http://dx

The present paper sets out to review the literature on several aspects of sex offenders with intellectual and developmental disabilities, including the relationship between sex offending and developmental disabilities, the prevalence and characteristics of sex offenders in this client group, assessment, treatment, and outcome of intervention. Several important variables were identified as influencing the disparate results found in different prevalence studies. These include variations in inclusion criteria, differences in the source of the sample, differences in determination of IQ, the impact of deinstitutionalization, and the effect of changing social and penal policies in the area where studies have been conducted. Although some studies have suggested an increasing incidence, there is no clear evidence for the over- or under-representation of people with developmental disabilities amongst sex offenders. One of the main methodological flaws in several reports listing the characteristics of sex offenders is that considerations are based on clinical samples. Therefore, there is no control group to show that these characteristics do not exist in other samples of individuals with intellectual disability (ID). It does appear that sex offenders with ID are more likely to commit offences across categories and to be less discriminating in their victims. There may also be an association with sexual abuse in childhood. The primary issue considered has been assessment of competency, in that people with ID are considered to be disadvantaged by the criminal justice process. While several authors have delineated the important areas for assessment, there are few assessment measures with robust psychometric properties. Pharmacological, behavioural, educational and cognitive treatments are reviewed. Several comprehensive treatments which include all of the aforementioned methods are also considered. Although most studies do not report particularly positive outcomes, several authors have found better outcomes with treatment lasting at least 2 years.

Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University's research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is available online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.html This document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version of the research, please visit the publisher's website (a subscription may be required.) Risk Assessment in Offenders with 1.The

This paper describes a cognitive therapy for men with a learning disability convicted of sex offences against children. Methods are described which focus the session, emphasize confidentiality, ensure that the patient accepts responsibility for the offence, and deal with issues of intent, harm done to the victim and sequences of offending behaviour. Methods for producing cognitive change are described. Patients were assessed regularly and data are presented in detail. While all six men showed improvement, there were several variables which interfered with the course of treatment. The study attempts to address two major problems in work with sex offenders: the difficulty of employing a controlled treatment design and the importance of a long follow-up period.

The present study compares the responses to treatment of sex offenders with intellectual disability receiving 1- and 2-year probationary sentences. There were seven subjects in each group. There were no differences between subjects with regard to age, IQ or previous offences. All subjects received group treatment which addressed issues of: denial, minimization and responsibility for the offence; harm done to the victim; behaviour consistent with offending; and victim awareness and confidentiality. The subjects were assessed on a standard questionnaire designed to assess attitudes consistent with sex offending. All subjects were convicted of either indecent exposure or offences against children. There was a significant difference between the groups at the end of the probation period with subjects sentenced to 2 years' probation showing greater improvement. Subjects receiving 1 years' probation retained a number of attitudes consistent with denial and minimization of their offence. Furthermore, follow-up data underlined the poorer response to treatment for the 1-year probation group in terms of re-offending rates and assessment of attitudes consistent with sex offending. The authors recommend that a court order for a 1-year period of probation with treatment is of little value when dealing with sex offenders with intellectual disability. Rather, a period of at least 2 years' probation with a treatment recommendation is suggested.

No abstract

No abstract

The authors show that context of sampling affects most relationships between intellectual disability (ID) and offending when the methods for measuring ID are held constant. The results also present several questions on the relationship between risk, services available in an area and referral to higher security.