Dosage of Treatment to Sexual Offenders: Are We Overprescribing?

• NCJ Number: 199847
• Journal: International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology Volume: 47 Issue: 2 Dated: April 2003 Pages: 171-184
• Author(s): Donna L. Mailloux; Jeffrey Abracen; Ralph Serin; C. Cousineau; Bruce Malcolm; Jan Looman
• Date Published: April 2003
• Length: 14 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study examined the appropriateness of allocation of sex offender treatment to a large group of sex offenders in Ontario, Canada.

Abstract

There continues to be a need to study the association between dosage of treatment for sex offenders, risk of recidivism, and the outcome of sex offender treatment in terms of reducing recidivism. Although previous research has examined the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral treatment techniques in reducing recidivism among sex offenders, more probing studies are needed to provide greater clarity for the provision of treatment to sexual offenders. In the current study, 337 sex offenders who received treatment within the Ontario region of Correctional Services Canada between 1993 and 1998 were compared in terms of treatment intensity (low, moderate, or high). The three groups were compared in terms of actuarial risk assessment measures, criminogenic risk factors, and the number and type of treatment programs completed. The authors hypothesized that those offenders receiving high intensity treatment would have greater criminogenic risk factors, higher actuarial scores, and have a higher rate of treatment participation than offenders who received moderate to low intensity sex offender treatment. The results indicate support for the hypothesis. In general, those offenders receiving the high intensity treatment did score higher than the other two groups on the two measures. This finding confirms that those offenders at highest risk for recidivism are receiving more intense treatment than offenders who are less likely to recidivate. However, the findings also suggest the possibility that the low intensity treatment group is receiving too much treatment relative to their supposed risk of recidivism. The authors conclude that given the concern over the scarcity of treatment resources, further study is called for in terms of how much treatment is enough for those sex offenders who are at low risk of recidivating. References