Prospects for the Future of SVP Treatment Programs
This chapter seeks to provide some guidance for those tasked with running SVP treatment programs that are based in the available research, informed by the author’s experience of how different SVP programs operate in practice and enlightened by emerging models of good clinical practice. SVP programs damage the liberty interests of those committed, create uncomfortable role conflicts for the mental health professionals involved as well as arguably distorting mental health law, and, perhaps most fundamentally, may simply be poor social policy. Nevertheless, it must always be borne in mind that particularly serious sexual recidivism that captures media attention either by those considered for commitment but not committed or by discharged former SVPs not only entails significant harm to those directly involved but also has the potential to create irresistible public and political pressures that mandate higher commitment rates and severely impede future releases. Consequently, even concerns for liberty interests, professional ethics, and public cost are not well served by lax disregard of real risk. The challenge then is to operate SVP programs in a way that is responsive to real risk while not being overly risk-adverse.
Six principles are proposed intended to mitigate these concerns. These address pre-commitment services, highly selective commitment, employing the least restrictive alternative, graduated reduction of restrictions both in secure conditions and in the community and post-commitment services. The research background to SVP programs is reviewed, and the ways in which it has changed since SVP programs were originally developed are described. Finally, some guidance on key issues is provided.
KeywordsSVP Liberty interests Least restrictive alternative Base rates Dynamic risk Evidence-based Risk management
- Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- van den Berg, J.W. Smid, W., Schepers, K., Wever, E., van Beek, D., Janssen, E., & Gijs, L. (2017). The predictive properties of dynamic sex offender risk assessment instruments; a meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
- Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (2012). Preselection effects can explain variability in sexual recidivism base rates in Static-99R and Static-2002R validation studies. Presentation at the 31st Annual Research and Treatment Conference of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Denver, CO.Google Scholar
- Hanson, R. K., Harris, A. J. R., Scott, T.-L., & Helmus, L. (2007). Assessing the risk of sexual offenders on community supervision: The Dynamic Supervision Project (User Report No. 2007–05). Ottawa, ON: Public Safety Canada. Available from http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/_fl/crp2007-05-en.pdf.
- Knight, R.A. & Thornton, D. (2007). Evaluating and improving risk assessment schemes for sexual recidivism: a long term follow up of convicted sexual offenders. Final Report: US Department of Justice, Award Number 2003-WG-BX-1002. http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/217618.pdf.
- Lofthouse, R. E., Lindsay, W. R., Totsika, V., Hastings, R. P., Boer, D. P., & Haaven, J. L. (2013). Prospective dynamic assessment of risk of sexual reoffending in individuals with an intellectual disability and history of sexual offending behavior. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 26, 394–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Marlatt, G. A., & Gordon, J. R. (Eds.). (1985). Relapse prevention. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
- Marques, J. K., Wiederanders, M., Day, D. M., Nelson, C., & van Ommereren, A. (2005). Effects of a relapse prevention program on sexual recidivism: Final result from California’s sex offender treatment and evaluation project. Sexual Abuse, 17, 79–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11194-005-1212-xCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2013). Motivational interviewing: Helping people change (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Minnesota. (2007). Sex offender recidivism in Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Department of Corrections.Google Scholar
- Olver, M. E., Wong, S. C. P., Nicholaichuk, T., & Gordon, A. (2007). The validity and reliability of the violence risk scale-sexual offender version: Assessing sex offender risk and evaluating therapeutic change. Psychological Assessment, 19, 318–329. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-35126.96.36.1998CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar