Treating sexual offenders with intellectual limitations in the community

Abstract

PurposeThis study summarises the results of a cognitive‐behavioural treatment group for sexual offenders (n=14) with intellectual limitations in the community.Design/methodology/approachAll participants were convicted sex offenders serving probation orders or prison licences who attended a 14‐month treatment programme designed for sex offenders with intellectual limitations. The programme comprised of five main components: sex education; cognitive distortions; offending cycle; victim empathy; and relapse prevention. All participants completed psychometric measures specifically designed for people with intellectual limitations before and immediately after completing the treatment programme. The four core measures include: Victim Empathy; Sexual Attitudes and Knowledge Assessment (SAK); Questionnaire on Attitudes Consistent with Sexual Offenders (QACSO); and Sex Offences Self‐Appraisal Scale (SOSAS).FindingsPost assessment results reveal significant improvements in sexual offence related attitudes; reductions in attitudes relating to cognitive distortions and pro‐sexual assault beliefs; and significant improvements in victim empathy.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough none of the participants have been reconvicted for committing new sexual offences during the follow‐up period, given that the follow‐up was restricted to 12 months post‐treatment, it is not possible to conclude this intervention was successful in reducing risk of sexual recidivism.Originality/valueThe results from this study support the use of cognitive‐behavioural approaches in demonstrating positive cognitive shift (reconstructing cognitive distortions and attitudes to victim empathy) for sexual offenders with intellectual limitations.

A Systematic Review of Behavioral Health Interventions for Sex Offenders With Intellectual Disabilities

“…Treatment programs for sex offenders with IDD were implemented in a variety of settings and nations including prisons, hospitals, assisted living arrangements, and private homes in the United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand, and Australia. Twelve studies were conducted in the United Kingdom (Craig et al, 2006; Craig et al, 2012; Lindsay, Marshall, et al, 1998; Lindsay, Neilson, et al, 1998; Lindsay et al, 2011; Lindsay et al, 1999; Lindsay & Smith, 1998; Michie & Lindsay, 2012; Murphy et al, 2007; Murphy et al, 2010; Rose et al, 2002; Rose et al, 2012), three studies were conducted in Australia (Keeling et al, 2006b, 2007; O’Connor, 1996), two in the United States (Rea et al, 2014; Singh et al, 2011), and one in New Zealand (Sakdalan & Collier, 2012). …”

“…Thirteen studies evaluated purely CBT interventions (Craig et al, 2006; Craig et al, 2012; Keeling et al, 2006b, 2007; Lindsay, Marshall, et al, 1998; Lindsay, Neilson, et al, 1998; Lindsay et al, 2011; Lindsay et al., 1999; Lindsay & Smith, 1998; Murphy et al, 2007; Murphy et al, 2010; Rose et al, 2002; Rose et al, 2012). Treatment procedures were largely standardized and provided weekly group sessions ranging from 2 to 2.5 hr in length.…”

“…Using another measure, Rose et al (2002) identified an increase in sexual knowledge on the Sexual Behavior and the Law (SBL) scale. In addition to the SBL scale and SAKS, significant gains were found in reducing attitudes in favor of sex offending and changing cognitive distortions that rationalize sex offending on the Questionnaire on Attitudes Consistent with Sex Offending scale (QACSO; Broxholme & Lindsay, 2003; Lindsay, Carson, & Whitefield, 2000) in 6 studies (Craig et al, 2012; Keeling et al, 2007; Lindsay et al, 2011; Murphy et al, 2007; Murphy et al, 2010; Rose et al, 2012). Lindsay and Smith (1998) found a reduction in attitudes consistent with indecent exposure on a scale designed by the study authors.…”

“…Out of the 13 CBT studies, 7 studies collected only behavioral assessments at follow- up (Craig et al, 2006; Craig et al, 2012; Keeling et al, 2007; Lindsay et al, 2011; Lindsay et al, 1999; Murphy et al, 2007; Rose et al, 2012), 5 studies collected both cognitive and behavioral assessments (Lindsay, Marshall, et al, 1998; Lindsay, Neilson, et al, 1998; Lindsay & Smith, 1998; Murphy et al, 2010; Rose et al., 2002), and 1 performed no follow-up assessment (Keeling et al, 2006b). Methods of measuring behavioral outcomes consisted of official reports from legal reconviction, and information from police officers, mental health workers, and probation officers.…”

“…Methods of measuring behavioral outcomes consisted of official reports from legal reconviction, and information from police officers, mental health workers, and probation officers. No further sexually abusive behavior was documented during the follow-up period for 7 out of the 12 studies that collected behavioral data (Craig et al, 2006; Craig et al, 2012; Keeling et al, 2007; Lindsay, Marshall, et al, 1998; Lindsay, Neilson, et al, 1998; Lindsay et al, 1999; Rose et al, 2002). The greatest rates of problematic sexual behaviors were found in studies that collected data from both official and unofficial sources (Lindsay, Marshall, et al, 1998; Lindsay, Neilson, et al, 1998; Lindsay et al, 2011; Murphy et al., 2010; Murphy et al, 2013; Rose et al, 2002).…”