West Virginia Sex Offender Study

November 2001 West Virginia:

Executive Summary:

Over the next ten years, an estimated 147 sex offenders will be released from West Virginia’s state prisons each year, over 1 inmate every 3 days. Although paroled sexual offenders can receive psychological treatment and be monitored and assisted by parole officers, the percent of sex offenders released on parole has been lower than any other offender group.1 As a result of increased maximum sentences for incest and sexual assault that took effect July 1, 1991, more sex offenders are expected to be paroled rather than discharged. Previously, the sentences were 5-10 years for incest, 15-25 for 1st degree sexual assault, and 10-20 for 2nd degree sexual assault.2 Under these sentences, inmates could be eligible for discharge before parole eligibility.3 Given that released sex offenders lose little of their good time4, sex offenders sentenced before these changes occurred are likely to discharge their sentence, rather than be released on parole. One sex offense, when a parent, guardian, or custodian allows sexual abuse to be inflicted upon a child who is less than 16 years of age (§61-8D-5a), retains a 10-20 year sentence. Those sentenced for this crime could be eligible for discharge prior to parole eligibility.


Nearly 40% of sex offenders currently on probation, on parole, or in prison admitted that they had previously committed a felony sex offense as an adult and reported that they had no relationship to the criminal justice system at the time of their current sex offense. This suggests that more can be done to prevent re-offending by known felony sex offenders. Additional research that tracks a cohort of released sex offenders should be conducted to determine the recidivism rate of released sex offenders.

This report summarizes sex offenses reported to law enforcement, sex offenders in criminal justice custody or supervision, admissions to and releases from correctional facilities, registered sex offenders, and sex offender treatment providers.

For the remainder of this report: by West Virginia Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety

Informative Presentation by Nicole Pittman on Adam Walsh Act and Juveniles

Nicole Pittman - SORNA

Uploaded by Jeff-Sherr on WiZiQ Tutorials

WASHINGTON STATE SEX OFFENDER TREATMENT PROVIDERS SURVEY 2009

June 2009:

Background and Methodology

At the request of Washingtonfs Sex Offender Policy Board, the Social and Economic Sciences Research Center, Puget Sound Division, Washington State University (SESRC) conducted a survey of the sex offender treatment providers (SOTP) licensed by the State of Washington to assist sex offenders transitioning into Washington communities.

Working with the Benchmarks Committee and SOPB staff, SESRC prepared a protocol of questions regarding the SOTPfs observations of sex offender transition. The survey investigated issues of housing, employment, and community support for the offender, as well as the operation of the transition gsystem.This included the SOTPfs assessment of the coordination of services, management of supporting records, and other issues identified as salient by "The Comprehensive Protocol: A Systemwide Review of Adult and Juvenile Ex Offender Management Strategies," prepared by the Center for Sex Offender Management.

Invitations to participate in the on]line survey were sent to treatment providers identified by the Washington State Department of Health, the Washington Association of Treatment Providers and the Sex Offender Policy Board. Eighty]five invitations were issued. Nine invitees responded that they did not find the survey appropriate. (Most were not treating adult male sex offenders, the subject of the survey.) Of the 72 remaining invitees, 26 completed surveys, a 36 percent response rate. The survey was completed during June 2009.

For the remainder of this paper: by KYRA KESTER, PH.D.

Sex Offender Research Paper

Recidivism Sex Offenders Research Paper

Sexting brochure for parents

December 2009:

"Sexting" is a cross between sex and texting. It is the act of sending sexually explicit messages or photos electronically, primarily between cell phones. "Sexting" is a relatively new practice among teenagers and with increasing frequency is bringing teens into the juvenile justice system.

A juvenile conviction for a sexual offense has serious consequences which include registering as a sex offender. Even if "Sexting" does not result in judicial system intervention, the impact can last a lifetime.

Colorado's Weld county District Attorney's office has created a brochure to help inform the public about the growing problems of teens and sexting. The brochure, "Sexting: Balancing the law, teens and technology" is available HERE.

Juveniles Who Commit Sex OffensesAgainst Minors

December 2009:

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) is committed to improving the justice system’s response to crimes against children. OJJDP recognizes that children are at increased risk for crime victimization. Not only are children the vic-tims of many of the same crimes that victimize adults, they are subject to other crimes, like child abuse and neglect, that are specific to childhood. The impact of these crimes on young victims can be devastating, and the violent or sexual victimization of chil-dren can often lead to an intergenerational cycle of violence and abuse. The purpose of OJJDP’s Crimes Against Children Series is to improve and expand the Nation’s efforts to better serve child victims by presenting the latest information about child victimization, including analyses of crime victimization statistics, studies of child victims and their spe-cial needs, and descriptions of programs and approaches that address these needs.

Although those who commit sex offenses against minors are often described as “pedophiles” or “predators” and thought of as adults, it is important to understand that a substantial portion of these offenses are committed by other minors who do not fit the image of such terms. Interest in youth who commit sexual offenses has grown in recent years, along with specialized treatment and management programs, but relatively little population-based epidemiological information about the characteristics of this group of
offend-ers1 and their offenses has been available. The National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) offers perspective on the characteristics of the juvenile sex offender population coming to the attention of law enforcement.

Key findings from this Bulletin include the following:

--Juveniles account for more than one-third (35.6 percent) of those known to police to have committed sex offenses against minors.

--Juveniles who commit sex offenses against other children are more likely than adult sex offenders to offend in groups and at schools and to have more male victims and younger victims.

--The number of youth coming to the attention of police for sex offenses increases sharply at age 12 and plateaus after age 14. Early adolescence is the peak age for offenses against younger children. Offenses against teenagers surge during mid to late adolescence, while offenses against victims under age 12 decline.

--A small number of juvenile offenders. 1 out of 8.are younger than age 12.

--Females constitute 7 percent of juveniles who commit sex offenses.

--Females are found more frequently among younger youth than older youth who commit sex offenses. This group's offenses involve more multiple-victim and multiple-perpetrator episodes, and they are more likely to have victims who are family members or males.

--Jurisdictions vary enormously in their concentration of reported juvenile sex offenders, far more so than they vary in their concentration of adult sex offenders.

For the remainder of this study: by David Finkelhor, Richard Ormrod, and Mark Chaffin

The Impact of Prison-Based Treatment on Sex Offender Recidivism

September 2009:

Using a retrospective quasi-experimental design, this study evaluates the effectiveness of prison-based treatment by examining recidivism outcomes among 2,040 sex offenders released from Minnesota prisons between 1990 and 2003 (average follow-up period of 9.3 years). To reduce observed selection bias, the authors used propensity score matching to create a comparison group of 1,020 untreated sex offenders who were not significantly different from the 1,020 treated offenders. In addition, intent-to-treat analyses and the Rosenbaum bounds method were used to test the sensitivity of the findings to treatment refuser and unobserved selection bias. Results from the Cox regression analyses revealed that participating in treatment significantly reduced the hazard ratio for rearrest by 27% for sexual recidivism, 18% for violent recidivism, and 12% for general recidivism. These findings are consistent with the growing body of research supporting the effectiveness of cognitive—behavioral treatment for sex offenders.

For the remainder of this study: by Grant Duwe, Minnesota Department of Corrections, St. Paul, AND Robin A. Goldman, Minnesota Department of Corrections, Lino Lakes

Sex Offender Treatment Programs

2002:

INTRODUCTION


Over the years, public fear of sex offenders has led to serious misconceptions regarding sex offender treatment. The atrocious acts carried out by some sex offenders are very hard for the public to understand, and present society with complex challenges. Society often finds it easier to turn a blind eye to the crime, lock up the offender and throw away the key than attempt to address the challenge appropriately. This lack of public understanding toward sex offenders has created the myth that sex offenders cannot be treated, and therefore should never be returned to the community. This paper is intended to dispel the myth of the untreatable sex offender, and provide conclusive evidence that sex offender treatment is not only possible but to a large extent is successful in reducing the recidivism of sex offenders. First, the sex offender population in Canada must be examined so that we know what we are dealing with.


SEX OFFENDER TREATMENT
Although many community members believe that sex offenders cannot be treated, an increasing amount of support has been collected that attests to the success that can be achieved by treating sex offenders. In fact, Correctional Service of Canada has continually been implementing more sex offender treatment programs since it began offering sex offender treatment in 1973. Capacity for sex offender treatment increased from 200 in 1987 to over 1700 in 1995 (Blanchette, 1996). In addition, Correctional Service of Canada has recently “expanded and refined its programs for sexual offenders so that it now funds numerous institutional programs” (Marshall, 2000). The massive implementation of sex offender treatment programs by Correctional Service of Canada has put Canada at the forefront of research and knowledge about sex offender treatment, and many of the Canadian sex offender treatment programs illustrate promising results. Therefore, many offenders are able to receive adequate treatment that allows them to lead crime free lives upon release.

The success of sex offender treatment is evident when recidivism rates among treated sex offenders are compared to untreated sex offenders. For example, in one meta-analysis of treatment studies, Hall (1995) found that across several studies, treated offenders sexually recidivated at a rate of 19%, whereas untreated offenders sexually recidivated at a rate of 27% (as cited in Blanchette, 1996). This suggests that, overall, the treatment provided was able to produce an 8% reduction in the recurrence of sexual recidivism for treated sex offenders. This is a very promising result when it is considered that sex offenders often victimize more than one person, and there are usually multiple victims before an offender is caught. Therefore, even a small reduction in recidivism for sex offenders translates into a large reduction in the amount of sexual offences that occur (Blanchette, 1996). Given research such as this and the experience of the John Howard Society in working with sex offenders, the rest of this paper rests on the presumption that sex offenders are treatable and treatment programs do work. Therefore, it is important to determine what specific kinds of treatment methods work best for which sex offenders, so that they may all be treated effectively.

In order to lay the foundation for an examination of sex offender treatment, it is essential to review the academic research that has recently emerged about sex offender treatment. In most research studies, the term “sex offender” encompasses a wide range of offenders who have different treatment needs and different recidivism rates. The two most common types of sex offenders referred to in the research are child molesters who mainly victimize children, and rapists who mainly victimize adult women. Both sex offender types can be further sub-divided based on their relationship to the victim, as either incest offenders (familial relation) or non-incest offenders (not familial relation). Overall, research has shown that sexual recidivism for all sex offenders is quite low, with rates of only 10% to 15% five years after release (Hanson & Bussiere, 1998). However, researchers have found that different groups of sex offenders recidivate at varying rates.

One study using data from 10 follow up studies of adult male sex offenders (a combined sample of 4,673 offenders) divided sex offenders into three separate groups that are believed to be distinctly different from each other and, thus, require different treatments (Hanson, 2001). These three groups consisted of incest child molesters who victimize related children, rapists who victimize adult women, and non-incest child molesters who victimize unrelated children.

For the remainder of this paper: by JOHN HOWARD SOCIETY OF ALBERTA

Why-Should Sex Offenders Be Treated

Why-Should Sex Offenders Be Treated -

Media distortion of the public's perception of recidivism and psychiatric rehabilitation

1991:

OBJECTIVE: The public's perception about the success or failure of psychiatric rehabilitation is frequently dependent upon information received through the news media. The primary objective of this report is to present an example of how the news media can distort public perceptions of treatment outcome.

METHOD: Verbatim quotations were presented from a television news series that alleged criminal recidivism by nine patients purportedly treated for various paraphilias at a large, community-based sexual disorders clinic. Brief case vignettes about each of the nine were then reviewed. This allowed for comparisons between what the media had alleged and what had actually occurred.

RESULTS: Two of the nine cases were relatively minor instances of recidivism involving no genital contact, although the media presentation had either failed to report this or had suggested otherwise. A third case of alleged recidivism involved a patient who was evaluated but never actually treated by the clinic in the community. A fourth patient had refused recommended clinic treatment upon prison release, and a fifth patient had been discharged from treatment at the clinic because of noncompliance years before recidivating. Other cases presented contained additional misleading information. None of the nine cases was reported by the media in the context of a balanced approach that included treatment successes. Clinic staff were constrained from responding publicly to correct certain misinformation because of patient-psychiatrist privilege.

CONCLUSIONS: Inaccurate media presentations about psychiatric rehabilitation that ignore treatment successes and focus only on alleged failures do a disservice to patients, mental health workers, and society at large.

For the remainder of this article: by FS Berlin and HM Malin, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205.

Media Distortion of the Public's Perception of Recidivism and Psychiatric Rehabilitation by Fred S. Berlin, M.D., Ph.D., and H. Martin Malin, Ph.D.,
American Journal of Psychiatry, 148, 15, pp. 1572-1576, 1991.