Support for Current Sex Offender Management Policies: A National Survey of the Perceptions of Professionals

Abstract

Utilizing a sample gathered from two professional organizations, this study compared the perceptions held by criminal justice professionals and clinical specialists toward current sex offender management policies. In addition to controlling for demographic variables, consideration was given to the roles of belief in the cause of sex offending and punishment philosophy, both largely absent from the literature on sex offender policy perceptions, as influencing factors of policy support. Results indicate low levels of support for current policies across professional groups, however, criminal justice professionals are significantly more likely to support current policies than clinical specialists. Furthermore, belief that sex offending is caused by a lack of virtue, holding a traditional punishment philosophy, and being a parent were associated with increased support for current policies. The implications of these findings for the management of sex offenders are discussed.

Survivors’ Beliefs About the Causes of Sexual Offending: An Australian Study

“…In other words, belief that sexual offending is within the control of the individual predicted support for more deleterious consequences. Call and Gordon's (2016) related study of Probation and Parole Officers and clinical professionals (n = 248) reached the same conclusion: professionals who believe offenders to be making a conscious choice in perpetrating sexual violence support harsher policy measures. Fortney et al (2007) surveyed 125 adult sexual offenders from Florida, and found that over half (54%) believed that adult sex offenders were sexually abused themselves as children, echoing the cycle of abuse narrative favored by the public and professionals.…”

“…Most recently, Call's (2019) survey of 254 members of the American public found that over two thirds adhere to this causal belief, reflecting Levenson et al's (2007) earlier finding (see also Fontes et al, 2001;Fortney et al, 2007;Katz-Schiavone et al, 2008;O'Neil & Morgan, 2010;Paulauskas, 2015;Richards, 2018Richards, , 2019. Other common explanatory theories among the public are that sexual offending is caused by: genetic and/or biological factors (Call, 2019;Call & Gordon, 2016;Furnham & Haraldsen, 1998;O'Neil & Morgan, 2010;Paulauskas, 2015); mental illness (Call, 2019;Call & Gordon, 2016;Fontes et al, 2001;Levenson et al, 2007;McCartan, 2010;O'Neil & Morgan, 2010;Richards, 2018); choice (Fontes et al, 2001;Jahnke et al, 2015;Pickett et al, 2013;Richards, 2018); and moral failings on the part of the perpetrator (Call, 2019;Call & Gordon, 2016;Mancini & Pickett, 2016;O'Neil & Morgan, 2010;Pickett et al, 2013). Causal explanations identified less frequently among the public are: masturbating to deviant sexual imagery (Paulauskas, 2015;Pickett et al, 2013); seeking to enhance masculinity (Paulauskas, 2015); and drugs and alcohol (Katz-Schiavone et al, 2008).…”

A tale of “second chances”: an experimental examination of popular support for early release mechanisms that reconsider long-term prison sentences

“…One other final potential limitation of this work is the use of the Call and Gordon (2016) punishment orientation scales. Previous work has used these scales to control for participants' general punishment orientations related to traditional and rehabilitative punishments (e.g., Call, 2018;Richards, 2020;Sparks, 2021), and they were chosen for the current study because they encapsulate participants' orientations toward five goals of punishment in the US justice system (retribution, incapacitation, restoration, rehabilitation, deterrence) (Call & Gordon, 2016). However, the inclusion of these measures as controls in the current models, due to the structure of the scales themselves, did not control for participants' orientations toward two established punishment philosophies that are often directly compared: utilitarianism and retributivism (see Frase, 2005).…”

“…Two further scales, used in their entirety from Call and Gordon (2016), were also administered in order to control for general punishment orientations in two areas. All questions used a 1 (definitely not) to 100 (definitely yes) scale in response to the query of whether each item was the best way to reduce crime.…”

A Systematic Review of Professionals’ Views About Community Management Policies for Individuals Convicted of Sexual Offenses

“…In contrast, moderate levels of agreement were reported by probation and prison officers in two studies (Connor, 2012;Payne et al, 2016). Only one study, which included community corrections and psychologists, reported low levels of agreement with community policies for individuals convicted of sexual offenses (Call & Gordon, 2016). Interestingly, professionals support for these policies even without scientific evidence was moderate (Levenson et al, 2010;Payne et al, 2016) to high (Mustaine et al, 2015).…”