Social Work and Sexual Violence...Assignment #12

Felicia McCaw
SW 314
Social Work and
Sexual Violence
Assignment #12


Reference: Sage Publications

2003, Vol. 47, No.2, 171-184
1
http://ijo.SagePub.com/content/47/2/171

Dosage of Treatment to Sexual Offenders: Are we prescribing?

Compiled and written by:

Donna L. Mailloux, Jeffrey Abracen, Ralph Serin, C. Cousineau, Bruce Malcolm, Jan Looman

Name of Study

Dosage of Treatment to Sexual Offenders: Are we prescribing?

Literature

The purpose of this study is to determine whether or not the dosage of treatment is over represented. This study serves as an investigative resource to monitor the treatment allocated to sexual offenders. Data included in this investigation is relevant for other jurisdictions that are interested in developing an empirical based system for treating sexual offenders. Therefore, any deductive conclusions contributes to effective treatment of sexual offenders and the correct amount of treatment needed for each sexual offender based on high risk and low risk status.
Consistencies of studies reflect outcomes that accentuate the need to move beyond questions regarding sex offender sex treatment to provide strategic plans for treatment of sexual offenders.
This study investigates the allocation of sex offender treatment to a large group of sexual offenders utilizing the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: Sex offenders attending high-intensity sex offender treatment programs
would have more static criminogenic risk factors than sex offenders attending moderate or low intensity sex offender treatment programs.

Hypotheses 2: Sex offenders in higher intensity sex offender programs would have higher scores
on actuarially based risk assessments than sex offenders attending moderate or
low intensity sex offenders treatment programs.

Hypotheses 3: Sex offenders attending high intensity sex offender treatment programs would
participate in more sex offender specific programs and more programs related to
other criminogenic needs than offenders in low and moderate intensity sex
offender treatment programs.






Felicia McCaw
SW 314
Assignment #12
Page 2

Method Used to Study

The method used included investigative determinants of sex offender treatments participation. Utilizing a sampling gathered from the Ontario region Correctional Services of Canada (CSC)
that provides services to offenders serving sentences over 2 years. Mailloux and Serin found 67% of sex offenders take sex offenders program with completion rate of 86.9%. Further the method conclusively allows the assessment to include a recommendation for a particular intensity of sex offender program (low, moderate, or high).

Measures

Enabling correct measures the files of sex offenders assessed at MAV between 1993 and 1998
were coded for information pertaining to background and criminal history. Risks assessment scores on the Level of Service Inventory (LSI) (Bonta and Andrews, 1993) and the psychopathy checklist revised (Hare, (1991) were taken form MAV files. The Offender Management System (OMS) was utilized to obtain information which is an electronic database containing information related to all offenders under the jurisdiction of CSC.

Results

Based on a study by Malloux and Serin (2001) higher risk offenders attended a greater number of treatment programs (including more sex offender treatment programs), rapists were likely to receive treatment. Utilizing MANOVA the results were significant – Wilks, F (8,594) = 5.75, P<.01; N^2 = .07, this suggest low association between the dependent and independent variables. The univariate tests revealed significant main effects across all variables except number of sexual convictions. A post hoc investigation utilizing Tamhane’s test supports the hypothesis that a low-intensity group had fewer nonviolent convictions than both moderate (mean difference = -7.30, p<.01) and high-intensity (mean difference = -13.11, p<.01) groups. The low-intensity group had fewer nonsexual violent convictions than both the moderate (mean difference = -1.41, P<.01) and high-intensity groups (mean difference = -1.98, p>.01).

The low-intensity group was found to be significantly older than both the moderate (mean difference = 5.31, p<.01) and high-intensity (mean difference = 5.80, p<.05) groups but again no differences between moderate and high-intensity group. ANOVAS were performed instead of MANOVA given the high correlation (r=>83) between the dependent measures. Because of the nature of highly correlated data Tabachnick and Fiddell (2001) recommend the use of univariate tests. The overall ANOVA was significant for both PCL-R, F (2,226) = 18.25, p<.001, N^2 = .14, and the LSI, F (2, 235) = 19.07, P <.001, N^2 = .14. Felicia McCaw SW 314 Assignment #12 Page 3 Also, with the Wilks criterion, the dependent variables were significantly different by intensity, level, F (6, 496) = 4.93, p>.001). A weak effect size was revealed, N^2 = .006. Univariate tests
indicated that there were significant differences between the groups with reference to the number of substance abuse programs F (2,250) = 6.7, p<.01; sex offender programs, F (2,250) = 4.31, p<.05; and cognitive skills programs completed, F (2,250) = 5.0, p<.01.

For substance abuse programs, the low-intensity group took few programs than either moderate (mean difference = -.44, p<.01) or high-intensity (mean difference = -.53, p<.05) groups. No significant difference were found between the moderate and high intensity groups.

For sex offenders programs, both the low intensity (mean difference = -.44, p<.05) and moderate intensity group (mean difference = -.46, p<.05) took significantly fewer programs than the high intensity group. No significant difference between the low and moderate intensity group. For the cognitive skills programs, the low intensity group took fewer programs than the moderate intensity group (mean difference = -.80, p<.01).

Conclusion of the Study

The proposed hypotheses are supported by the study which indicated differences between the three intensive groups reflecting higher scores for the high-intensity group than either of the other groups and the low-intensity group provided evidence of lower scores than the other groups. The POL-R scores reflect that the high risk groups are receiving more intense treatment to prevent recidivism. Further that treatment to low-intensity offenders is being overstated and over administered.

Due to the amount of research regarding dosage of treatment to sexual offenders the study reflects a framework of empirical validated indices that others use a treatment guide that affect decisions regarding sexual offenders.

My Opinion/thoughts about the study

My opinion of the study is that the purpose of supporting the hypotheses and proving a corellational pattern exists and it is interesting and an acceptable idea that those within the high intensity groups do need more treatment than those in low intensity groups. Further that treatments are being overly administered to low intensity groups and should be adjusted accordingly and documented and confirmed.