Here you will find a variety of interesting and pertinent information from around the psychology world. Each of these blogs has specifically been chosen for the PsychoStud.com reader. Enjoy!
Cannot read data from the selected RSS channel. RSS format is invalid. The selected RSS channel is unavailable now.
Drs. Gene Abel, M.D., and Judith Becker, Ph.D. are considered to be leading authorities in the area of sexual deviancy. In the 1980's, when both practiced in New York City, they conducted a study on child molesters that were referred to them by the probation department. As a result, they devised one of the early treatment protocols for sexual offenders.
According to Abel and Becker sex offenders were deficient in six areas and these areas needed to be addressed in treatment. The six areas were: Assertiveness Training, Social Skills, Deviant Fantasy, Empathy Training, Cognitive Distortions and Relapse Prevention. The modality of treatment was the group, the thinking being that these areas were best addressed in a group setting as some of the treatment modules required role playing. (Groups have an additional advantage - stigmatized populations, such as sex offenders, are best treated in a group where their shame can be effectively dealt with.)
The Abel and Becker model was a cognitive-behavioral approach. That is, the offender was required to examine his thinking and thus change his behavior. The cognitive-behavioral model of sex offender treatment has been endorsed as the preferred treatment for offenders by the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA).
While ATSA still insists on promulgating the cognitive-behavioral approach, sex offender treatment has evolved beyond this particular approach although, according to a 2009 national survey, 86% of programs for adults and adolescents continue to use this approach. (It should be noted that while the cognitive-behavioral approach is allegedly empirically supported, there is no evidence that relapse prevention is of any value and the value of teaching sex offenders empathy is, at best, questionable.)
While groups remain the modality of treatment, how that treatment is delivered has evolved beyond the cognitive-behavioral approach. Among the contemporary theories are the following:
Good Lives
Risk-Need-Responsivity
Psychodynamic
THE GOOD LIVES MODEL
The goal of the Good Lives model is to aid the offender in achieving a good life in socially acceptable ways. Risk management and avoidance strategies are deemphasized.
THE RISK-NEED-RESPONSIVITY MODEL
This model of treatment focuses on the moderate and high risk offender. It attempts to address the offender's risks that are linked to reoffending and targets them for change, being responsive to the offenders learning style. Social learning and cognitive-behavioral approaches are emphasized.
THE PSYCHODYNAMIC MODEL
This model first seeks to create a safe environment where group members are free to engage in interpersonal exchanges. It is through such exchanges that individuals begin to understand and alter their inner responses and previously unexamined hypotheses about life and interpersonal relationships.
A critique of the cognitive-behavioral model is that 1) it is psycho-educational. The group leader(s) has the knowledge and deposits it into the offender (The Brazilian educator, Paulo Friere, referred to this as "the banking concept" of learning) and 2) it does not help the offender relate better to others.
Several years ago we converted our program from the cognitive-behavioral model to the psychodynamic model. We noticed the following: some offenders, once their probationary period had ended, chose to remain in group voluntarily. This was virtually unheard of when we used the CB model. People began to relate better and self-reported having more satisfied relationships outside of group. (See my video below on some of the benefits of (psychodynamic) group psychotherapy.)
The minister (priest, rabbi,iman) was facing a dilemma. A sex offender, recently released from jail, had approached him about participating in church (temple, mosque) services. The offender was not unknown - his case had been highly publicized when disclosure occurred. Should he be allowed to participate in services or should he be excluded?
These are questions that are increasingly being asked by pastors and their congregations. There are no easy answers.
Sex offenders, particularly child molesters, are generally not welcome at church services. If they are, they are generally assigned people who meet them at the door, sit on either side of them during the services and are then escorted out, not being allowed to participate in any social activity that may take place after the services.
A church in Wisconsin chose to do it differently. They are offering biweekly worship services in the evening specifically for sex offenders who have been released from incarceration. No children are permitted to be at the service. (To read more http://t.co/RMuya3A0)
What do you think? Are convicted sex offenders welcome in your church? If so, how are they handled?
"A boy who is sexually abused will grew up to become a sex offender"
There is no support for this. If this were true the vast majority of sex offenders would be female, not male, as one in four females and one in seven males are sexually assaulted before the age of 18. (Approximately 95% of offenders are male)
MYTH #2
Most sex offenses are committed by strangers
Although public education about childhood sexual abuse has lessened the spread of this myth it is still out there. Most sex offenses are committed by someone the victim knows - family member, friend, intimate partner or acquaintaine. About 27% are committed by strangers.
MYTH #3
Sex Offenders can be profiled
No I"profile" of sex offenders exists. Although mental health professionals who treat sex offenders describe them as "manipulative," "deceptive," and "secretive" there is no set of characteristics, be they physical, emotional, mental or psychological that are common to all sex offenders.
It is important to keep in mind that sex offenders can be:
Male of female
Be young or old
Have various levels of education
Be married or single
Have strong ties to their families and communities, or have weak ties; and/or
Have no record of prior criminal involvement or have a record for sexual or non-sexual offenses
MYTH #4
When a sex offender recidivates he commits another sex offense
The reality is that sex offenders are more apt to be rearrested for non-sexual, non-violent crmes as opposed to sexual offenses.
MYTH #5
Using the polygraph on offenders reduces their risk to re-offend
There is no evidence that the polygraph has been effective in preventing sex crimes.
MYTH #6
Sex offender treatment doesn't work - sexual offender recidivism rates are high
The media is mainly to blame for propagating this myth. A 2002 study by the US Department of Justice indicated that recidivism rates among sex offenders was 5.3%; that is 1 in 19 released sex offenders were later arrested for another sex crime. In comparison, the same study found that 68% of released non-sex offenders wre rearrrested for any crime (both sex and non-sex offenses, while 43% of the released sex offenders were rearrested for any crime.
In 1994 approximately 4,300 child molesters were released from prisons in 15 states. An estimated 3.3% of these 4,300 were rearrested for another sex crime against a child within 3 years of release from prison.
RESOURCES
www.atsa.com - The Association for the Treatment of Sex Abusers
www.csom.org - The Center for Sex Offender Management
One method used by homicide detectives to get a murder suspect "to give it up" is to tell them that they will feel better when they admit their crime. There seems to be a positive power in a guilty party acknowledging their wrong doing. As the saying goes, "confession is good for the soul."
I believe the same is true for sex offenders as I have seen it occur numerous times, all with a beneficial effect - they feel better and it helps them get down to the work of understanding why they committed their offense and what they have to do to see that they do not reoffend.
Sex offender disclosure, for the reasons above, is an important part of healing. But how does it take place? One method I am familiar with has the group leader telling the offender that, because of their denial, they are only being given a trial of treatment, say 6 - 10 weeks, and if they cannot acknowledge their offense during that time they will be terminated as a treatment failure and returned to the court. Such a method tends to be heavy handed and, while it has worked, I would not be inclined to depend on it.
Another approach is to have the group members tell the resistant client. Such an approach is much more effective as it comes from peers, and they will be listened to more than a group leader. Another advantage is that the group member who voices it is usually speaking for others in the group and the resistant client feels the group pressure on him. Thirdly, the non-judgmental nature of the group is mentioned - "we won't think any less of you, we've all been through it" - coupled with the fact that the case is over, nothing the individual can say will put him in any danger, is helpful.
Sex offenders require sex offender specific therapy that not all mental health professionals are capable of providing. This being the case some guidelines are offered below to help in the search for a knowledgable professional.
Just because someone has an advanced degree as a mental health professional does not mean they can be engaged to provide sex offender treatment. In choosing a therapist it should be someone who has the following:
Professional Membership in an organization such as The Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers
Demonstrated experience in providing sex offender specific therapy. Since most sex offender specific therapy is group therapy it helps if they are also as a Certified Group Psychotherapist (CGP)
Someone who is knowledgeable about risk instruments such as the STATIC - 2002, the VRAG, the STABLE 2007, to name a few
An individual who is currently being supervised, or has been supervised, by a mental health professional who has expertise in the field of sexual offender evaluation and treatment
If the treatment provider has 3 years or less of experience he/she should be currently supervised by a mental health professional with expertise in the field
As for anyone seeking mental health counseling, no matter what the focus of it may be, it is important to keep in mind that the individual seeking the counseling is a consumer and it is within their rights to ask the provider about their background. Having more knowledge is better than having little or none at all.
Many people are under the impression that the motivation behind a sex crime has to be sexual in nature. This is understandable but not true. For instance, it has long been known that rape is a crime of violence, not of sex. The lack of a sexual motive can also be found in other sexual offenses as well.
Two examples:
Jim, an unmarried man of 68, lived had lived alone much of his life, except for a period of four years when he was in the military. He was quiet, unassuming and kept to himself. A young couple he had met through his only cousin called him one day. They had lost their house after the husband became unemployed and were now homeless with a 5 year old son. Jim decided to allow them to live in his house until they became financial sound.
He regretted his decision. They were soon taking advantage of him, borrowing money for food, using his truck - with him buying the gas - yet not doing their share of the household chores. Being the quiet, passive, unassertive man that he was Jim didn't complain. Yet his anger and irritation began to fester. One day the couple's 5 year old son reported to them that Jim had fondled him in what was an apparent attempt to teach the boy how to masturbate.
Testing indicated that Jim had no sexual interest in children. His score on a risk assessment instrument placed him in a low risk category of estimated risk to recividate. He had no prior criminal record. The examiner concluded that Jim's inability to properly assert himself when he was aware of how he was being taken advantage of needed to be the focus of his sex offender treatment. Unable to do this he had displaced his anger toward the parents onto their innocent child.
Another example:
Rodney was a 55 year old widower. An adult neighbor called the police when she saw him on his front lawn exposing himself to her. When the police arrived and told Rodney of the allegation he readily acknowledged his inappropriate behavior. He was arrested and charged. In court he denied he had acknowledged his offense to the police, stated they were lying and took his case to a jury trial where he was found guilty.
Referred for a psychosexual evaluation the examiner noticed that Rodney had made statements to him only to later deny he had said them. His short term memory was impaired. The psychologist recommended that Rodney undergo a neuropsychological evaluation, the results of which showed he was in the early stages of dementia. The condition of his probation that he be in sex offender treatment was dropped and he was treated for his dementia.
Research has shown that there is no appreciable difference between the benefits of individual vs group therapy. However, I'm sold on group therapy, especially for the population I work with - sex offenders.
It used to be said - maybe it still is - that the benefits of group therapy for a person adjudicated for a sex offense are the following:
It helps them overcome their denial
It helps them work through their shame
It helps them learn social skills
There may be more benefits that are mentioned but these are the ones I remember.
But groups offer many more than the commonly mentioned benefts listed above. Perhaps an example will help.
Kyle entered a sex offender group at the insistence of his probation officer. He had spent almost half of his 55 years incacerated for a variety of crimes, many of them violent. Approximately 20 years ago he had committed and been found guilty of two rapes, the reason he was referred.
A heavy drug user Kyle attempted to turn the group into an NA meeting. He was extremely vocal about the need of other group members with drug problems to get into NA or "you'll pick up and be back in prison." He refused to talk about the rapes he had committed. His angry tone and bullying tactics were off putting for the group. But the group pushed back and when it did he would fold his arms and state he wasn't going to talk anymore. The group called him on this - "you want to pick up your ball and go home" - which he denied was the case.
He made an attempt to leave the group, fabricating a filmsy excuse. Both the group leader and his probation officer refused to allow this.
One of the things the group confronted him with was his language. He strenously objected, saying that he grew up speaking this way and, besides, people didn't mind it. Who did the group think it was, telling him to change! The group responded by saying they were not out to change him but rather would appreciate his considering that his language might offend others.
Slowly Kyle began to "settle in" the group. It was noticed that his offensive language was being used less and less. He identified with a group member who was from the same neighborhood he grew up in and, like him, had been in prison. This group member was direct with him and he appeared to hear what he said, which was quite different from his interactions with other group members. It was also noticed that Kyle was beginnning to make a series of self-disclosures - "anger is a problem for me," "I have to stop judging people like I do."
He even acknowledged that he hid behind his angry front.
The acknowledged leader in understanding how groups function is Irving Yalom, M.D., who has written extensively on the subject. (He also wrote one of the first, if not the first, article on group therapy with sex offenders in 1966.) Yalom mentions several "therapeutic factors" that groups offer and Kyle has benefited from them. Specifically Kyle has seen group members grow and change, which offers him hope that he can too; he has learned from observing other group members - imitative behavior and interpersonal learning; he has come to see that he is basically no different from others - the principle of universality and his behavior is slowly being modified - the development of socializing techniques.
As I noted at the beginning - individual and group therapy benefits are pretty equal. But from where I sit as a group facilitator it's exciting to see people grow and change and how a group makes this happen. I'll take group therapy every time.
The legal system can be intimidating, especially if you have never before been arrested. One's anxiety is probably heightened if you are being charged with a sex crime. This blog is a brief primer on what you can expect, with suggestions about what you might do.
Usually a criminal complaint has be to issued when an allegation of an offense, in this case, a sex offense, has been alleged. This either comes in the mail or is delivered by the police. If you are the recipient of a criminal complaint and the police tell you they want you to come to the police station to talk to them it is within your rights to refuse. Criminal defense attorneys almost always tell their clients not to speak to the police without their being present. This is excellient advice and should be followed.
You will need an attorney. Most men that I know that have been charged with a sex offense such as Rape, Indecent Assault and Battery, Frotteurism or Exhibitionism, rely on their family and/or friends to assist them in coming up with a name. Unless your family members and friends are knowledgable about the law I would advise against this approach. You need an attorney that has defended individuals, such as yourself, that have been so accused. Take the time to find an experienced attorney that has handled cases such as yours. It probably will be expensive but keep in mind this is your future that is at stake here.
The case may drag on for longer than you thought. There may be many pre-trial conferences. You may show up at the courthouse only to be told that the conference was rescheduled for another day. This will upset you as you have taken time off from work. Try not to let this get to you. Hard as it may be, be patient. I have seen men lose patience and press their attorneys to settle the case - "get it over with" - such individuals usually wind up wishing, after the fact, that they had been more patient. They could have gotten a better deal.
Be pro-active. Don't hesitate to ask questions of your attorney. You're paying him, he' working for you. Utilize the Internet for information. Ask your attorney about hiring a forensic psychologist, with experience conducting psychosexual evaluations, about evaluating you. If the results are positive you may use it in your defense in court.
If a deal is proposed get the details. Unfortunately, I have spoken to many men who have said they accepted a deal that involved probation only to find out later that conditions of that probation included a psychosexual evaluation and counseling. According to them their attorneys knew of this but never informed them.
For most people the legal system is foreign territory. It's frightening and intimidating for the unexperienced. But this is your future that is at stake here. You want the best possible defense. Do what it takes to make that happen.
"I've disappointed God and I've disappointed myself."
Not many people would expect to hear these words from a man who committed a sexual offense, but many offenders I've treated have uttered them in one form or another. The notion of shame comes up in many contexts, one of them being the shame of having to register as a sex offender. Presenting oneself to an officer at the local police station and telling them why they are there is not an easy task.
Contrary to the popular perception of sex offenders as being out of control predators, most that I have met over the course of the last 30 years know that they have committed an egregious offense and feel guilty about it. Along with that guilt comes an abiding sense of shame. Some comments that reflect this are the following:
"I'm disgusted with myself"
"I humiliated myself and my family"
"I hate myself"
"I feel I resent myself"
Society, in the way it treats sex offenders, enforces the sense of shame. But I am convinced that offenders would experience a personal sense of shame regardless. (I have real concerns about those that don't.)
In sex offender treatment the focus is generally on the offender's cognitive distortions, deviant sexual arousal, impulse control, knowing their "danger signs," developing strategies to employ when they find themselves in a high risk situation. These areas have to be addessed. But so does the deep, abiding shame many offenders carry with them.
Learning self-compassion is part of our treatment program.
You have been retained to defend a man accused of a sexual offense. He denies the allegation. How should you proceed?
You have reviewed the police report(s) and victim(s) statements. Next have your client undergo a psychosexual evaluation. This will provide you with information regarding your client's:
Personality Functioning
Sexual Interests
Mood Disorders (Bipolar illness, Major Depression, etc.)
Substance Abuse Problems
Trauma
Cognitive Functioning
Level of Risk
How will such an evaluation help your client?
If his IQ falls between 50-70 he is mildly retarded. This will raise the question of competency
If he has normal sexual interests that's a plus
If he has substance abuse problems you will want him in treatment
If his level of estimated risk is low that's a plus
If he has a mood disorder you will want to refer him to a psychiatrist for a medication evaluation
If your client admits his guilt and says he wants to plead to the charge(s) then you should appraise him of the following:
Doing so will probably mean that he has to register as a sex offender
If he does have to register it will probably mean he has to register for the next 20 years
Information about him and his arrest will be posted on the Internet
His housing may be restricted
He may lose his job and/or his job prospects will be limited
Conditions of his probation - if he receives probation - will most likely be that he undergo an evaluation and treatment
He will suffer some form of ostracism
Neither you, nor he, will know what risk level he will be assigned by the registry board
He may have to wear a GPS
If a plea deal is offered it is your duty to your client to appraise him of the consequences so that he can make an informed decision. Information you have obtained about your client from his psychosexual evaluation may assist you when negotiating with the prosecuting attorney.
Recently, a university professor from Utah was on a flight to Boston, where he was to attend a conference. While in flight he was viewing child pornography and was seen by another passenger. This passenger took a photo of the child porn on his computer and notified the stewardess. The passenger also called one of their children, who notified the Massachusetts State Police. The professor was arrested upon the plane's landing in Boston.
Viewing and downloading child pornography is becoming a huge problem, both here in the US and in other countries. It is one of the fastest growing Federal crimes, where receipt of child pornography carries a mandatory five year sentence.
Up until very recently it was assumed that those arrested for posession of child pornography were at risk to have physical contact with children, referred to as "offline offending." Thus it would be assumed that the Utah professor would be a high risk individual, based on the behavior that he engaged in.
But the recent research of Canadian psychologist Michael Seto indicates that this may not be the case. In a metaanalysis of 9 samples Seto and his associates found that in following offenders from 1.5 to 6 years after they had been arrested for possession of child pornography only 2% committed a contact offense, 4.6% had committed a sexual offense and 3.4% had committed another possession of child porn offense. This data supported an earlier metaanalysis that had arrived at similar results. (A Swiss study arrived at similar results.)
Seto's research appears to be having some effect. In Massachusetts a defense attorney recently challenged a SORB (Sex Offender Registry Board) ruling that classified his client, who plead guilty to possession of child pornography, as a Level 3 ("most dangerous") offender. He presented the Board with Seto's study and his client was re-classified a Level 2.
Seto and his associates are now attempting to develop a risk assessement measure that will determine who is low risk v high risk among those who download and collect child pornography.
What if we knew how to cure cancer. But what if some people had a stake in making sure the facts about this cure were distorted. What if everytime we got onto the Internet, turned on our TV's, read our newspapers or listened to the news on the radio we were bombarded with the "fact" that deaths from cancer were increasing, that, as a society, we were helpless or near helpless to combat this scourge? But what if a number of people were also talking about the decreasing number of deaths attributed each year to cancer, with the new "cure." We hopefully would end up listening to those telling the truth as opposed to those distorting it.
Unfortunately, it's not the same when the analogy is applied to sex offenders, be they child molesters, rapists, voyuers or frotteurists. Even though great strides have been made in evaluating, assigning risk and developing treatment for this population the public seems intent on living in ignorance - aided by the media and public officials.
The hysteria over sex offenders seems to have no bounds. "Studies" are quoted to show how high risk all sex offenders are; apps have been developed to locate offenders in our neighborhoods, states have their sex offender registries, etc.
But, what is the truth about this population?
We now know how to better evaluate sex offenders. Instruments have been developed and are being used to determine where their sexual interests lie - invaluable in separating out pedophiles from men who molest children but have no pedophilic interests.
Instruments such as the STATIC-2002 have been in use and are being improved upon to determine who may pose a greater risk to recidivate than those who do not.
New models of treatment - the Good Lives, Risk-Need-Responsivity, Harm Reduction and Psychodynamic models - are being used in addition to the Cognitive-Behavioral model which has been in place for several decades now.
So, what are some "truths" about sex offenders that the public seems to not want to hear? Here are some:
Since 1995 sex offenses, world wide, have been decreasing
The recidivism rates for sex offenders are low - 11% to 18%
When sex offenders reoffend it is generally to commit an offense other than a sex offense
In communities that have established Circles of Support and Accountability for high risk sex offenders the recidivism rate are below 10% (!)
Recent research indicates that men who download child pornography are very unlikely to commit a contact offense with a child
Recently Gov. Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania is quoted as saying, when he signed a bill to revise the state's version of Megan's Law, "We can hope that by making our laws tougher, we can spare the pain and grief that has visited too many families."
Unfortunately the Governor has it wrong. We know what works in decreasing sex offender recidivism (it's not "tougher laws"), it's right at our fingertips, but we aren't implementing it.
The "grooming" of a victim by a sexual offender is a process whereby the sexual offender gains the victim's trust, breaks down their defenses and manipulates them so that he can perform the desired sexual act. The process of grooming can also involve the victim's support network.
The grooming process of sex offenders is only used with children. It is not used for offenders who engage in exhibitionism, frotteurism, or rape.
The following is a fictionalized scenario that illustrates several aspects of grooming:
Jim and Sharon
"Jim and I often tell ourselves how fortunate we are to have Jack, a retired engineer, living next to us He is always so friendly and helpful, and on more than one occasion has helped us when we were in a jam. And the kids just love him!!! When the sitter once didn't show he volunteered to babysit, brought the cutest little puppy you ever saw for the kids, and it seems he is always available to take the kids to their after school activities when Jim and I are unable to do it. I did become a little unnerved though, when I saw him through the kitchen window, touch my youngest, Maria, on the buttocks as she was climbing out of the pool.....but it probably was just an accident."
In the above scenario Jack has involved the parents, Jim and Sharon, in the process of grooming. He has done this by ingratiating himself with them - being friendly, always being available to help out, etc. He has also endeared himself to the children, taking them to their after school activities, buying a puppy for them. His involvement with the family has also given him time to select a target, in this case the youngest, Maria. It is not enough though to have a target, he also has to have access to the target which, living next door, he has. Given how Jim and Sharon admire him - which their children certainly would know - Jack also has a position of authority in the children's eyes. And he's won the parents and children's trust and respect. Due to this opportunities to be alone with the children open up.
Generally, when a sex offender seeks to groom a potential victim they look for the following:
Someone who is vulnerable/needy
Not trusted by others
Poor boundaries with others
Will keep a secret
Low self-esteem
Few social supports
Behavior problem
Techniques used variety but threats and intimidation, convincing the children that they are "learning" about sex, convincing the children that it is OK and "everybody does it", getting the children high or intoxicated, using blackmail or a lure - "I lost my dog. Will you help me find him?", are common.
A recent example of this process was contained in a recent article in Sports Illustrated about the assistant coach at Penn State, Jerry Sandusky, who allegedly molested scores of boys:
"The report asserts that Sandusky traded on his status as a Penn State football demigod. Many of the alleged assaults occurred either in the university's football facilities or at football functions. The Nittany Lions program became Sandusky's bait. He brought victims to games at State College, allowed them to attend coaches' meetings, facilitated their meeting players, cast them in instructional videos, and in one case took a boy to the Alamo Bowl, in San Antonio. Sanduskly was charged with 40 counts of various sex crimes, seven of them involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, a felony." (Italics are mine)
From its earliest beginnings individuals have used the Internet for illicit purposes. In one of only two times I have been in a Chat Room an individual IM'd me asking if I had ever been to Costa Rica. I told him I had. He then said he was in the travel business and wondered if it would be okay to send me some material. I said sure and gave him my name and home address. (Keep in mind that this was in 1996 - I would never disclose my personal information over the Internet now!)
I soon forgot about the conversation. Approximately two weeks past and I received a letter in the mail. I couldn't recall who I might know in Nashua, NH and, as I opened the letter, a color photograph of a young woman, whose age I guessed to be 16 or 17, dropped out. She was wearing a bikini and on a beach. As I read the letter it said that for a set price I would get a package deal that included air fare to Costa Rica, a room at a resort hotel on the beach and a beautiful woman to accompany me while I was there for my week's stay. There would be other men from the US there as well and, if any of wanted to exchange our "dates" we were free to do so.
Since this experience in 1996 using the Internet for illicit purposes as grown....dramatically grown. Some statistics:
12%, or 24, 644,000 websites are pornographic
Every second approximately $3,100 is spent on pornography
25% of all search engine requests are pornographic
35% of all Internet downloads are pornographic
AdultFriendFinder.com is the most popular porn site
In 2006 Federal authorities arrested approximately 15,500 people on charges of receiving children pornography
Common forms of Internet pornography are pornographic websites, sex chat rooms, voyeur cams and real time webcams. The allure of these forms can be so strong they have been compared to cocaine addiction. Often the behaviors are subsumed under the rubric of "sexual addiction." Other terms that are used are compulsive sexual behavior, sexual compulsivity and sexual impulsivity." There appears to be a wide variance in what these terms mean, especially sexual addiction, but generally sexual addiction is defined as 1) the individual is not reliably able to control the sexual behavior and 2) the sexual behavior has significant harmful consequences and continues despite these consequences.
It is important to note that "sexual addiction" is not a diagnosis that is listed in the Diagnostic and Statiscal Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (DSM-IV). A new disorder, Hyper Sexual Disorder, will be in DSM-V but not as a diagnosis but rather in the appendix due to it's requiring further empirical validation.
A high risk sex offender is being released after having been incarcerated for ten years. He abused two of his own daughters as well several of his daughter's friends. The sex offender registry board of the state where he lives has classified him a Level 3, reserved for the most dangerous and likely to reoffend.
The community where he plans to reside is alarmed. His was a high profile case when it occurred and the local papers are now running articles about his imminent return. In addition to having been classified a Level 3, the state has placed him on a GPS, his picture and personal information are up on the Internet, as well as in schools and youth facilities, he is on lifetime probation and the town he plans to live in now wants to enact restrictions on where he can live.
Unfortunately research has never proven any of the measures enacted to ensure community safety to be effective.High risk factors related to sexual recidivism (called criminogenic risk factors) such as negative social influences, rejection and loneliness, lack of cooperation with supervision, impulsivity, poor problem solving skills and lack of concern for others are not addressed by these measures.
The stakeholders in ensuring that offenders have no more victims include law enforcement officials, legislators, treatment providers and the community. All want high standards for the risk assessment and management of sex offenders.
A community based model that has proven to be successful in reducing the recidivism rates of high risk sex offenders is Circle of Support and Accountability (CoSA). Begun in Hamilton, Ontario in 1994 by a Mennointe pastor who agreed to provide community support for a recently released high profile offender it has been enacted throughout Canada, the United Kingdom and some jurisdictions in the United States.
Each Circle is composed of a Core Member (the ex-offender) and 4 - 6 community volunteers, people who have pledged to assist the Core Member in the community. For 60 - 90 days following his release from prison the primary volunteer meets with the Core Member on a daily basis. Other members meet on a once per week basis and the full Circle meets with the offender weekly. CoSA holds the Core Member accountable of his behavior and assists him in making good choices toward achieving prosocial goals.
In a study of 44 high risk offenders in Canada participants were shown, after 35 months, to have had an 83% reduction in sexual recidivism, a 73% reduction in all types of violent recidivism and an overall reduction of 71% in all types of recidivism when compared to a matched group of offenders who had not participated in CoSA. (The full details of the study are in Sexual Abuse, Vol 21, Number 4, December 2009).
You have been retained to defend a man who has allegedly committed a sex offense. He denies the allegations. You review the police reports and victim statements. You confer with the ADA prosecuting the case. You appraise your client of how you intend to proceed in his defense.
What is often left out of the above scenario, and what may be helpful to you in your defense of your client, is a forensic psychosexual evaluation.
If your client's IQ falls between 50-70 he is mildly mentally retarded. This would raise issues of his competency. If he has no deviant sexual interests, that's a plus. If there are indications of substance abuse problems you will perhaps want him to have a substance abuse evaluation. You will definitely want him in substance abuse treatment.
It can, and often does, occur that once the results of the psychosexual evaluations are reviewed with the defendant - this would be part of the evaluating psychologists feedback - he admits his guilt to you. This obviously affects how you proceed with the case. It also means that you would want him in sex offender specific treatment and be able to say that to the Court.
"It just happened." This is a common response from sex offenders when they are asked why they committed their crime. Of course it's not true - if it truly were they would be at great risk as their offense could occur anywhere, at any time. As treatment progresses they come to realize that what they thought was a spontaneous event really was the result of choices and decisions they had made. The offense involved planning.
Common to all sex offenders are what are called "criminogenic" risk factors. These are factors that are involved in their sexual offenses, be it rape, child molestation, exhibitionism, child pornography or frotteurism. The factors that have been identified are:
+ Sexual preocupation
+ Deviant sexual interests
+ Attitudes supportive of offending
+ Emotion regulation problems
+ Lifestyle impulsivity
+ Poor problem solving skills
+ Negative social influences
+ Resistance to supervision
As can be seen, impulsivity is a factor, and although it may not be directly involved in the offense, offenders frequently live a life characterized by impulsivity. They have trouble delaying gratification.
An interesting study, conducted in the late 1960's, confirms the benefits of being able to delay gratification. To summarize it (an article on the study can be found in The New Yorker, May 18, 2009) a psychologist at Stanford University conducted an experiment with 4 and 5 year old children. He placed each in a small room with nothing but a desk and a chair. Each was told to sit down and to pick a treat from a tray of marshmallows, cookies, and pretzel sticks. Each was then told that they could eat their chosen treat right away or, if they waited while the psychologist left the room for a few minutes, they could have the treat they had chosen as well as another.
Most of the children were unable to wait the 3 minutes necessary to obtain the additional treat. The thirty percent that were able devised strategies to help them. One simply turned her chair facing away from the desk with the tray of goodies. Another child distracted himself by singing out loud.
Analyzing the results the psychologist, Walter Mischel, discovered that the "low delayers" had more behavioral problems in school and at home. They got lower S.A.T. scores, often had trouble paying attention, found it difficult to maintain friendships and stuggled with stressful situations. The "high delayers" were found, on average, to have S.A.T. scores 210 points higher than the child who could only wait 30 seconds. As adults they had better paying jobs, happier marriages.
So, while impulsivity, defined as the inability to delay gratification, is often not a direct factor in a sex offenders crime, it is a criminogenic risk factor and attention needs to be paid to helping the offender develop skills to delay his need for immediate gratification.
In March of this year a woman gave me permission to publish as a blog an email that she had sent me. This is her follow up:
It's been about six months since I first emailed you my story. Much has happened since then. Jim plead guilty and was sentenced to serve one year in prison with a suspended sentence of two years. He'll be on probation for five years when he gets out.
I still struggle with feelings of betrayal, anger, resentment and disbelief. At times I lose my composure and find myself crying. But I no longer feel that my life is over.
My parents have been wonderful! They took care of my two children when news of Jim's abuse became public. They have been incredibly supportive both emotionally and financially. My children are now back with me and my mother makes the drive to our house twice a week to help me care for them. With her and Dad's help I think I'm beginning to put the pieces back together.
I've lost some friends because of this but others, once they were over their initial reaction of shock, have come to my aid. I've gotten into individual therapy with a knowledgeable therapist and I'm discovering I'm a lot stronger than I thought I was.
I'm told that Jim will probably serve 10 months of his one year sentence which means he might be out next April. I have accepted the fact that he is a child molester. What this means going forward, in terms of our marriage, I'm not sure. Right now I'm taking it one day at a time.
PS
Thanks to everyone who responded to my first post back in March. You, too, have been an important part of my healing.
ATSA, the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, is a national organization, (http://www.atsa.com) based in Beaverton, OR that sex offender specific therapists are encouraged to belong to. Since it's founding in 1985 it has promulgated cognitive behavioral therapy as the therapy of choice for this specialized population.
In 2009, the Safer Society Foundation, (http://www.safersociety.org) located in Brandon, VT, published the results of a survey they conducted in the United States and Canada among sex offender specific therapists. In the "Executive Summary" the following is stated:
"Programs that follow best practices use evidence-based models of change. They use trained staff. They adhere to the risk, need, and responsivity principles. In other words, the programs match the intensity of services to the client's risk level (risk principle). They focus on treatment on problems that are directly linked to offending behavior (need principles). The programs use effective methods, typically cognitive-behavioral and skills based interventions matched to the learning style of the individual (responsivity principle). They provide aftercare services."
The survey goes on to say that in the United States 86 percent or more of the programs that responded used the cognitive-behavioral model. In Canada the percentage was slightly lower. Second was the Relapse Prevention model (note: there is very little research that supports this model being effective) and the "self-regulation" and "good lives model" were included in the survey "to address the perceived failings of the relapse prevention model."
One of the earliest professional articles written on the treatment of sex offenders was by Irvin D. Yalom, M.D., the country's leading authority on group psychotherapy. In his article, entitled "Group Therapy of Incarcerated Sexual Deviants," written in 1966, Dr. Yalom describes how his psychodynamic approach resulted in positive change. The quote that had special relevance for me was the following:
"A detailed investigation and analysis of the specific offense was usually a blind alley in therapy. Progress was made instead through discussion of relevant aspects of their physical and psychological worlds. Emphasis was placed upon their social withdrawal, their inability to approach their peers for normal sexual relationships, and their relationships to their wives and parents."
Cognitive behavioral treatment is, in many ways, a psycho-educational model based on the "banking concept" of learning. By this I mean that the group leader(s) are looked upon as having the "knowledge" that they then "deposit" into the heads of the group members (offenders). In this way the group members are "taught" social skills, cognitive distortions, relapse prevention, etc. There is, in my opinion, a major problem with this - such a model does not aid the offenders in developing the ability to relate to others. Yalom, with his psychodyanmic approach, addressed this.
While the Safer Society Survey stated that only 1% of those surveyed ultilized the psychodynamic approach this does not mean it is not effective. It is my belief that such an approach is just as effective as cognitive behavioral treatment and probably moreso, although to my knowledge no studies comparing the two have been done. (For an article entitled "The Efficacy of Psychodynamic Psychotherapy" go tohttp://nvpp.nl/JonathanShedlerStudy20100202.pdf
Why, in my opinion, is a psychodynamic group more effective for sex offenders than a cognitive behavioral group? As Dr. Yalom noted, in such a group the men learn how to relate. If a man has a problem with anger he sees other group members who can appropriately assert themselves. He learns from this. In a psychodynamic group more attention is paid to feelings which, for most men, is foreign territory. (In my experience it is common to hear offenders remark "I never knew how important feelings, mine and other peoples, were.") This understanding of feelings aids the men in becoming a more cohesive group. Due to this, probably the most notable difference, in my experience, is that those offenders in a psychodynamic group ask if they can continue on after their probationary period has ended. Rarely, if ever, does this occur in a cognitive behavioral group.
Each year a familiar scenario plays itself out during the month of October. The various media- TV, newspapers, radio, the Internet - begin to warn us of the danger of protecting our children from sex offenders during Halloween. Laws that have been enacted in various states - such as barring sex offenders from giving out candy, having them place signs on their front lawn warning children that a sex offender lives inside, and to keep away, and making all the sex offenders in the community gather in a central location for the evening, sprout up.
But let's ask the question - do these manuvers really protect our children? I suppose they do, although I have never seen hard data that supports this. One piece of data that has been known for some decades now is that children are sexually molested, not by strangers, but by someone they know. (The Center for Sex Offender Management states about 27% of offenders are strangers.)
There is a lot of sex offender hysteria present in our society. Just look at the proliferation of software programs that will locate sex offenders in your community (there are now apps that will do this as well) and the efforts by various communities across the nation to bar sex offenders from living in them.
If someone is really interested in community safety and sex offenders they need to educate themselves. One way to do this is to go the the website of The Center for Sex Offender Management (http://www.csom.org) and read "Fact Sheet: What You Need to Know About Sex Offenders."
Preventing sex offenses - child rape and molestation, adult rape, exhibitionism, voyeurism and frotteurism - is a worthwhile goal. And there are many ways to accomplish it. For instance, a parent could teach their children about "good and bad touches." A teacher could speak to her students about the importance of reporting suspicious activity. Law enforcement could educate themselves about sex offenders and know what to look for.
Another way to help prevent sex offenses is to become a sex offender specific therapist, be that a social worker or psychologist. One does not become a sex offender specific therapist merely by having a degree conferred on them, although there are such "therapists" who believe this to be the case.
Working with sex offenders is a specialty and it requires being knowledable about sexual abuse and sex offenders. Some of this can be gotten through class room learning. However, getting into the field of sex offender therapy also should include having had a practicum where the person learning is actually doing an interview with an offender, doing an offender evaluation and observing and eventually leading a sex offender group - under the guidance and supervision of an experienced sex offender clinician.
While doing sex offender work can be demanding it can also be rewarding knowing that you have, by providing excellent treatment, lowered the probability that the offender will create new victims.
An important part of doing a psychosexual evaluation is to assess the level of risk the individual being evaluated poses. There are several instruments forensic psychologists use - the STATIC-2002, the STABLE- 2007, the ACUTE-2007 - to accomplish this task. These instruments are not generally well known to the lay person so how is a family member, probation officer, attorney, or friend to guage risk?
Well, there are several risk factors that, taken together, might indicate a moderate to high level of estimated risk. Some are:
Substance Abuse
Having a Male Victim
Hx of Prior Sex Offenses
Stranger Victim
Impulsivity
Hostility toward Women
It should be kept in mind that a mental health professional trained in one of the above risk assessment instruments is the best person to determine estimated risk to recidivate and the above mentioned risk factors are some of the risk factors that are considered.
The "bible" of mental health professionals is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - DSM IV. Listed within the DSM-IV are categories of mental disorders. The last revision occurred in 2000 and the new DSM - DSM V - is scheduled for publication in 2015.
There is no category for "sexual addictions" listed in the DSM-IV. This will probably not be the case with DSM V, but at the moment the "bible" of mental health professionals does not contain any information on this "disorder."
Robert Weiss, the Founding Director of The Sexual Recovery Institute, defines sexual addiction as "an excessive preoccupation with the idea of, pursuit and acting-out of sexual behavior (with self or others), most often accompanied over time by related negative life, relationship, career and health consequences."
In an article entitled "Measuring Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity: A Critical Review of the Instruments" in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 36:227-260, 2010, the authors, J.N. Hook, et. al., state the following:
"Sexual addiction is beginning to be recognized as a growing problem. Research on issues related to sexual addiction has proliferated in recent years. This increase in research has been accompanied by an increase in instruments used to measure sexual addiction. Although several of these instruments are promising and show initial psychometric evidence, the field is hampered by weak theory that identifies precisely what sexual addiction is."
As noted in a previous blog, "sexual addiction" involves a relationship between the pattern of behavior and the individuals life. What sets this "addiction" off from other patterns of sexual behavior is 1) the person cannot control the behavior and 2) the person continues the behavior despite it having harmful consequences.
It's a topic that comes up with some frequency in the sex offender groups that I facilitate - an offender tells the group that he has been dating a woman for a couple of months but hasn't told her of his sex offense and feels guilty about it. He wants to tell her but, understandably, he fears her reaction.
This topic came up last evening in group. The response of one group participant was "Bad news doesn't get better with age." Another group member was very direct in stating that she should have been told on the second or third date. "Be direct. If she says 'goodbye' to you at least she's done it before you or her get emotionally involved with one another."
Another group member said that he had been dating a woman for a year when he was indicted for possession of child pornography. He disclosed his offense and she decided to stay in the relationship. Another group member disclosed early in the relationship and the woman said she couldn't continue in it knowing that he was a sex offender. This man added that he felt an obligation to disclose early on in the relationship so the woman wouldn't feel pressured into a decision as she might be if the relationship continued longer and she was then told.
My personal belief is that the woman has a right to know. I make an analogy to having major surgery. The hospital/surgeon is obligated to tell the patient all of the possible implications, including death. It's called "full disclosure."
In our treatment contract we have the following stipulation: "I will fully inform my significant other of all aspects of my offense history, including having them read the police report(s), victim statement(s) and other relevant material pertinent to my case." Sex offenders are good at keeping secrets. Their offense history is one thing that shouldn't be secret from their partners.
As some of my previous blogs have pointed out, reliable information about sex offenders can be difficult to obtain. As a result, misinformation about sex offenders is often the norm. Case in point - sex offenders can't be cured. This is not true - 12 to 24% of sex offenders (according to the Center for Sex Offender Management) will reoffend, but not by committing sexual or violent crimes.
As I was writing this I received a telephone call from one of the men in a sex offender group I facilitate. He informed me that he would be missing group and went on to explain that it had just been disclosed that his step-father had sexually molested his two little boys. The general public believes that children are more at risk from strangers but the sad truth is most victims know their abuser - which is how the perpetrator gains access.
Sex offender specific treatment providers are also not immune, believing things about sex offenders that are not true. For example, some providers continue to believe that sex offender denial is a risk factor. Research has shown that it is not and that programs that focus on denial are less effective than programs that focus on known risk factors.
The responses to the blog articles I have written dealing with the wives and significant others of sex offenders being the "forgotten victims" of sex offenders has been overwhelming. I came across the following on the Internet and thought it might be helpful. My posting this as a blog is not to be understood as my giving an endorsement of what is stated/offered. It is posted in the hope that it will be helpful.
Thanks in part to Congressman Andrew Weiner, the perils of smart phones have come into the public's consciousness. But posting pictures has other dangers as well, especially when it comes to children, smart phones and sexual predators.
This past January I posted a blog posing the question "Are wives of sex offenders victims too?" I went on to say that they definitely were, describing them as "forgotten victims." The response to the blog was overwhelming and it continues to be. It has received, to date, 315 page views and 18 people posted comments. (Some of the comments are heartbreaking.) On March 5th I posted a communication that was sent to me by a woman whose husband was a sex offender. This, too, received a large number of page views.
What do the comments tell us? Well, they tell us that wives and significant others of sex offenders are victims, that their needs are often forgotten and that need support for their suffering.
Some suggestions:
Don't Blame Yourself: There is no way you could have known. Sex offending is "underground," secretive behavior. Why should you have suspected the person you love and trusted?
Confide in Someone: Don't carry the pain alone. Talk to a trusted friend or confidante. Pouring out your thoughts and feelings helps. If need be, get professional help.
Read His Evaluation: Insist your husband/partner get a psychosexual evaluation from a recognized sex offender specific therapist. Make sure it includes a risk assessment. Chances are reading it will help you see he had problems that had nothing to do with you.
What suggestions to help wives and significant others do you have?
A voyeur is a person ("peeping Tom") who observes an unsuspecting person who is engaged in sexual activity or who is in the process of undressing. The behavior usually begins before the age of 15 and its course tends to be chronic. Rarely does the voyeur actually have any contact with the individual they are observing although they fantasize that they do. The act of looking ("peeping") provides sexual excitement and the voyeur generally masturbates during the experience or shortly afterward.
According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) of the American Psychiatric Association the diagnostic criteria for Voyeurism is the following:
Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving the act of observing an unsuspecting person who is naked, in the process of disrobing, or engaging in sexual activity.
The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
If you have ever been the victim of a voyeur how has if affected you?
As an attorney it goes without saying that you want the best for your client. He has been accused of a sex offense, Indecent Assault and Battery on an adult. He denies it. You're fearful of what could happen if the case goes before a jury or a judge. The Assistant District Attorney prosecuting the case is open to plea bargain - several years probation, a sex offender evaluation and treatment. This is much better than you thought you'd be able to get. You can probably convince your client this is a good deal - but should he take it?
There are several things you and he should know. Taking such a deal will mean the client will be on the Sex Offender Registry, probably for 20 years. Neither you nor he know what his classification will be. If it's a Level 3 this will have serious consequences for him - his crime will be posted on the Internet, he may have employment and housing issues as a result and he may have to wear a GPS.
The sex offender evaluation may be another issue in that it may be accessible by the Sex Offender Registry Board. This may be a non-issue if he is considered a low-risk. But neither you nor he know that this will be the case.
Treatment over incarceration is certainly the better of the two options. But most treatment programs require that the offender acknowledge his offense. Is he willingly to do this? If not he may run the risk of being terminated from the treatment program and being referred back to the Court for non-compliance. If that occurs he could be incarcerated.
These are considerations both you and he should talk about before accepting any plea arrangment.
Your client, an adjudicated sex offender, has a hearing before the Sex Offender Registry Board (SORB). The Board has given him a classification and he is challenging it, wanting to be classified lower.
Here are a few things you should know:
At the time your client was classified SORB may not have had all the material on him. This would be especially true if he was recently released from prison, in that he would not have been evaluated and probably would not have been in treatment.
SORB uses instruments that have not been shown to have any validity.
How You Should Prepare:
If your client has not received a psychosexual evaluation have him take one.
The STATIC-2002, a validated instrument that estimates risk to re-offend, should be a part of the evaluation. If his risk his low or moderate you can argue for a lower classification.
If your client has issues with alcohol and/or drugs have him receive a substance abuse evaluation and have him be in treatment. Then you can tell SORB he is addressing his problem(s).
Make sure you know his IQ. (A good psychosexual evaluation includes cognitive testing). If his IQ falls in the 50-70 range he is mildly retarded. This raises the issue of competency and his need for special sex offender treatment that is appropriate for him.
Coach your client!! Make sure he can articulate the factors involved in his offense, i.e. financial stress, illness, not having a good support network, etc. The LAST thing the Board wants to hear from him is that "it was an accident." An "accident" is when you tip over a glass - not the behavior he is being classified for!
When a person wants to get counseling for themselves they have two choices - individual or group psychotherapy. Most people, given the choice, would opt for individual therapy even though both individual and group have been shown to have the same therapeutic effect. In a 4 minute video I talk about both modalities of treatment and begin to explain some of the therapeutic effects of group therapy.
Increasingly, an important part of monitoring sex offenders who reside in the community is to place them on the GPS.The device allows probation to track the location of those wearing the device and the cost of the GPS is born by the offender. Generally those at high risk of re-offense are those who are selected.
Exclusion and inclusion zones can be set-up for each offender. So, for example, if an offender committed his offense of frotteurism while riding the subway, probation can set-up as an exclusion zone all subway transit lines. If the offender should board a subway probation would immediately know.
Recently I co-presented at a Conference on sexual abuse with the Acting Commissioner of Probation, here in Massachusetts, Ronald P. Corbett, Jr. He told of Boston police having what is referred to as a "shot spotter." When a gun is fired the "shot spotter" instantly tells the police the exact location of where the gun went off. The Probation Department coordinates the shot spotter with their tracking of sex offenders on the GPS. In some cases they have been able to determine that when a gun was fired an offender was in the vicinity. In such a case the offender was either the shooter, the victim or a witness. So accurate is the GPS that probation can immediately know his name, longitude and lattitude, the speed at which he was traveling and the distance he was from where the shot was fired.
A person does not have to be a sex offender to be placed on the GPS - any offender on probation, who the department considers a high risk individual, can wear it. It is one way of keeping the community safe.
Contrary to popular belief, there is no "profile" of a sex offender. Although some mental health professionals who treat sex offenders describe them as "manipulative," "deceptive," and "secretive" there is no set of characteristics, be they physical, emotional, mental or psychological that are common to all offenders. A "profile" of a sex offender does not exist.
But what can be applied to all sex offenders is a set of what is called "criminogenic risk factors." Using these factors is one way (there are others) of gauging an offender's risk to relapse. The factors are:
Sexual preoccupation
Deviant sexual interests
Attitudes supportive of offending
Intimacy deficits
Emotion regulation problems
Lifestyle impulsivity
Poor problem solving skills
Negative social influences
Resistance to supervision
These factors are referred to as "dynamic" factors, as opposed to "stable" factors, in that they can change over time. Research has shown that effective treatment programs attempt to address as many of these factors as possible.
Some treatment programs target denial, minimization, low self-esteem, poor victim empathy and having been abused as a child. However, these factors have little or nothingto do with recidivism!
So, while there is no set of characteristics that form a sex offender profile there are criminogenic risk factors that can, and should, be used with sex offenders. Those treatment programs that target them are the most effective.
Exhibitionism is the exposure of one's genitals to a stranger. Sometimes the exhibitionist will masturbate while he is exposed. While in some cases there is the desire to shock and surprise, in others the exhibitionist entertains the fantasy that his victim will become sexually aroused and want to have sex with him.
Exhibitionism is one of the most compulsive deviant sexual behaviors. Yet only about 17 percent of exposure incidents are ever reported to the police. Therefore the only way to obtain a somewhat reliable estimate of how frequently the behavior occurs is to ask a random sample of women. One researcher did this, in 1978, by conducting a survey of 100 British nurses, with 33 being their average age. 44 percent had been exposed to, with 34 percent having been exposed to more than once.
In another study 405 female college students, from four geographic areas of the United States (KY, OR, MT and TX), their average age being 20, 32 percent stated they had been exposed to, with 37 percent saying they had been exposed to more than once.
The British and US surveys are remarkable similar. If these results were extrapolated to a population of 110 million females it would mean that approximately 32 percent of them, or 35,200, 000, would have been exposed to.
In the British study of nurses, 57 percent said they were exposed to before they were 16 years of age. Only 19 percent were 21 years or older when they were first exposed to . In the case of the college women surveyed 66 percent reported being 16 years old when first exposed to. It is the belief of one researcher that the most likely victim is at or about the age of puberty when she is first exposed to.
Studies on women who were exposed to indicate that the effects tend to be mild. While one researcher found no serious psychological effects on exposure victims he found that many tended to blame to blame themselves and felt that their self esteem had been negatively affected.
To recap:
Exhibitionism is a significant problem
Huge numbers of women are victimized
The majority of victims are under 17 years of age when first exposed to
There is some understandable confusion about what a "paraphilia" is. According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) of The American Psychiatric Association a paraphilia is characterized by "recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors" that involve the following:
Nonhuman objects
The suffering or humiliation of oneself or one's partner, or
Children or other nonconsenting persons that occur over a period of at least 6 months
Some individuals need paraphilic fantasies or stimuli for erotic arousal while for others it occurs only intermittently and the person can usually function without paraphilic fantasies or stimuli.
For Pedophilia, Voyeurism, Exhibitionism, Frotteurism and Sexual Sadism, the diagnosis is made if the person has acted on these urges with a nonconsenting person or if the urges, sexual fantasies, or behaviors cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty. For the other Paraphilias, the diagnosis is made if the behavior, sexual urges or fantasies cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning.
Case Example
Philip was referred for a psychosexual evaluation after two teenage girls, life guards at a condo complex swimming pool, saw him peeking out at them from a locker room dressed in an adult diaper. Upon interview he readily acknowledged his diaper fetish and said that he had been engaging in the behavior for years, often times going into the men's room at shopping malls and changing into an adult diaper and then peeking out the door, becoming sexually aroused at the thought people would see him.
Philip's diaper fetish fits the criteria of a paraphilia. It also illustrates that people such as he rarely self-refer and only come to the attention of mental health professionals when their behavior has brought them into conflict with their sexual partner or with society.
In 1692, in Salem, Massachusetts a mass hysteria gripped the population and over 150 people were arrested and imprisoned for being witches. Even more were accused but not charged.
The hysteria spread to surrounding towns, including Boston. Nineteen people were hanged and one man, who refused to enter a plea, was crushed to death in an attempt to get him to plead.
What occurred has been been cited as an example of religious extremism, false accusations, lapse of due process and the intrusion of government on individual liberties.
Today another form of hysteria - sex offender hysteria - appears to be gripping towns across the US. Registries, residency restrictions, GPS monitoring and a lot of misinformation based on fear.
The Blog post below is one example of sex offender hysteria. It is filled with misinformation that, if one took the time to do some simple research, would be easily refuted. Unfortunately this is not generally done and people who propagate such errors go unchallenged.
The following is being published with the permission of the person who wrote it:
"It has been three months since my husband Jim was arrested for molesting a neighbor's 7 year old daughter. I'm still terribly frightened and confused. My family is upset with me that I haven't left him. My friends have been distancing themselves from me. I have no one to turn to, and even if I did, I'm not sure what I'd say.
The hardest part for me is dealing with my feelings. I loved and trusted him - we've been married 10 years and knew each other for 3 before we got married - yet now, with this, I'm questioning how much I really knew him and if I really loved him. I certainly don't trust him.
It seems like I've been crying non-stop since he was charged. At first I sided with him and said the girl was lying but it soon became obvious she didn't make this up. I'm not a violent person but when he first acknowledged to me that he did it I felt like ripping his eyes out! At times I question my own ability to understand reality.
I'll be honest and say I wanted to kill myself. I'm not so certain I still won't......It made the papers and a local TV reporter came to the house several times wanting an interview. Jim still has his job but he'll never advance in it if he manages to stay out of jail. I've sent our two children to live with my parents in another city. My co-workers are pleasant but I sense they are less friendly to me since all of this began.
I feel like I'm rambling and not making sense. I just want to go to asleep and wake up to be told all of this has gone away."
Many people think there is only one form of sex offender denial - "I didn't do it!" This is the form of denial that many people have in mind when sex offender denial is discussed.
There are, however, other forms of sex offender denial. They are listed here with examples:
Responsibility: "I was drunk at the time."
"I was using cocaine then."
Minimization: "I never used force on her/him."
Intention: "I never meant to hurt him."
"We were playing and it just happened."
Intrusion: "I never raped her/him."
"Yes, I fondled her, but it was over her clothing."
Harm: "She/he will forget about it in a couple of years."
Frequency: "It only occurred twice."
Deviant Fantasy: "People who have sexual thoughts about kids
are real perverts!"
Denial is commonplace in our lives. Think of it this way - if you got a parking ticket would you acknowledge it? Chances are you would - it's no big deal. But, if asked, would you acknowledge that you've looked at Internet porn? Probably not. Denial, in both offender and non-offender, can be seen to be a defense against shame and embarrassment.
Have you noticed other forms of sex offender denial?
Frotteurism is a disorder in which a person obtains sexual pleasure from rubbing up against another person, usually in a crowded situation, such as public transportation or in an elevator.
Frotteurism is a paraphilia, a disorder that is characterized by:
recurrent, intense sexual fantasies over a 6 month period
sexual urges or behaviors involving touching or rubbing up against a non-consenting person
the person acts on these urges or the sexual urges or fantasies cause distress or interpersonal difficulty
Frotteurism takes two forms: rubbing one's genitals against the victim's thighs or buttocks or rubbing one's hands over the victim's genitals or breasts.
Most people who engage in frottage usually fantasize that they have a caring relationship with their victims. However, once contact is made and broken they escape to avoid prosecution.
Causes
There is no scientific agreement about the cause of frotteurism. Most experts believe that the behavior begins when someone accidentally touches the genitals of another person and finds that sexually arousing. Repeating the behavior tends to reinforce and pepetuate it.
Demographics
Males are more likely to engage in frotteurism than females. Females tend to be the victims.
Diagnosis
Most people with this disorder come into mental health settings as a result of a court order. The diagnosis is usually made by a psychiatrist or psychologist.
Case Example
Stan was on the Green Line heading into Boston. He had forgotten the Red Sox would be getting out. His car was jammed and people were pressing up against one another. He felt the buttocks of a young woman standing in front of him pressing up against him. He got sexually aroused.
A month later his wife went into surgery for gynecological problems. Their sex life was put on hold. Stan then found himself on the T engaging in the behavior that he had found pleasureable a month before. His frotteurism continued for two years before he was arrested and referred for sex offender specific treatment.
As mentioned in previous blogs there are a lot of sex offender myths out there. I won't review them all here - you can find them in other articles on my blog or in The Free Guide to Understanding the Adult Sex Offender on our website - but there is one I'd like to mention that seems to be the most persistent, at least in my experience.....
The myth goes like this - boys molested as children grow up to be sex offenders. Or to put it another way, the boy victim later becomes the adult male sex offender. (If true, then US Senator Scott Brown would be an offender, which I don't think he is).
I wish people who believe in this myth would just think! If this were true then the majority of sex offenders would be female not male because females, as children, are sexually abused at a rate higher than males. According to the Center for Sex Offender Management (www.csom.org) one in every 5 girls and one in every 7 boys are sexually abused by the time they reach adulthood.
So, the question becomes - why does this myth persist? My guess is that it is a simple way for people to comprehend behavior that they find incomprehensible.
Most people would probably agree that shame is a difficult emotion to experience. But what is shame? According to Webster's Dictionary it is defined as "a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming or impropriety." Anais Nin, the novelist, defined shame as "the lie someone told you about yourself."
Whatever definition you go by shame is a difficult, emotional, esteem lowering and painful feeling to experience. If you don't think so, think back to your childhood and recall the experience of being shamed by a peer or an adult.
But what about sex offenders and shame? Do they experience it?
Based upon my 30+ years of experience in the field I would say that most sex offenders do. This comes up, with some frequency, in sex offender specific group therapy. You hear it in their talk of how it has affected their relationships with others and with themselves, in their talk of community notification and the dread with which they approach the local police department when they have to register and wondering how they will be treated by the officer behind the desk. You hear it in their anxiety about some states IDing offenders by planning to issue them driver's licenses and plates letting others know who they are.
There is a lot sex offenders have to work through in sex offender specific counseling. Shame is one of many topics.
Are sex offenders confined to one social or economic class?
No. Sex offenders are found across all strata of society and they are not confined to any one ethnic group.
Are sex offenses ever spontaneous acts?
No, they are not, although some offenders say that theirs were. This, however, is not true. If it were, offenders would always be at great risk to act out in a sexually deviant manner.
What are some High Risk Factors (HRF) for sex offenders?
Some Identified High Risk Factors are:
Alcohol and Drug Use
Deviant Sexual Interests
Impulsivity
Negative Social Influences
Psychological Stress
Not Cooperating with Supervision
What is NAMBLA?
NAMBLA is an acronym for North American Man Boy Love Association, a group of pedophiles, with headquarters in San Francisco, CA., that are out to change the law so adult men can have sex with young boys. Other pedophiliac organizations are the Lewis Carroll Collection Guild and the Rene Guyon Society. The motto of the latter is "sex before 8 or it's too late."
"Sexting" - using your cell phone to send a nude picture of yourself - appears to be somewhat popular among teenagers as 1 in 5 have alleged to have sexted someone.
Given that many teenagers now have cell phones it was only a matter of time, some say, that they would begin to experiment with sending nude or racy photos of themselves. But it's no laughing matter as prosecutors across the country are pursuing child pornography charges against kids who send nude photos to one another over cell phones and email.
In Vancouver, Washington one teenage girl is alleged to have taken pictures of herself and texted them to a small group of her classmates. One boy forwarded the text to others and, when school authorities found out, both had a chat with school administrators.
A 14 year old girl in Trenton, N.J., wasn't so lucky. She took approximately 30 explicit photos of herself and posted them to MySpace. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children tipped off a state task force. The girl was arrested and charged with possesion of child pornography and distribution of child pornography. She could end up having to register as a sex offender if convicted.
A 14 year old registering as a sex offender! Possibly being incarcerated! Seems outrageous to me.
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so." Mark Twain
Myth : When a sex offender recidivates he commits another sex offense (rape, child molestation, indecent assault and battery, etc) or he engages in crimes more serious and violent than his prior offenses.
Fact : Sex offenders are more apt to be rearrested for non-sexual, non-violent crimes as opposed to sexual offenses
Myth : Using the polygraph on offenders reduces his risk to reoffend.
Fact : The polygraph has not been shown to be effective in preventing sex crimes.
Myth : Sex offender denial prevents a sex offender from benefiting from sex offender specific treatment.
Fact : Research indicates that even if an offender is in denial he can benefit from sex offender specific treatment
Use of the polygraph, sex offender denial and the nature of sex offender reoffenses are all myths. As people rely less on the media for their information perhaps these myths will become history.
Communities want to keep their residents safe. The question is how to go about it. It seems that residency restrictions top the list in communities across the US.
As mentioned in a previous blog the Center for Sex Offender Management conducted a nation wide poll on attitudes toward sex offenders and published the results last August. Pertinent findings were:
Residency restrictions for sex offenders were thought by 63% to be effective in reducing the risk to reoffend with 20% believing it to be "very effective."
82% of respondents thought GPS/Electronic Monitoring was effective in reducing sex offender recidivism.
Research did not support the above beliefs.
Some 73% of the poll respondents thought making information public about sex offenders reduced recidivism. Research on this is mixed with some studies suggesting the potential is there while other studies state no such link has been established.
So what does work to reduce recidivism and protect communities? Let me know your thoughts.
There's a belief out there that good sex offender treatment cannot take place if confidentiality is not maintained. The thinking is - how can an offender feel safe if what he says isn't being kept confidential?
It's not so much a question of feeling safe as it is a question of being honest. An offender cannot be tried for offenses (rape, exhibitionism, indecent assault and battery, etc.) committed in the past if the treatment provider does not know the victims. Likewise, aspects of the abuse an offender discloses about the offense that got him referred cannot be used against him as his case has already been adjudicated.
When an offender is in the legal system, and treatment is a condition of his probation or parole, his right to confidentiality is waived. This is because those charged with supervising and treating the offender have to share information with one another. If they are unable to do that society is at risk, given the secrecy of offenders.
If the abuse is occurring in the present, yes, the treating professional is obligated to notify the authorities, since not to do so is unethical and could lead to revocation of one's license as well as criminal charges.
Here are two more sex offender ploys I have noticed over the years:
Presenting a Good Front:
Purpose: Convince the Probation/Parole Officer and therapist he's really motivated to change his behavior.
How It's Used: Haring the offender make any of the following comments: "I was so upset with what I was doing (sexual abuse) that I told my therapist knowing that s/he would have to file a report. "Since all this came out I've gone back to church (or discovered Jesus Christ, became a reader at Church services, etc.) and now I know how serious what I did was." and "I never this did to anyone else."
Danger: If not countered ("You've still got a serious problem you have to look at"), such statements will continue to be part of the offender's self-deluding system. (They are also part of his denying and minimizing).
Feel Sorry For Me:
Purpose: To have the Probation Officer and/or therapist pity him and his "tough" situation, thereby shifting the focus from his sexual crime to his "tough" personal situation.
How It Works: The offender offers a list of his current problems (not, of course his sexual offense!): he alone (his wife is divorcing him) is responsible for the monthly mortgage payments, since he's been told of stay out of the house he doesn't have anyone to talk to; his car badly needs repair, etc.
Danger: If the Probation Officer and/or therapist begins to feel sorry for the offender the purpose of meeting with him (to have him deal with his sexual crime) will be lost and you'll end up trying to "help" him with his other alleged problems.
There are several labels that seek to define sexual behavior that people cannot control. Among them are sexual compulsivity, sexual addiction, compulsive sexual behavior and sexual impulsivity.
In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) of the American Psychiatric Association, there is no category listed that describes a person's inability to control their sexual behavior. (This most certainly will change in the DSM-V).
There appears to be two models that attempt to describe this disorder - sexual compulsivity and sexual addiction. The first disorder is associated with obsessive-compulsive disorder while the second model - sexual addiction - is associated with the DSM-IV-R criteria for substance abuse.
The "sexual addiction" model includes several components. They are:
the person experiences sexually arousing fantasies, urges or behaviors that are persistent and intense and which causes them to be impaired in at least one area of functioning.
the person has had these symptoms for at least 6 months
the condition is not caused by any other medical condition or explained by an Axis I or Axis II diagnosis.
In a "sexual addiction" what is important to note is the relationship between the pattern of behavior and the individual's life. The key feature that sets apart a "sexual addiction" from other patterns of sexual behavior is that 1) the person cannot control the behavior and 2) the person continues the behavior despite it having harmful consequences.
Let's say you, or someone you know, is looking to get into therapy. What mode of treatment, individual or group, do you think would be chosen? If the research has it right you or your friend would choose individual therapy.
There have been many studies on the treatment efficacy of individual vs group therapy and what has been shown is that there are no significant differences between the two. However, what has been shown is that people have a strong preference for individual over group treatment. Why? The main reason is that the thought of being in a group makes people anxious. (The main fear of an individual entering a group is "Will they accept me?").
In one study some students seeking help at a college counseling center were told they would be in individual treatment while others were told they'd be in a group. A very high percentage of those told they'd be seeing an individual therapist showed up for their first appointment. Conversely, a very low percentage of those told they were being referred to group showed for their first appointment.
Irvin Yalom, M.D., one of the country's top experts on group therapy, felt so strongly about the efficacy of groups that when he was the Director of a large university counseling center he only offered group therapy to students seeking help.
There are many benefits to group and one of them is that you get input from other group members, your peers, which often times makes what is said more acceptable, as opposed to individual therapy where input only comes from the therapist. Some other identified therapeutic factors are groups instill hope, they impart information, the group member feels less isolated and one gets to imitate behavior.
Another important therpeutic factor is that of universality. To quote Dr. Yalom: "Many individuals enter therapy with the disquieting thought that they are unique in their wretchedness, that they alone have certain frightening or unacceptable problems, thoughts, impulses and fantasies.....In the therapy group, especially in the early stages, the disconfirmation of a client's feelings of uniqueness is a powerful source of relief." Having lead sex offender groups for many years I have seen evidence of this factor at work and, I have to tell you, it's powerful! It's probably one of the reasons I have a bias toward group treatment as opposed to individual treatment.
What are your thoughts, feelings, reactions, maybe even experiences, of individual vs group therapy?
Jim, a pseuonym, was referred for evaluation and treatment after being released from prison, having served 6 years for an indecent assault and battery on a 4 year old girl. In the referral material from the prison it was noted that his group therapist had stated that he was "uncooperative," "constantly made excuses" and had referred to himself as "retarded." He had been terminated at least twice from the sex offender treatment program due to not completing his assignments. No psychological testing of any kind had been done on him.
He was administered the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test-R as part of a comprehensive sex offender evaluation. His Full Scale IQ of 66 placed him in the range of mild mental retardation. No wonder he was "uncooperative," "constantly made excuses" and was terminated twice from the offender program! He was mentally retarded! Yet, due to no cognitive testing having been done he was placed in a group of high functioning offenders and simply could not keep up with them.
The above caused me to wonder - What if Jim had been in an outpatient program that had done no cognitive testing and that had placed him in a high functioning group? He would have been just as lost as he was in the group he was placed in in prison, would have been terminated and would have possibly faced a violation hearing, and possible jail time. This would certainly have been an injustice to him.
Developmentally delayed sex offenders have treatment needs quite different from the average functioning offender that must be taken into consideration. A first, fundamental step, is to realize they are mentally retarded, i.e., they must be given (as all offenders must be) a comprehensive sexual offender assessment that includes cognitive testing. Due to their lower level of cognitive functioning they should never be placed in any group other than a group of similar offenders.
I wonder how many "Jim's" there are out there who are mentally retarded offenders who are not recognized as such. Unfortunately, I fear their numbers might be rather high.
Over the years I have noticed various "ploys" used by sex offenders. Here are two "Sex Offender Ploys:"
Therapy Shopping:
Purpose: To Get the Least Demanding Treatment
How It's Used: The offender complains to his Probation Officer that a "personality difference" exists between his therapist and himself. Treatment therefore isn't possible and he should be allowed to go elsewhere.
Variations: Using the cost of treatment, the difficulty of getting to treatment and the time of treatment.
Danger: If allowed, the offender will "therapy shop" for a long period of time.
(Note: In MA it is now common for probation officers to give several names of qualified sex offender specific therapists to the offenders they supervise, telling them to chose from the list).
Let's You (Probation Officer) and her/him(Therapist) Fight:
Purpose: To either destroy or seriously harm the working relationship between the Probation Officer and the Therapist.
How It Works: The offender "quotes" the Probation Officer to the therapist, or vice-versa, "S/he told me I don't have to come here," or "S/he told me that I can delay the evaluation for a month."
Variations: The offender pulls in a third party, such as his attorney, and either "quotes" the probation officer or the therapist to this third party.
Danger: DO NOT ASSUME THE "QUOTE" IS CORRECT. Always verify with the "quoted" party first. If this is not done animosity toward the "quoted" party will grow (and the offender will have achieved his goal).
Generally speaking, the public makes no distinction between a pedophile and a child molester. Often times the terms are used interchangeable. There are, however, significant differences.
According to The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) of the American Psychiatric Association a pedophile is a person who:
Over a period of at least 6 months experiences recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally 13 years of age or younger).
The person has acted on these sexual urges or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulties.
The person is at least 16 years of age and at least 5 years older that the prepubscent child.
A major difference between a pedophile and a child molester is that the primary source of sexual gratification comes from being sexual with prepubscent children. This is not true of the child molester whose primary source of sexual gratification comes from being sexual with an age appropriate consenting adult.
At the present time there are two ways to measure deviant sexual arousal. The two instruments that do this are the penile plethysmograph (PPG) and the Abel Assessment for sexual interest-3 (AASI-3).
The PPG requires the sex offender to attach a sensor to his penis. He sits in a room adjacent to the person conducting the assessment and, after he has completed this initial task, a video camera is turned on. He is then instructed to put on headphones through which he listens to a series of audio taped scenarios, some of age appropriate, consenting sex and some of inappropriate sexual contact with adults and children. The sensor detects levels of arousal by measuring the blood flow in the penis and sends this information to a computer, which then graphs it out.
The AASI-3 is composed of two parts. One part is a questionnaire concerning the offender's interest in a variety of deviant sexual activities. He reads them on a computer and responds. The second part is a slide assessment. The slides, of men and women, boys and girls, all clothed, of both African-Americans and Caucasians, is first quickly viewed by the offender. He is then instructed to go back and again look at the slides but this time rate them on a rating system that is explained to him.
Both measures indicate what age groups and genders an offender is aroused to and interested in. The AASI-3 also provides information on interest in Internet child pornography and Internet child sexual contact.
As you might imagine, having to undress as part of a PPG assessment does not go over well with the person being assessed. Nor does it generally go over well with the agency making the referral, such as the Court. Additionally, the PPG does not provide any information on 25% of the people assessed. This can be due to the person having neurological problems that interfere with the results or to medications or depression. No such problems exist with the AASI-3.
Knowing if an offender has deviant sexual arousal is very important as deviant arousal is a risk factor.
Even though you may not know what a cognitive distortion is, chances are that you use them. Also referred to as "thinking errors," cognitive distortions are used by everyone, although for some reason sex offenders appear to rely on them more.
Perhaps an example will help. A person studies to take an exam that they believe will help them advance in their job. After hours and hours of study the big day arrives. They take the exam and.....flunk it! Thoughts such as "I'm a failure," "I'll never amount to anything," cross their mind. The result, they get discouraged. (They could have said to themselves "At least I now know the areas I'm weak in," "Next time I take the test I'll be able to manage my anxiety better.")
Cognitive distortions that sex offenders rely on are maybe a little more pronounced. A grandfather who abused his 5 year old grandaughter says "She sat on my lap so I knew she wanted me to fondle her." Or the pedophile says "They were asleep when I fondled them so it's no big deal."
Most exhibitionists I've interviewed over the years rely on the distorted thought they they will expose themselves to an adult female, and she will be so aroused she'll immediately want to have sex with him! It sounds crazy to you, I'm sure, but not to them!
So, part of the treatment of a sex offender is to discover what his "thinking errors" were and to correct them.
In a survey reported on last August conducted by the Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) the majority of respondents stated that any knowledge they had of sex offenders came from the media. Since the media often only reports on sensational cases, and appears to have a bias against the effectiveness of offender treatment, I thought it would be a good idea to put up some of the FAQ I have received over the years.
Who becomes a sexual offender?
Any person, male or female, can be a sexual offender. Offenders are not confined to any one social class, race, religion or economic background.
It is true that most sexual offenders were sexually abused as children?
No. While a percentage of offenders were sexually abused as children the majority of boys so victimized do not grow up to become sex offenders. It there were a correlation between being abused and becoming an offender most offenders should then be female as they are abused as children at a rate higher than boys.
What type of acts are considered to be sexually deviant?
Exhibitionism
Voyeurism
Pedophilia
Rape
Incest
Frotteurism*
* Frotteurism is the act of rubbing up against another person and getting sexually aroused from doing so. This often occurs in crowded places, such as on publice transportation, where the perpetrator can claim the act was "accidental."
Are sex offenses ever spontaneous acts?
No, for the most part they are not, although it is common to hear an offender say "it just happened." Most sex offenses are planned out in advance. In some instances the offender is not aware of his own planning.
I invite others to send in their FAQ regarding offenders. I will attempt to answer them.
When a sex offense occurs and the perpetrator has been apprehended the focus is generally two-fold: obtaining services for the victim(s) and bringing the offender to justice. A sex crime creates many victims - the person(s) abused, their family and friends, the community in which they live. But what about the wife or significant other of the offender? Aren't they victims too?
Yes, they are. But little, if any, attention is paid to them. It is not difficult to imagine the shock and trauma experienced by the wife or significant other of an offender. The person they live with, the person they love and have had children by - the person they thought they knew - is now under arrest for one of the most stigmatized offenses out there - a sex crime.
Overnight their world becomes a horror show. There is the matter of getting their loved one released, if he is being held in custody. Then the matter of coming up with the retainer, usually quite substantial, for the attorney to defend him. The fear that he will lose his job, how to deal with the publicity, the neighbors, relatives, friends, how to protect their children. What to do if he gets incarcerated.
In such a scenario who can they turn to? Not many community based sex offender programs offer services that are helpful. Some offer what are referred to as "chaperone" programs, but the focus of these programs tends to be on educating the wives/significant others as to the nature of sexual deviancy, explaining the "assault cycle" and cognitive distortions used by offenders,and the high risk factors they should be on the watch for to prevent their partner from re-offending - not very helpful to someone experiencing significant emotional turmoil.
More attention to the emotional needs of these "hidden victims" is needed.
The Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) last August released the results of a National Opinion Poll regarding the public's attitudes toward sex offenders. Among some of the more interesting findings:
The public believes that sex offense rates are higher than research shows them to be. 72% thought at least half, if not most, convicted sex offenders would commit additional sex crimes in the future. One-third (33%) believed 75% or more would reoffend.
Data shows that 15-30% of adult sex offenders will recidivate.
82% of the respondents thought GPS/Electronic Monitoring was effective in reducing sex offender recidivism.
Research fails to support this belief.
Residency restrictions were thought by 63% to be effective at reducing the risk to re-offend, with 20% believing they were "very effective" at doing this.
Available research does not support this
Making information public about sex offenders was thought by 73% to reduce recidivism.
Research on this point is mixed. Some studies suggest the potential is there, while others have not demonstrated any such link.
In the national poll 74% of the respondents reported that they received most of their information about sex offenders from the media. Only a small fraction of the sample stated that they had obtained their information from Internet searches, professionals in the field, sex offender registries and family regarding their source of information.
The mere mention of the word "sex offender" evokes a powerful, visceral, negative reaction from most people. While such a response is understandable we need to be informed about this segment of our population so as to deal with it effectively.
Some Myths
* All Offenders Are Alike
Not so. If it were a rapist would be no different than an exhibitionist and a pedophile would be no different than a voyeur.
* Treatment Doesn't Work
Not true. In a study by the Wisconsin Department of Corrections of 11,350 child molesters who had received treatment the recidivism rate was 11%. In a study sponsored by the Ministry of the Solicitor General of Canada post-treatment relapse rates were 12.8%.
Community Safety
Across the US communities are enacting resolutions and laws that restrict were a sex offender can live. Most common restrictions are that they cannot live within 1,000 yards of a school, playground, bus stop or library. Such restrictions give a false sense of security as they have not been shown to be effective in reducing sex offender recidivism.
A Thorough Evaluation
So, what does promote community safety? A thorough sex offender evaluation by a competent mental health professional. Why is such an evaluation valuable?
It tells you the offender's level of risk
It tells you what other problems (alcohol, drugs, etc) need to be addressed
It indicates mental health problems that need to be addressed: bipolar disorder, major depression, etc.)
It informs the type of treatment - group or individual - and, if group, the nature of the group (developmentally disabled, major mental illness, average functioning)
It indicates any need for medication
It tells you if the offender has deviant sexual interests
It indicates his level of intelligence (which is important to know for treatment purposes)
"Amazing Grace" is probably one of the most well known hymns in the country. However, it's composer, John Newton, is less well known, especially his personal background. It is safe to venture that if he were alive now, that he would be a Level 3 sex offender, be wearing a GPS bracelet and be restricted as to where he could live, and this after having served a lengthy prison sentence. Hard to imagine his background of rape and torture after listening to the hymn "Amazing Grace," which he wrote.
1/7/2011 10:57:00 AM
Cannot read data from the selected RSS channel. RSS format is invalid. The selected RSS channel is unavailable now.
Dreaming Up LIfe
Spiritual Practice, Music, Counseling and Coaching by Patrick Dieter
Dear Giver , I’m getting in touch with you because I need your support with something. Yes, I will mention money, but that will be totally up to you, and I will never know whether you chose to support me in that way, or by some other means (or if you just clicked away from [...]
Our society runs in fast motion. There is much to do and technology easily eats up whatever time we have when we are done with our to-do list. The straight out truth is this speed is taking a toll on our lives and relationships. There is much going on “out there” but there also is [...]
You have been waiting for him to pop the question and no matter how long you wait, there is always a reason that he will propose later. Or maybe he says, “Let me do it on my time; don’t push me.” The only problem is you have been dating or living with each other for [...]
Listen and enjoy my interview on Playboy Radio with Tiffany Granath. She was a great hostess and some great information was given out. The name of the segment- “Is Monogamy Too Much to Ask for in a Marriage?” Click on the link. http://www.tvguestpert.com/audio/SiriusXMPlayboyRadio1.18.12Todd Creager.mp3
Business and life coaches always talk about creating a vision. They may have you see yourself making the money you want to make, buying the house you want to buy or being the weight you want to be. The reason that coaches insist on people making a vision is because it works- it works [...]
I am doing a free teleseminar today(Monday, Oct. 3rd at 4:15 PM Pacific time) titled- The Secrets of a Long, Hot Marriage which are some of my important points I make in my book, “The Long, Hot Marriage. This 1 hour teleseminar is sure to change how you look at yourself and your partner (and [...]
I have been teaching grad students at the USC School of Social Work and truth be told- I am learning as much as the students to whom I am lecturing. We cover a lot of area is in this class and even though I have a lot of preparation to do, I am having a [...]
Above is a video I recently came across on the many struggles boys and men face in society and how they are reacting to it. Psychologist Philip Zimbardo asks, “Why are boys struggling?” He shares some stats (lower graduation rates, greater worries about intimacy and relationships) and suggests a few reasons — and he [...]
Life is challenging and everyone is saying it these days. The economy has just added to a myriad of stresses that people are dealing with. I saw numerous couples just today alone whose relationships have become too mundane and serious. Of course, there are problems and I would be the last person to make light [...]
I run into some of the best advice in 140 characters or less on Twitter all the time. Here is my top ten list of advice, quotes and tips from some of my favorite relationship experts this week: 1. Don’t assume that you understand your husband. When he speaks, really listen, ask a question [...]
Where is the compassionate part of me? It’s easy to get caught up in your inner “parts”, your instinctive emotional responses, when talking with your partner. This video discusses what to do to reach that compassionate part of yourself in order to shift patterns and open dialogue between you and a loved one.
High risk factors related to sexual recidivism (called
I still struggle with feelings of betrayal, anger, resentment and disbelief. At times I lose my composure and find myself crying. But I no longer feel that my life is over.
A teacher could speak to her students about the importance of reporting suspicious activity. Law enforcement could educate themselves about sex offenders and know what to look for.
STABLE- 2007, the ACUTE-2007 - to accomplish this task. These instruments are not generally well known to the lay person so how is a family member, probation officer, attorney, or friend to guage risk?
On March 5th I posted a communication that was sent to me by a woman whose husband was a sex offender. This, too, received a large number of page views.
happen if the case goes before a jury or a judge. The Assistant District Attorney prosecuting the case is open to plea bargain - several years probation, a sex offender evaluation and treatment. This is much better than you thought you'd be able to get. You can probably convince your client this is a good deal - but should he take it? 
The device allows probation to track the location of those wearing the device and the cost of the GPS is born by the offender. Generally those at high risk of re-offense are those who are selected..jpg)
is. According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) of The American Psychiatric Association a paraphilia is characterized by "recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors" that involve the following:
Most people would probably agree that shame is a difficult emotion to experience. But what is shame? According to Webster's Dictionary it is defined as "a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming or impropriety." Anais Nin, the novelist, defined shame as "the lie someone told you about yourself."
.jpg)
From news.cnet.com:
.jpg)
At the present time there are two ways to measure deviant sexual arousal. The two instruments that do this are the penile plethysmograph (PPG) and the Abel Assessment for sexual interest-3 (AASI-3). 
