Post research and statistically evidence of increasing number of male sex offenders across Australia both indigenous and non-indigenous population clearly indicate the need for rehabilitation programmes for male sex offenders. This article provides a brief overview of current and emerging approaches in order to treatment of male sex offenders. Research supports the relevant application for an approach in which treatment is effective on the risk of recidivism exposed by male offenders. Research further demonstrate CBT is the most effective treatment method particularly targeting specific risk factors in order to reduce the recidivism of male sex offenders.
XX method explain
There are several male sexual rehabilitation programmes across Australia (see appendix XXX). Sex offender programs are a well-established feature of the correctional rehabilitation landscape in Australia (Haseltine, Sarre & Day, 2011). Programs for adult offenders operate in correctional centres in every state and territory (Macgregor, 2008; Heseltine et al., 2011). Still, the sexual offenders ratio indicates rising up and it rings a bell although rehabilitation occur in both prison and community. It is also important to raise
…show more content…
Next, effectiveness of perpetrator interventions, ensure the definition and measurement of effectiveness accountability the views of different groups. There is also a need for further research to develop most excellent practical and evaluation principles and guidelines for interventions considering individual and group based specific programme components including links between programme completion and
This essay begins with the introduction of the Risk-Needs-Responsivitiy Model which was developed to assess offending and offer effective rehabilitation and treatment (Andrews & Bonta, 2007). The R-N-R model “remains the only empirically validated guide for criminal justice interventions that aim to help offenders” (Polashek, 2012, p.1) consisting of three principles which are associated with reductions in recidivism of up to 35% (Andrew & Bonta, 2010); risk, need and responsivity. Firstly, the risk principle predicts the offenders risk level of reoffending based on static and dynamic factors, and then matched to the degree of intervention needed. Secondly, the R-N-R targets individual’s criminogenic needs, in relation to dynamic factors. Lastly, the responsivity principle responds to specific responsivity e.g. individual needs and general responsivity; rehabilitation provided on evidence-based programming (Vitopoulous et al, 2012).
In the event that a prisoner (particularly a sex offender) does complete rehabilitation, he carries with him a stigma upon reentering society. People often fear living near a prior drug addict or convicted murderer and the sensational media hype surrounding released felons can ruin a newly released convict’s life before it beings. What with resident notifications, media scare tactics and general concern for safety, a sex offender’s ability to readapt into society is severely hindered (554). This warrants life-skills rehabilitation applied to him useless, as he will be unable to even attempt to make the right decision regarding further crime opportunities.
This is offered to provide an incentive for “good behaviour” and ultimately rehabilitation during a sentence. The granting and restriction of parole is outlined in the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), and allows those with sentences of more than three years to be released after they have served their minimum sentences. The encouragement of rehabilitation upholds the rights of the community and offender, as the offender’s rights are not undermined by through excessively restricting their freedoms and the reintroduction of the rehabilitated offender into society minimises the threat of reoffending. However, the reward of parole for some offenders has resulted in community dissatisfaction. The Age article “Adrian Bayley should not have been on parole” represents a social concern regarding the leniency of parole for violent sexual offenders. The release of the evidently non-rehabilitated offender resulted in a breach of parole and the sexual assault and murder of Jill Meagher, a 29 year old Melbournian woman. As a result of the injustice of the lenient decision and subsequent community retaliation, new parole laws were introduced in Victoria during 2014. This legislation is outlined in the Corrections Amendment (Parole) Act 2014, and the penalty for breaching parole includes up to three months jail and/or a $4200 fine. Thus, there is greater justice for the victim and especially the community through the discouragement of crime for offenders who may not be rehabilitated and are released on
Many resources go into the prevention and management of sex offenders. However, very few effective programs exist that decrease the likelihood of reoffending. Through the use of meta-analyses, Seto and Lalumiere (2010) evaluated multiple studies that examined sex offenders. Emphasis was put on etiological explanations in the hopes of identifying factors associated with sex offending. Seto and Lalumiere’s (2010) findings help in creating effective programs to decrease recidivism rates.
Vandiver, D. M., & Teske, R. (2006). Juvenile female and male sex offenders a comparison of offender, victim, and judicial processing characteristics. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50(2), 148-165.
There is much debate as to whether a sex offender should be released into the public, this debate stems from the idea that a sex offender cannot be treated and that they are a danger to the public as they are ‘purely evil’ (Burke, 2005), however there is much evidence that sex offenders can be treated and re-introduced into society as a productive member. Sex offender is a general term used to refer to any person who has been convicted of crimes involving sex, from rape and molestation to exhibitionism and pornography distribution. There are many theories which try to explain why people are sexual offenders, these theories along with treatments for sex offenders will be looked at to help explain why people sexually offend and to help evaluate whether sex offenders should be released.
Although they may be out of jail, they cannot be considered free. They are unable to make their own decisions: where they can work, where they can live, and how they can live their lives are all under control of the government. These people look the same as everyone else, but underneath the mask, lay a title they cannot shake. These people are sex offenders. A sex offender is defined as anyone who has committed a sexual crime. These crimes range from serious crimes, like rape, to minor offenses, such as urinating in public, or under age consensual sex. All sex offenders are placed on the registry and are required to follow a careful protocol. Registered sex offenders are paired with a Community Corrections Officer (CCO) who oversees and supervises the offender's actions. Many restrictions are placed on the offender, and although the laws can vary from state to state, there are some basic restrictions that apply to every offender. Some of these restrictions include: a sex offender cannot move without the permission and approval of their CCO, they can only live and work in certain areas, they cannot own any firearms, their personal computers are monitored and controlled by their CCO (many websites are blocked, including pornographic content), they are not allowed to take or consume any mind altering substances such as drugs or even alcohol, and they are required to get regular counseling (“Rules”). Currently there are 747,408 registered sex offenders in the United States. Some states such as Delaware and Oregon have a higher concentration of sex offenders (500 per 100,000) where as Pennsylvania has the lowest concentration of sex offenders (94 per 100,000) (“Sex Offender Statistics”). Due to the inefficiencies ...
3. Report of the Interagency Council on Sex Offender Treatment to the Senate Interim Committee on Health and Human Services and the Senate Committee on Criminal Justice, 1993
In today’s society, juveniles that commit a sexual assault have become the subject of society. It’s become a problem in the United States due to the rise of sexual offenses committed by juveniles. The general public attitude towards sex offenders appears to be highly negative (Valliant, Furac, & Antonowicz, 1994). The public reactions in the past years have shaped policy on legal approaches to managing sexual offenses. The policies have included severe sentencing laws, sex offender registry, and civil commitment as a sexually violent predator (Quinn, Forsyth, & Mullen-Quinn, 2004). This is despite recidivism data suggesting that a relatively small group of juvenile offenders commit repeat sexual assaults after a response to their sexual offending (Righthand &Welch, 2004).
In a study more than one half of all responding registrants reported having lost a friend as a result of public knowledge of their sexual offending. There is also evidence that family members of registered sex offenders experience persecution and threats when the information is public. Consequently, the offender might lose support from both friends and family, which further hinders their ability to rehabilitate into
In the United States there are 747,000 registered sex offenders. (Snyder) While most sex offenders are male, sometimes sex offenses are committed by female offenders. Sex Offenders who are released from incarceration are required to register in the sex offender registry. The sex offender registry is a system in various states designed to let government authorities keep track of the residence and activities of sex offenders, including those who have completed their criminal sentences. (Wikipedia) Even if the offender has done their time they are still required by law to register, making it hard for the offenders to leave their past and return to everyday life. My paper will make you ask yourself should all sex offenders be required to register or are they deserving of a new path.
Cognitive behavioral therapy is a promising outlook for the rehabilitation of sex offenders. The therapy is directed towards reconditioning the way a sex offender thinks and operates daily. This makes it possible for offender to apply learned treatment methods and tools to their every day life and more effectively recognize maladaptive thought patterns, which could lead to reoffending. The downside to the therapy is that it relies heavily on the offender to want to change; however, pre-screening into the program helps to ensure only those who want change may participate. In the future there may be more of a shift to the Good Lives Model, which focuses even more on self-worth and self-actualization to make the offender feel important and return to the community as a productive citizen.
Yates, P. M. (2005). Pathways to treatment of sexual offenders: Rethinking intervention. Forum on Corrections Research, 17, 1-9.
Sex offenders have been a serious problem for our legal system at all levels, not to mention those who have been their victims. There are 43,000 inmates in prison for sexual offenses while each year in this country over 510,000 children are sexually assaulted(Oakes 99). The latter statistic, in its context, does not convey the severity of the situation. Each year 510,000 children have their childhood's destroyed, possibly on more than one occasion, and are faced with dealing with the assault for the rest of their lives. Sadly, many of those assaults are perpetrated by people who have already been through the correctional system only to victimize again. Sex offenders, as a class of criminals, are nine times more likely to repeat their crimes(Oakes 99). This presents a
The sex offender registry has been a topic of debates and formal studies since the Minnesota Sex Offender Registration Act was first passed in 1991 (Stevens, n.d.). Sex offenders across the country are being harassed and abused on a daily basis for the crimes they committed, were convicted for, and served their punishment for. Due to the sex offender registry giving out names, pictures, addresses, phone, numbers, vehicle information, as well as other personal information these sex offenders are being targeted in the homes and work places. Their families are also victims of abuse. In addition, the use of the sex offender registry has created blind spots in parents. They may