender programs is to reduce the desire to put sex offenders in protective custody while creating a climate conducive for voluntary participation in treatment and in achieving this goal; the programs maintain a significant proportion of sex offenders within the population. The programs offer risk management services in order to decrease the possibility of sex offenders within their care engage in future activities that are sexually offensive. The programs include various components that in their activities in order to achieve their goal of managing risk and the components include evaluation services, sex offender treatment program as well as specialised correctional management. Residential sex offender treatment program is a high-intensity program that targets high-risk sexual offenders being a unit-based program with cognitive-behavioural emphasis. Residential sex offender programs allow implementation of modified therapeutic community and boasts of being a proven and effective model of decreasing recidivism. Modified therapeutic community within prison setting emphasis pro-social values as well as behaviours required within the outside community. All residential sex offender programs conduct regular community meetings in order to ensure maximum participation while decreasing the effect of institution operations. Community meetings motivate participants to embrace positive attitude at the same time reinforcing program concepts as well as skills. The meetings are usually facilitated and conducted by participants within the program under the guidance of treatment staff that supervise planning and scheduling of community meetings (Samuels, 2013). Moreover, follow-up programs like psychotherapy are maintained in order to ensure the continuation of the positive change within the sex offenders and to ensure that the offenders continually participate in pro-social skills. Effectiveness of the various interventions in sex offenders is evaluated in reducing recidivism in order to control the offenders and prevent victimization. In the interventions regarding criminal offenders, there is growing research that suggests that cognitive-behavioural approach has considerable effect. The approach incorporates comprehensive and structured approach that bases on sexual learning theory by the use of cognitive reformation methods as well as behavioural techniques. Behavioural methods in this approach primarily focus on decreasing arousal while at the same time increasing pro-social skills. Programs that are effective in this population include programs that offer skill-based training, model pro-social behaviour, attitudes, and supervised community component (Samuels, 2013). The goal of incarcerating a sex offender involves both punishing the offenders as well as protecting the society; however, for sex offender, punishment alone often is unproductive and it even increases their pathology. Studies reveal that incarceration leaves sex offenders with fantasies and more deviant and treatment specialists discover that such fantasies directly affect sex offender’s actions upon release evident in their high rate of recidivism. Research indicates that sex offenders denied treatment programs have 50% to 85% chance of reoffending; however, the odds can be decreased significantly through broad and intensive therapy. Estimates offered by current research show that only a 15% chance of reoffending and shows that cost effectiveness of sex offender treatment program saves the taxpayers money (United States, 1998). A Vermont study regarding the cost effectiveness of sex offender treatment shows that for each offender, treatment programs cost one-fifth the cost of prosecuting another sex crime. The programs that target sex offender can pay for themselves if they can prevent one in every five offenders from reoffending; however, the cost of victimization alone seems to justify treatment. In responding to sexual victimization, the desire to treat sex offenders, Texas has implemented comprehensive sex offender program that aims ate treating the offenders by using experienced clinicians in sex offender treatment (Samuels, 2013). Through intensive residential treatment, therapists can help sex offenders through phase-based system that aims at changing arousal patterns, prevention of relapse and enhancing victim empathy. After dealing with the deviant sexual arousal patterns, fallacies as well as irresponsibility attitudes that relate to sexual activity follow within a group setting. The group psychotherapy approach is less expensive and more effective in recognizing and dealing with participant denial and evasion of responsibility. Moreover, since many offenders lack social skills, groups within residential treatment are designed to be avenues through which the offenders can learn skills necessary for living responsibly in the community. Groups aim at the victimization issues, learning to assert their rights without being aggressive, relaxation techniques, obtaining a realistic view of the world and covert conditioning that help deal with the disgusting and deviant sexual acts. Effectiveness of the programs that target sex offenders is shown by their conceptualization, assimilation and application of information in accordance with the desired outcomes. After undergoing a rehabilitation program, sex offenders show a high level of victim empathy, identify and recognize their deviancy, identify relapse conditions and inhibiting relapse, understand the concept of honesty with themselves and others and develop a plan for successful navigation through life. Parole monitoring is an essential part of the sex offender programs in monitoring an ongoing outpatient treatment by incorporating a strong parole element. Sex offenders regardless of whether they are/not undergoing intensive residential treatment, the offenders are given the opportunity to continue treatment in parole. The trend toward increased treatment programs and long-term residential treatment has occurred even though findings show that community-based treatment like those embraced in Texas are more effective compared to residential treatment (United States, 1998). Conclusion Various issues have to be taken into account when evaluating effectiveness of sex offender programs because the different programs have their strengths and weakness. Opinion with regard to the extent in which methodological flaws should be allowed differ because other aspects have to be incorporated like attention of the sex offender to treatment, inclusion of refusers and drop-outs, the form of outcome examined and the acceptable period of follow-up. Nevertheless, both optimists and sceptics generally agree that excellent evaluations for sex offender programs incorporate both treated and comparison groups that are usually compared in terms of their risk. Sex offender treatment effectiveness has promoted its transition from mental hospitals that formally housed the initial sex offender programs to the development of programs that work in opened community-based programs. The promise of the programs has witnessed a growing number of community-based and residential programs that incorporate therapists in rehabilitating sex offenders while ensuring the safety of the community. However, critics point out those programs targeting sex offenders to be not conclusive in their findings; however, there are indications that the programs offer a degree of effectiveness in rehabilitating the offenders. References Chapman, R. (2010). Culture wars: An encyclopedia of issues, viewpoints, and voices. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe. Craig, L. A., Browne, K. D., & Stringer, I. (2003). Treatment and sexual offense recidivism. Trauma, violence, & abuse, 4 (1), 70-89. D'Emilio, J., & Foster, T. A. (2013). Documenting Intimate matters: Primary sources for a history of sexuality in America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Febalo T. (1998). The State of Texas: Sex Offender Registration and notification Laws: Overview. Retrieved 28 January 2014 from http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/Public_Safety_Criminal_Justice/Reports/SexOffender.pdf Harrison, K., & Rainey, B. (2013). The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of legal and ethical aspects of sex offender treatment and management. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons. Jung, S., & Gulayets, M. (2011). Using clinical variables to evaluate treatment effectiveness in programmes for sexual offenders. Journal Of Sexual Aggression, 17(2), 166-180. doi:10.1080/13552601003802238 MacKenzie, D. L., O'Neill, L., Povitsky, W., & Acevedo, S. (2006). Different Crimes, Different Criminals: Understanding, Treating and Preventing Criminal Behavior. Burlington: Elsevier Science. Samuels C. E. (2013). Sex Offender Programs. US Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons. Retrieved 29 January 2014 from http://www.bop.gov/policy/progstat/5324_010.pdf Texas Department of Criminal Justice. (n.d). Parole Division. Retrieved 28 January 2014 from http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/divisions./parole/parole_specialized_programs.html United States. (1998). Programs in correctional settings: Innovative state and local programs. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance. Read More