Views of Sexual Abuse Professionals About Sex Offender Notification Policies

Levenson, Jill S.; Fortney, Timothy; Baker, Juanita N.

doi:10.1177/0306624x08327785

Cited by 38 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Insufficient awareness of sexual risk factors, poor or lack of training, inadequate supervision, or poor policy and guidance, might offer some explanation for both the overestimations of risk and the inconsistent application of strategies to manage all known risk factors (Bonta & Wormith, 2007). Indeed, a number of previous studies, show practitioners failing to use evidence based knowledge when developing intervention plans (Bosker et al, 2013); support sex offender policy without scientific justification (Levenson, Fortney, & Baker, 2010); demonstrate harsh and negative views of those convicted of sexual offences (Higgins & Ireland, 2009); and influence the outcome of parole eligibility depending on the personal views of the assessor (Freeman, Palk, & Davey, 2010). These studies help show that where the personal views of practitioners and assessors are negative towards those convicted of sexual offending; outcomes tend to be adverse for the client.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effective risk management planning for those convicted of sexual offending

Kewley

Beech

Harkins³

et al. 2015

Jnl Aggress Conflict Peace Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which risk is addressed in the risk management planning process of those convicted of sexual offending. Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from a risk assessment and management system called the Offender Assessment System (OASys), used by the National Offender Management Service, in England and Wales. The records of 216 clients were accessed and each risk management plan analysed. The study aimed to understand if first, general and sexual risk factors identified by assessors were recorded and detailed in subsequent plans; second, if specialist sexual offending risk assessment tools were used to inform risk management strategies; and third, if both a balance of control and support mechanisms were in place to tackle identified risk and needs of clients. Findings – Inconsistencies were found in relation to practitioners transposing risks identified, into the subsequent risk management plans. Strategies were therefore deemed, inadequate as there was a significant omission of the use of specialist sexual risk assessment tools to inform and ensure risk assessment to be robust. In addition risk management plans were often overbearing in nature, as assessors tended to utilise control strategies to assist the reintegration process, in contrast to a combination of both control and support. Research limitations/implications – This sample was taken from only one probation trust in England and Wales. The findings might therefore be unique to this organisation rather than be representative of national practice. This study should therefore, be replicated in a number of other probation areas. In addition, it is important to note that this study only reviewed one electronic tool used by practitioners. Therefore, while it might appear for example that the RM2000 tool was not routinely completed; this cannot be assumed as practitioners might have adopted local custom and practice, recording RM2000 scores elsewhere. Practical implications – These findings highlight the need for some understanding as to why there is a lack of consistency throughout the risk management planning process. Practitioners should receive ongoing risk management training, development and supportive supervision. In particular, practitioners require supervision that supports and develops their skills when applying RM2000 classifications to their clients’ risk management plans. Likewise initiatives which develop practitioner’s awareness and application of strengths based approaches such as the Good Lives Model should be encouraged. These will help practitioners develop plans that address both the risks while supporting their development of the strengths a client presents. Originality/value – To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study of its kind, which examines the risk management plans of those convicted of sexual offending, completed by practitioners in England and Wales using the OASys tool.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effective risk management planning for those convicted of sexual offending

Kewley

Beech

Harkins³

et al. 2015

Jnl Aggress Conflict Peace Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Females show higher levels of support for residence restrictions (Mancini et al, 2010) and more likely to support community notification (Brown, Deakin, & Spencer, 2008;Caputo & Brodsky, 2004;Kernsmith, Craun, & Foster, 2009b) perhaps due to the higher level of fear towards sex offenders (Beck & Travis, 2004). In general, gender is not viewed as an influential characteristic among professionals (Malesky & Keim, 2001;Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2012, however, Levenson et al (2010) reports that female sexual abuse professionals are more likely to have higher levels of both anger and fear about sex offenders residing in their community.…”

Section: Factors Influencing Perceptions Of Current Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, Levenson et al (2010) identifies significant differences between employee classification as sexual abuse professionals, specifically, that the mental health providers of sexual abuse cases were significantly less likely than criminal justice professionals (29% vs. 38%) to favor community notification as a policy for the management of sex offenders in the community.…”

Section: Professional Perceptions Of Sex Offender Management Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Generally, research indicates the public is supportive of sex offender management policies (Comartin, Kernsmith, & Kernsmith, 2009;Levenson, Brannon, Fortney, & Baker, 2007;Schiavone & Jeglic, 2009), but mixed support exists for the same policies among professionals interacting or supervising sex offenders (Levenson, Fortney, & Baker, 2010;Malesky & Keim, 2001;Mustaine, Tewksbury, & Payne, 2015;Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2012Tewksbury, Mustaine, & Payne, 2011). Due to the mixed support among professionals, the current study seeks to advance the knowledge among this population in two ways.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Call

Gordon

2016

Am J Crim Just

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Levenson, Fortney, and Baker (2010) asked individuals working in the field of sexual abuse (including law enforcement officers, probation officers, attorneys, and polygraph examiners) a series of questions designed to elicit their perceptions about sex offender policies. The researchers compared criminal justice professionals with other (e.g., mental health) professionals in the sample who worked closely with sex offenders.…”

Section: Perceptions Of Sex Offender Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prison wardens' perceptions of sex offenders, sex offender registration, community notification, and residency restrictions.

Connor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Views of Sexual Abuse Professionals About Sex Offender Notification Policies

Cited by 38 publications

References 30 publications

Effective risk management planning for those convicted of sexual offending

Effective risk management planning for those convicted of sexual offending

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

Prison wardens' perceptions of sex offenders, sex offender registration, community notification, and residency restrictions.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About