Are the cognitive distortions of child molesters in need of treatment?

The cognitive distortions of child molesters are in need of treatment

“…In Are the cognitive distortions of child molesters in need of treatment?, Marshall et al (2011) propose that identifying and challenging the cognitive distortions of child molesters is of limited value in treatment. They challenge researchers and therapists to reconsider the role of so-called distortions in child-molestation.…”

“…In presenting their arguments for debate, Marshall et al (2011) have defined the term cognitive distortion as "thoughts, perceptions, beliefs and ideas that are understood to present obstacles to the offender taking responsibility for his crimes" (p. 2 1 ). While this is a broad definition of cognitive distortion, the paper itself, along with a recent paper in a similar vein by two of the same authors (Marshall, Marshall, & Ware, 2009) focuses heavily on select specific phenomenon subsumed under their generic description of cognitive distortion.…”

“…

AbstractThis paper forms the second part of a debate lead by Marshall, Marshall, and Kingston (2011) regarding the need to address so-called cognitive distortions in sexual offender treatment. In their paper, Marshall et al argue that so-called cognitive distortions may not necessarily require intense and focussed attention or challenge throughout treatment.

…”

Sex Offending and Situational Motivation

“…If indeed this third type of interpretation is correct, this would lend support to the argument made by a growing array of clinicians and researchers in the field that the insistence upon challenging and proscribing external accounts in therapeutic work with individuals convicted of sex offending is unnecessary and possibly iatrogenic (see e.g, Maruna & Mann, 2006;Waldram, 2007;Lacombe, 2008;Marshall et al, 2011;Ware & Mann, 2012;Bullock & Condry, 2013;Digard, 2014). Participants in the current study had, in effect, rejected the label "sex offender" and the negative connotations that sit alongside that label, and had developed a much more positive self-identity (Paternoster and Bushway, 2009).…”

“…This interpretation is also broadly in line with contemporary research trends in the study of sex offending. For instance, meta-analyses (Hanson & Bussiére, 1998;Morton-Bourgon, 2005) and literature reviews (Ward et al, 1997;Schneider & Wright, 2004;Blake & Gannon, 2008;Marshall, et al, 2011) have largely failed to find support for the idea that denial of offending, externalizations and situational excuses for sexual offending are predictive of recidivism. Indeed Maruna (2001) argues that rather than being seen as part of a 'hardening process", justifying further criminal acts, such "neutralisations" might be seen as a "softening" process, signalling a weak attachment to crime and an overall acceptance of societal values.…”