Download Responding to Sexual Offending: Perceptions, Risk Management by K. McCartan PDF

Show description

For the most part, risk assessment has been exactly that – assessment of factors known to increase the risk to reoffend. Recently, some authors (Bonta and Wormith, 2007) have started to shift our focus away from being entirely risk-/need-based to consideration of how these factors should be approached going forward. In what they refer to as fourth-generation risk assessment processes, the key is to identify and highlight areas that should be of principal concern in a comprehensive case-management plan that may also take protective elements into consideration.

Although many questions remain, the most recent large-scale metaanalysis of sexual offender treatment outcome by Hanson et al. (2009) has certainly advanced the discussion. , those of risk, need, and responsivity, described above in this chapter) have the greatest effect on sexual reoffence. , Static-99R, Stable 2007, and Acute 2007) cannot be underestimated in helping professionals select empirically sound treatment goals and strategies. To this point in the history of the field, it has become clear that, all other things being equal: ● ● ● Treatment completers reoffend less than those who do not complete.

Does treatment work? , Groth, 1979), but much of their writings were anecdotal in nature. Nearly 30 years after Swanson’s article, Furby et al. (1989) published an analysis that became immediately influential. In it, they observed that there was no evidence at that time that the treatment programmes for people who had sexually abused were reducing recidivism. Many came to understand this review to mean that treatment efforts could not and would not work. In fact, the authors concluded that the methodological problems they found meant that it was impossible to draw any statistically meaningful findings (see also Hanson (2014) for a contemporary view).