Skip to Main ContentCenter for Sex Offender Management, Supervision of Sex Offenders in the Community: A Training Curriculum
CSOM
Search
A Project of the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice
  OverviewIssues & CautionsUser's GuideRecommended ReadingsDownload CenterSearch
Site Map
Versions
Long Version
Overview
Innovative Approaches
Components of Supervision
Sex Offender-Specific Treatment
Practical Supervision Strategies
Evaluation Form
Outline
Medium Version
Short Version
Other CSOM Curricula
Start of Main Content
Long Version
Section 3: Lecture Content and Teaching Notes
Components of Supervision: Specialized Approaches to Managing Sex Offenders

6 hours, 50 minutes

NOTES

  1. G. Marlatt and J. Gordon. (1980). Determinants of Relapse: Implications for the Maintenance of Change. In Davidson, P.O. and Davidson, S.M., (eds). Behavioral Medicine: Changing Health Lifestyles. Brunner/Mazel. New York, NY.

  2. Cumming, G. and Buell, M. (1997). Supervision of the Sex Offender. Safer Society Press, 36.

  3. The Center for Sex Offender Managementís Glossary of Terms Used in the Management and Treatment of Sexual Offenders defines the different kinds of denial as follows:

    • Denial of facts: The offender may claim that the victim is lying or remembering incorrectly.
    • Denial of awareness: The offender may claim that he experienced a blackout caused by alcohol or drugs and cannot remember the offense.
    • Denial of impact: Refers to the minimization of harm to the victim.
    • Denial of responsibility: The offender may blame the victim or a medical condition to reduce or avoid accepting responsibility.
    • Denial of grooming: The offender may claim that he did not plan for the offense to occur.
    • Denial of sexual intent: The offender may claim that he was attempting to educate the victim about his/her body, or that the victim bumped into the offender. In this type of denial, the offender tries to make the offense appear nonsexual.
    • Denial of denial: The offender appears to be disgusted by what has occurred in hopes others will believe that he is not capable of committing such a crime.

  4. Marshall, W.L., Laws, D.R., and Barbaree, H.E. (eds.). (1990). Handbook of Sexual Assault: Issues, Theories, and Treatment of the Offender.

  5. Prentky, R.A., Knight, R.A., and Quinsey, V. (1990). Sexual Violence, A Review Commissioned by the Panel on the Understanding and the Control of Violent Behavior, National Research Council, Presented in Symposium, Destin, FL, p. 62.

  6. English, K., Colling-Chadwick, S., Pullen, S., and Jones, L. (1996); How Are Adult Felony Sex Offenders Managed on Probation and Parole? A National Survey. Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, Department of Public Safety and the National Institute of Justice.

  7. Ibid.

  8. Coyne, R., Chief Probation Officer, New London, Connecticut Office of Adult Probation; Fagel, F., Area Coordinator, Oregon Youth Authority; and Olsen, S., Jackson County, Oregon Community Corrections. (1999). Presentation at the Center for Sex Offender Managementís Intensive Training Session at the American Probation and Parole Association Institute. New York, NY.

  9. An analysis of the caseload size of eight of CSOMís National Resource Sites (Maricopa County, Arizona; Jefferson County, Colorado; New Haven, Connecticut; the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; Westchester County, New York; Jackson County, Oregon; the State of Vermont; and Spokane, Washington) reflects an average sex offender caseload size of approximately 47 sex offenders per officer.

  10. Cumming, G. and Buell, M. (1997). Supervision of the Sex Offender, Safer Society Press, 3.

  11. Ibid., 3-4.

  12. Ibid., 4.

  13. Ibid., 4-31.

  14. Ibid., 4-5.

  15. See the Colorado Sex Offender Management BoardóStandards and Guidelines for the Assessment, Evaluation, Treatment and Behavioral Monitoring of Adult Sex Offenders, 1998.

  16. Supervision of the Sex Offender, 3-31.

  17. Ibid.,18.

  18. Ibid., 20.

  19. Ibid., 20.

  20. Ibid, 21-22.

  21. Ibid., 9-10.

  22. Ibid., 8-10.

  23. Ibid., 8-10.

  24. Hanson, R.K. & Bussiere, M.T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sex offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348-362.

  25. Barabee, H.E. and Marshall, W.L. (1988). Deviant sexual arousal, offense history and demographic variables as predictors of re-offense among child molesters. Behavioral Science and Law, 6, 267-280. Cited in Proulx et al. (1997). Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 9/1.

  26. Hanson, R. K., & Harris, A. J. R. (2000). The Sex Offender Need Assessment Rating (SONAR): A method for measuring change in risk levels. (User Report). Ottawa: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.

  27. Hanson & Bussiere (1998).

  28. Assessing the Risk of Reoffense in Sex Offenders, Training Curriculum developed by the Center for Sex Offender Management as part of its Comprehensive Training Curriculum, in draft.

  29. The RRASOR was normed on a prison population, not a probation population.

  30. Hanson, R.K. and Bussiere, M.T. "Predicting Relapse: A Meta-Analysis of Sex Offender Recidivism Studies." Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348-362.

  31. Hanson, R.K. (1997). The Development of a Brief Actuarial Risk Scale for Sexual Offense Recidivism. User Report No. 1997-04. Ottawa: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.

  32. Assessing the Risk of Reoffense in Sex Offenders, in draft.

  33. Ibid.

  34. The results of the preliminary analysis were shared in a memo from Randy Ireson to Cindy Mazikowski of Lane County Community Corrections and Sam Olsen of Jackson County Community Corrections dated March 10, 1998.

  35. Ibid., 24.

  36. Supervision of the Sex Offender, 23.

  37. These conditions have been adapted from the Westchester County, New York Probation Department and the Jackson County, Oregon Probation Department. Westchester County and Jackson County are two of the Center for Sex Offender Managementís (CSOM) National Resource Sites.

  38. For a description of the polygraph and its application, please see Section 2, pages 33-38.

  39. Colorado Standards, p. 65-66.

  40. Hanson, R. K., & Harris, A. J. R. (2001). "A structured approach to evaluating change among sexual offenders." Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 13 (2), 105-122. And Hanson, R. K., & Harris, A. J. R. (2000). "Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sex offense recidivism." Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 6-35.

  41. Olsen, S. Adult Parole and Probation Officer (retired), Jackson County, Oregon Community Corrections.

  42. Supervision of the Sex Offender, 44 and 49

  43. Training curriculum materials on family reunification will be available from CSOM in 2000.

  44. Haaven, J., Little, R., & Petre-Miller, D. (1990) Treating Intellectually Disabled Sex Offenders: A Model Residential Program. Safer Society Press.

  45. Colorado Sex Offender Management Board, Colorado Department of Public Safety. Standards and Guidelines for the Assessment, Evaluation, Treatment and Behavioral Monitoring of Adult Sex Offenders; Lifetime Supervision Criteria; and Standards for Community Entities that Provide Supervision and Treatment for Adult Sex Offenders who have Developmental Disabilities. Denver, CO Revised June 1999. And Maricopa County Adult Probation Department. Sex Offender Supervision Operations Manual. Phoenix, AZ, September 1999. Both provide examples of standards for lifetime supervision.