CENTER FOR SEX OFFENDER MANAGEMENT
The Effective Management of Juvenile Sex Offenders in the Community
A Training Curriculum

 A Project of the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice

 

Search:  

Section 6: Reentry
3 Hours

TOPIC: REENTRY

Family Reunification

As you are no doubt aware, pressure across the nation has increased in recent years to preserve and reunify families in the nation’s juvenile and family courts, and child welfare and social services systems.³⁷ It is, however, a difficult issue that is fraught with many challenges.

Based on your experiences, what are some of the challenges associated with family reunification?

(ALLOW FOR AUDIENCE RESPONSES.)

Yes, those are all very significant. Let’s walk through a number of challenges.

• Limited placement options.  Unfortunately and as we’ve discussed, aside from residential or institutional facilities, placement options for juvenile sex offenders may be very limited in some places. This means that if they are not in a placement, there may be very strong pressure to allow them to return home.
• Requests from family members to allow—or to restrict—a juvenile’s return home. Some parents or caregivers may be very—or overly—supportive of or resistant to the return of a juvenile sex offender.
• Concerns raised by victim advocates and service providers.  Victim advocates bring an important perspective to the work that we do with these youth, and ensuring that our offender management strategies are victim-sensitive is key. Victim advocates and service providers may, in some cases, have significant concerns about or objections to reunification.
• Expectations of child welfare and social service agencies, and juvenile and family courts.  These entities are usually involved in some way in these cases, and they likely have strong perspectives regarding whether or not reunification is appropriate.
• Large caseloads in social service and supervision agencies.  Social service caseworkers and juvenile parole officers often have very large caseloads, making it quite challenging to find the time to manage the complicated reunification process closely.
• Limited long-term influence of social service and supervision agencies, and the juvenile and family courts.  These entities may prohibit or restrict reunification while they are managing and responsible for these cases, but they are not involved with these youth, their victims, and their families forever. Ultimately, despite the risks and hazards, some juveniles maintain contact with victims and potential victims, and ultimately return home.

Unfortunately, there are no empirical studies that examine promising strategies to address these challenges, and that look at the impact of different approaches to reunification. Furthermore, very little about reunification exists in the professional literature.

Nonetheless, many jurisdictions have determined that it’s not reasonable, realistic, nor advantageous to prohibit all reunification efforts, especially in cases where youth pose a relatively low risk to reoffend, as determined by:

• Their dynamic risk factors;
• Their encouraging responses to treatment interventions;
• The victim’s, parents’ or caregivers’, and other family members’ responses to therapy; and
• The parents’ or caregivers’ willingness and ability to support the process and assure—above all else—the safety of the victim and other vulnerable people.

Some jurisdictions have developed specialized reunification policies and protocols that are designed to ensure a comprehensive and coordinated approach. Here are a number of the critical elements of such an approach:  

• Victim safety.³⁸ The physical, psychological, and emotional safety and well-being of victims and potential victims must always remain paramount, regardless of the offender’s wishes, other family members’ expectations, or the broader interests in and pressures associated with preserving families.
• Early initiation of the process.³⁹ The steps associated with reunification can be time-consuming and complicated. For juvenile sex offenders who are in residential or institutional facilities, reunification preparations should, therefore, begin as early as possible (ideally at intake) when the larger reentry and aftercare planning process is initiated.
  
  Furthermore, the leverage of the juvenile justice process can be used to ensure that the youth makes sufficient progress in treatment, that family members and victims receive the services and support that they need, and that a cautious, deliberate reunification strategy is undertaken that ensures the safety and well-being of the victim and other vulnerable parties.⁴⁰
• Gradual and deliberate.⁴¹ Considerable harm to the victim could result from the premature return home by a juvenile sex offender. Therefore, appropriate treatment for the victim, family members, and the offender is essential. The clinical interventions for each should have associated with them specific, measurable, logical, and progressive goals to assure the readiness of all parties for the next step in the process. The typical steps in the lengthy reunification process include the following:⁴²
  • Out of home placement for the juvenile sex offender;
  • Treatment interventions for the offender, family members, and the victim;
  • Readiness assessments for all parties, which are ongoing throughout the process;
  • Supervised contacts in clinical settings;
  • Clarification;
  • Supervised contacts in natural environments;
  • Transition to family supervision; and
  • Return home.
  
  Unfortunately, there isn’t sufficient time during this training to cover each of these steps in the reunification process in detail. For a more thorough review of them, you may want to consult the book chapters by Thomas and Wilson, and Thomas and Viar that are included in the reference list in your materials.
• Flexible and responsive.⁴³ As has been emphasized throughout this training, one size doesn’t fit all in these cases. The individualization—and modification over time—of family reunification plans and strategies are essential and must be based on the risks, needs, situations, and circumstances associated with each case.
• Collaboration.⁴⁴ For a family reunification effort to be responsive to changes in risk, needs, and circumstances, ongoing communication and collaboration among those working with the offender, victim, and family are essential. Unfortunately, there are instances when—as a result of the collaborative process and ongoing assessment and communication—the individuals who share responsibility for managing the reunification process may determine that it is no longer safe for the victim and other vulnerable parties in the home. Such cases may involve an increase in the risk of the juvenile offender, changes in the household composition, safety or other concerns expressed by the victim, or a decrease in cooperation or participation by parents or caregivers in the treatment and reunification process.