What's the evidence base for effective rehabilitation of non-violent adult sex offenders?

[futureapppsy2]

("Non-violent" meaning things like chronic sexual harassment/other sexual misconduct that doesn't cross into sexual assault)

My work is much more on the victim side of things, but I had always had the understanding that the literature on this isn't great--that we really don't have a consistently good way to rehabilitate these perpetrators yet. A quick literature search seemed to reveal that there's not much out there, but I saw someone argue otherwise recently, so I was wondering if any of you had more expertise in this topic? Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[R. Matey]

My understanding is that there is okay efficacy data on violent offenders, but designs are in need of improvement. Older DoJ brief here. Newer meta here. It seems to me that these principles would carry over to non-violent offenses, but I agree that I've haven't seen such a program rigorously tested. Anecdotally, I can confirm that I've seen it work for some folks, but not everyone (particularly those with PDs) had a good outcome.

 

[WisNeuro]

Is non-violent sex sex offender an official term? I feel like there should be another phrase here. After working in the PTSD world extensively, the term "sex offender" usually has fairly specific connotations, and not one that I would generally ascribe to a behavior say, of repeatedly making poor taste jokes in a work setting.

 

[R. Matey]

Is non-violent sex sex offender an official term? I feel like there should be another phrase here. After working in the PTSD world extensively, the term "sex offender" usually has fairly specific connotations, and not one that I would generally ascribe to a behavior say, of repeatedly making poor taste jokes in a work setting.

That's an interesting point. I know in some states communication (usually with a minor) can be consider a sex offense.

 

[futureapppsy2]

That's an interesting point. I know in some states communication (usually with a minor) can be consider a sex offense.

Yep. In the situation this was in the context of, a public figure had been revealed to have harassed numerous people (including at least one minor) to try to get them to engage in fetish content with him without their consent over 15-ish years. Definitely violating and creepy, but probably not anything that would have realistically involved a conviction.

 

[R. Matey]

Yep. In the situation this was in the context of, a public figure had been revealed to have harassed numerous people (including at least one minor) to try to get them to engage in fetish content with him without their consent over 15-ish years. Definitely violating and creepy, but probably not anything that would have realistically involved a conviction.

In my rapidly aging and limited experience, communication was typically the result of a plea deal so it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case. Still, I could envision that principles of SO Tx might apply for someone in this circumstance given the programs that I've been familiar with contain modules with psychoeducation on empathy, communication, and appropriate boundaries. The problem you might face is compliance. In SO Tx, the fear of the consequences surrounding a parole violation was often a powerful enough motivator for compliance until the skills became habitual (over the course of two or more years of treatment). That may not carry over if this theoretical client was pre-contemplative.

 

[WisNeuro]

Yep. In the situation this was in the context of, a public figure had been revealed to have harassed numerous people (including at least one minor) to try to get them to engage in fetish content with him without their consent over 15-ish years. Definitely violating and creepy, but probably not anything that would have realistically involved a conviction.

Ok, I'd consider the solicitation of a minor definitely within the purview of a sex offender.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I view rehabilitation claims for sex offenders to be dubious already given some of the methodology limitations of some of the commonly cited research, but parsing out "non-violent" seems like a term looking for a problem. I haven't done a review in the past 10-12 years, so maybe things have changed in the literature, but I'm doubtful.

 

[BuckeyeLove]

Feelings opinion: We honestly don't know. Anyone who comes at you with definitive answers is shilling snake oil. The problem is Courts still act like we do know, because they just NEED answers. And it's honestly concerning to me how many forensically trained folks i see taking advantage of this "need" in the Courts.