Assessing Risk of Sexual Re-offenses by Sex Offenders

A Training Program by the

Capital District Coalition for Sex Offender Management

Richard Hamill, Ph.D.

July 12, 2005

Comprehensive Approaches to Sex Offender Management

• Five critical disciplines: – Investigation (law enforcement, CPS) – Prosecution – Community Supervision (probation, parole) – Treatment (specialized sex offender services) – Victim Advocates

Goals for this workshop

• Probation Officers will learn to predict more accurately the degree to which a sex offender is likely to commit another sex offense.

• When included in the pre-sentence investigation report, the risk assessment provides the judge with critical information, as well as a rationale to support suggested sentences and conditions.

Overview of the workshop

• 1. What we know about sex offenses • 2. Types of sex offenders • 3. Assessing risk of sexual recidivism • 4. Using the Static-99 • 5. Presenting the Static-99 in reports • 6. Questions and answers

What we know about child sexual abuse

• 1. By the time he or she is eighteen years old, one in every 4 girls and one in every 6 or 7 boys has been the victim of a “hands-on” (contact) sex offense.

• 2. Young children (ages 0 to 5 years old) are the fastest growing class of sexual abuse victim.

• 3. Sexual abuse often creates significant, even life-long problems for victims and loved ones • 4. Multidisciplinary, collaborative approach is required for effective intervention.

Not All Sex Offenders Are The Same

• Victim preferences • Behavior preferences • Motivation for offending • Attitudes towards deviant behavior • Risk to re-offend • Supervision and treatment needs

What we know about sex offenders

• 1. There are many different types of sex offenders.

• 2. Each type has a different rate of re-offending, and prognosis for change.

• 3. Treatment cuts recidivism by about 50%.

• 4. If treatment is not provided, sex offender sexual re-offense rates are: – 14% convicted of a sexual re-offense within 5 years – 20% convicted of a sexual re-offense within 10 years – 24% convicted of a sexual re-offense within 15 years

Gender

(Vermont Probation & Parole, 2003) 98% of known sex offenders are male Females = 2% Males = 98%

Victim’s Age at Time of First Assault Kilpatrick, Edmunds, Seymour (1992). Rape in America. 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% <11 11 to 17 18 to 24 25 to 29 Age of Victims >29 Not Sure

Relationship Between Victims and Offenders Tjaden & Thoennes (2000) 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 90% 66% Children <12 Offender Known Adult 18-29 Offender a Stranger

Degree of Physical Injury Kilpatrick, Edmunds, Seymour (1992). Rape in

America.

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% serious minor none unknown

Reporting of Sexual Abuse Kilpatrick et al. (2003). National Survey of

Adolescents.

100 80 60 40 20 0 No 86% not reported to the authorities Police CPS School Other *some cases reported to more than one authority

What Are Victim’s Greatest Concerns?

Kilpatrick, Edmunds, Seymour (1992). Rape in

America.

Family knowing about the sexual assault 71% People thinking it was her fault People outside family knowing about assault Name being made public by news media Becoming pregnant 69% 68% 50% 34% Contracting a sexually transmitted disease 19%

Victims and Victimization History Hindman & Peters (2001) Variable

Mean number of victims reported at treatment sexual history Percent who reported being sexually abused as a child

Self-Report 1978-1983 (n=98)

1.5

Polygraphed with Immunity 1983-1988 (n=129)

9.0 67% 29%

Common Childhood Experience of Sex Offenders

• Harmful sexual experiences • Poor parent-child attachments • Antisocial parental influences • Physical and emotional abuse • Deviant masturbatory conditioning

Behavior Crossover Offending Sample Findings Study

Admit incest and extra familial child molesting Molesters of boys who also admit molesting girls 50-64% 45-63% Heil et al., 2003; O'Connell, 1998 Weinrott & Saylor, 1991 Heil et al., 2003; O'Connell, 1998 Rapists who admit to molesting children 64% O'Connell, 1998 ______________________________________

Issues:

crossover definitions; order of progression

Sexual Re-offense Rates

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 “Official”rates based on Harris & Hanson (2004) “Estimated” rates based on Hanson, Morton, & Harris (2003) 10 samples; n=4,724 Percent

14% 20% 24% 27% 25%

Official Re-offense Rates Estimated Re-offense Rates

35% 40% 45%

0 5 10 Years in Community 15 20

Explanations and Preconditions for Sexual Offending Cumming & McGrath (2004); Finkelhor (1984,1986) 1 2 3 Motives Willingness Opportunity

•

Sexual Interest

•

Emotional Closeness

•

Power and Control

•

Anger/Grievance

•

Cognitive Distortions

•

Substance Abuse

•

Stress

•

Psychopathy

•

Other

•

Planned Opportunistic

•

Manipulation Force

Motivation for Sexual Offending

• 1. Need for

Power / Control

• 2. Need for

Intimacy

• 3. Need to

Vent Anger

• 4. Need to Feel

Competent

• 5. Need for

Sexual Gratification

• 6.

Curiosity

(juvenile sex offenders only)

Hanson et al., Meta-Analysis (2002) ( 15 studies using “current treatments” over 4-5 years) Percent Recidivism 60 51% 50 Treatment Group 40 32% 30 17% Comparison Group 20 10% 10 0 Sexual Recidivism General Recidivism (41% reduction) (37% reduction)

Vermont Incarcerated Programs: Example of Risk/Need Matching

Initial Assessment

(LSI-R, RRASOR, Static-99, & VASOR)

Low Risk/Need

Serve Minimum Sentence No Prison Treatment Community Treatment DD/MI Services

Moderate/High Risk/Need

Release at minimum if completes prison program Moderate Intensity SO Prison Program High Intensity SO Prison Program High Intensity Violence Program SO Prison Program Community Aftercare Community Aftercare

High Risk/Need

High Violence High Psychopathy (PCL-R & VRAG) Community Aftercare

Vermont Community Programs: Example of Risk/Need Matching

Statutory Rapists

Short-term Psychoeducation Group or Brief Individual Treatment

Lower Risk/Need Sex Offenders

Weekly SO Group Treatment Individualized Assessment •LSI-R RRASOR •Static-99 •TPS •VASOR •(PCL-R) •(VRAG)

Higher Risk/Need Sex Offenders

2x/week SO Group

DD/MI Sex Offenders

Specialized Services

High Psychopathy Sex Offenders

Cognitve Self-Change Program SO Treatment as needed

50 40 30 20 10 0 Psychophysiological Assessment Methods Community Programs for Male and Female Adults 1986-2002 McGrath, Cumming, & Burchard (2003) Percent of programs 70 60 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 2000 2002 Penile Plethysmograph Polygraph Viewing Times Measures

30 20 10 0 60 50 40 Pharmacological Treatment: Programs for Adult Males McGrath, Cumming, & Burchard (2003) Percent of programs Lupron Provera SSRI's Community Programs (n=522) Other One or More Residential Programs (n=93)

Impact of Aftercare Services

Gordon & Packard (1998) 25 20 % Recidivism Rate at 5-year Follow-up Sex Offense Any Arrest 15% 15 8% 10 5 2% 0 Aftercare & Supervision (n=209) Supervision Only (n=97) Treatment Group 25%

Sex offender treatment

• What we know: – Treatment reduces re-offense rate by 40-60% – Treatment is not effective for all sex offenders • About one-third of sex offenders are NOT motivated to stop committing sex offenses • However, the treatment process does give us much more insight about offender modus operandi, strategies, triggers, level of risk to the community • Some failures also help keep the community safer

Unique Aspects of Sex Offender Treatment

• Treatment team is the probation/parole officer and the therapist • Unrestricted Release of Information for probation/parole officer and therapist • Immediate notification of P.O. if offender shifts into elevated risk of re-offending • Goal: Incapacitate before re-offense (VOP, rehab program)

Three components of treatment

• (1) Relapse Prevention model • sexual offending similar to an addiction • stress “abstinence,” not “cure” • cognitive-behavioral: focuses on feelings, beliefs (cognitive distortions), stimuli and behaviors • identify triggers for elevated risk, details of offense cycle, effective safety plan • enhance empathy for victims • enhance motivation for remaining abstinent

Treatment of sex offenders

• (2) Life skills development – anger-management skills (esp. rapists) – relationship-building / intimacy skills – skills for living with SORA, the s.o. label – vocational skills – communication skills • assertiveness training • communication of feelings

Treatment of sex offenders

• (3) Resolution of the effects of one’s own abuse / neglect • personal histories characterized by –childhood sexual abuse (especially preferential sex offenders), –physical abuse (especially rapists, use of-force sex offenders) –exposure to domestic violence (especially rapists), –Neglect / chaotic family system

Summary

• Community safety depends on: – successful law enforcement investigation – effective prosecution – effective correctional system programs – community supervision using strategies specific to sex offenders – community-based sex offender treatment – keeping awareness of impact on the victim

What we know about sex offenders

TYPES OF SEX OFFENSES

• Three clusters of sex offenses: – Contact, use of force (rape) – Contact, use of non-force strategies (molestation) – Non-contact offenses (exposing, voyeurism, obscene phone calls, sexual harassment)

Types of rapists

• Rapists (Prentky and Knight typology) Prognosis – 1.

– 2.

– 3.

– 4.

Opportunistic Pervasively angry Sexualized Vindictive fair-good fair poor-fair fair

Types of child molesters

(F.B.I. Behavioral Sciences typology) • Situational – 1.

Compensating – 2.

– 3.

– 4.

Psychopaths Normalized Sexualized Preferential - 1.

- 2.

- 3.

Seductive Inadequate Sadistic Prognosis very good poor fair-good poor-fair fair poor-fair poor

Types of rapists (Use of Force)

• Four types based on motivation: – (1) Opportunistic type: – Take advantage of opportunities open to them. – Typically, self-centered, risk-takers. – Prognosis: fair-to-good – (2) Pervasively angry type: – Rape is strategy to vent pent-up anger – History of other anger-motivated crimes – Prognosis: fair-to-poor

Types of rapists

• (3) Sexual type • Rape is committed as way of meeting sexual needs • Person has sexual attraction to rape • Two sub-types: Sadistic and Non-sadistic • Sadistic offenses: usually longer duration, often include extensive threats designed to create fear; physical incapacitation, infliction of pain • Non-sadistic rapes: Force is used as strategy to accomplish the rape • Prognosis is poor-to-fair. Work to incarcerate.

Types of rapists

• (4) Vindictive type • Rape victim is person toward whom they feel anger • Rape is punishment, or attempt to re-establish sense of personal power or control • Typical victims: partners, former partners • Prognosis: fair

Types of Child Molesters

• Based on the work of Ken Lanning (F.B.I. Behavioral Sciences unit) • Two large clusters of child molesters: – Situational (non-fixated) – Preferential (fixated)

Situational child molesters

• Four types of situational child molesters: • (1) Compensating (regressed) type • primarily intra-familial victims (incest) • exploit their authority as parents and/or adults • use non-violent strategies, like seduction • generally have a good response to treatment

Situational child molesters

• (2) Psychopaths – 0.5% of the population; 5% of child molesters – “without conscience” – victims chosen by availability, vulnerability – strategies: luring, manipulation; may use force – respond poorly to treatment, require incarceration

Situational child molesters

• Normalized type – life-long pattern, inter-generational – almost 100% are victims of childhood sexual abuse – sexual offending is an almost continuous pattern – victims are often family and friends – fair response to treatment

Situational child molesters

• Sexualized type – multiple paraphilias present – wide range of sexual behavior – victims based on availability – motivation is to offset boredom – strategy: abuse embedded into an on-going activity – treatment is difficult; fair-to-poor prognosis

Preferential child molesters

• Have a strong sexual preference for children • These “fixated” child molesters are considered stuck at a young stage in their own sexual development – Pedophiles: strong sexual preference for children under the age of puberty – Hebephiles: strong sexual preference for children at or just above onset of puberty

Preferential child molesters

• Three types identified: • (1) Seductive type – very child-oriented; highly identified with children – use of non-violent strategies, like seduction – strong age and gender preferences – 50% prefer boys, 25% prefer girls, 25% both – treatment is difficult; prognosis is poor

Preferential child molesters

• Inadequate type – two subtypes: psychiatric condition, mental deficiency – often socially isolated w/ poor social skills – impulse control often poor – victim choice often indiscriminant – offenses are sexual only, often non-verbal – prognosis is limited; medication helps

Preferential child molesters

• Sadistic type – strong arousal to inflicting pain – strong age and gender preferences – strategies include rape, kidnapping, murder – concurrent psychiatric problems – treatment prognosis is very poor, risk level very high. Work to incarcerate.

Stage model for molestation

• Five stages: – 1.

– 2.

– 3.

– 4.

– 5.

Engagement: “grooming” behaviors Sexual interaction: progression along the continuum to more intrusive acts Secrecy strategies Disclosure: Accidental or purposeful Retraction (by Suzanne Sgroi, M.D.)

Juvenile sex offenders

• Include all of the above types, as well as: • Curiosity-motivated – young juveniles – usually awkward, naïve – motivation is to satisfy curiosity about sex – severity of abuse may escalate over time – good response to treatment, especially if parents are willing to become involved

Female sex offenders

• Make up about 7-8% of all convicted sex offenders, thought to be under represented due to differential reporting and prosecution.

• Four types identified: • Normalized • Male – coerced victim / offender • Inadequate • Lover / teacher seductive (preferential)

Female sex offenders

• Normalized type – life-long pattern of sexual acting out – family and friends are most likely victims – almost all are victims of childhood sexual abuse – difficult to treat successfully

Female sex offenders

• Male-coerced victim - offender – sex is coerced by male partner, at least initially – woman seen as both victim and offender – victims are those imposed by male perpetrator – treatment prognosis is good

Female sex offenders

• Inadequate type – often mentally disordered or mentally delayed – poor coping skills, poor social skills – alcohol abuse/dependence over-represented – victims are often family members – prognosis is fair; medication helps

Female sex offenders

• Lover / teacher seductive type – usually child-oriented, identified with the child – age and gender preferences – strategies: seduction and teaching – may include preferential-type sex offenders (pedophiles, hebephiles)

Non-contact sex offenders

• Includes exposing, voyeurs (“Peeping Toms”), sexual harassment, obscene phone calls, etc.. (Paraphilic behaviors) • If an individual is engaging in one of these activities, there is an 88% likelihood that he is also engaging in at least one other paraphilic behavior.

• Polygraph studies show that many of these offenders also have contact sex offenses.

Evaluation of sex offenders

• Aspects of a specialized sex offender eval • (1) Review of background documentation, including victim statements • (2) Interviews of offender • (3) Interviews of collateral sources • (4) Psychological testing • Self-report tests • Actuarial tests

Evaluation of sex offenders

• (5) Testing of sexual interests • Penile plethysmograph • Viewing time measures • (6) Polygraph testing: • Instant offense polygraph • History of sexual offending polygraph • Compliance with Conditions of Probation/Parole

Evaluation of sex offenders

• Risk Assessment – Several measures found to do a fairly good job in predicting: • risk of sexual re-offense (Static-99, RRASOR) • risk of general re-offense (LSI) • risk of violent re-offense (VRAG)

“

Predicting things is difficult, especially when they’re in the future.”

Yogi Berra

ATSA Guidelines (2005)

18.07

Members conducting risk assessments use an actuarial risk assessment instrument that is appropriate for the client population being evaluated (p. 16).

Risk Instruments in Programs for Adult Males McGrath, Cumming, & Burchard (2003) 381 of 613 programs (62.1%) use one or more of these instruments MnSOST-R RRASOR VASOR Static-99 SVR-20 20.7% 34.4% 5.4% 53.2% 9.1%

15 10 5 0 30 25 20 Risk Principle 2-Year Sexual or Violent Re-Convictions Friendship, Mann, & Beech (2003) Percent Treatment Group Comparison Group Low Medium-Low Medium-High Static-99 Risk Category High

Types of Risk Assessment Strategies

Intuitive Clinical Actuarial Adjusted Actuarial

Advantages of Actuarial Approach

• Objectivity • Uniformity • Consistency • Equality

Static Predictors of Sexual Recidivism

(

Hanson & Bussiere, 1998; Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004) Predictor

Prior sexual offense Treatment not completed Stranger v. acquaintance Any criminal history Age of offender, young Early onset sex offending Never married Any unrelated victims Any male child victims Age of victim, young Degree of force used Sexually abused as child

r *

.19 .17 .15 .13 .13 .14 .11 .11 .11 .05 .04 .04

Subjects Studies

11,294 29 806 465 14,800 6,969 919 2,850 6,889 10,294 1,828 7,221 5,711 6 4 31 21 4 8 21 19 9 25 17

Risk Prediction Methods for Adults

Predictive Validity by Offense Type Method

Clincial RRASOR Static-99 MnSost-R VASOR SVR-20 VRAG LSI-R

Sex

low moderate moderate moderate moderate moderate low ---

Violence

low -- moderate -- moderate -- high moderate

Any

low -- -- -- -- -- -- high

Static-99

Hanson & Thornton (1999)

• Prior Sex Offenses* • Prior Sentencing Dates • Non-Contact Offenses • Index Non-sexual Violence • Prior Non-sexual Violence • Unrelated Victim* • Stranger Victim • Male Victim* • Young* • Single *Items on RRASOR

Static-99

Hanson & Thornton (1999) Percent Sexual Recidivism 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 (10%) 5-year follow-up 10-year follow-up 15-year follow-up 1 (14%) 2 (19%) 3 (19%) 4 (18%) Score (% of Sample) 5 (9%) 6+ (12%)

Score 0 1 2 3 4 5 6+ Static-99 Sexual Recidivism Percentages Sample Size (N=1,086) 5 years Sexual Recidivism 10 years 15 years 107 (10%) 150 (14%) 204 (19%) 206 (19%) 190 (18%) 100 (9%) 129 (12%) .05 .06 .09 .12 .26 .33 .39 .11 .07 .13 .14 .31 .38 .45 .13 .07 .16 .19 .36 .40 .52

Dynamic Predictors of Sexual Recidivism (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004) Predictor r *

Supervision non-compliance .31 Self-regulation problems Conflict intimate relationship Any deviant sex interest Attitudes tolerant sex crime Negative social influences Antisocial personality .19 .18 .16 .11 .11 .11

Subjects Studies

2,159 2,411 298 2,769 1,617 938 3,267 3 15 4 16 9 6 12

Dynamic Predictors of Sexual Recidivism (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004) Predictor

Anxiety Low self-esteem Denial of sex offense Empathy for victims Depression Insight alone

r * Subjects Studies

.03 .02 .01 -.04 -.07 667 1,424 1,780 1,745 850 6 10 9 5 7

Static - 99

• Purpose: To estimate the probability of sexual and violent recidivism.

• Who do I use it on: ADULT MALE offenders who have been convicted of at least one sex offense against a child or adult.

• • • • • Who should I NOT use it on?

Youth (under eighteen years old at time of release) Females Offenders convicted of possession/dissemination of child pornography Offenses related to prostitution (soliciting, pimping)

Item 1: Prior sex offense convictions / charges

• To be considered a sex offense, the crime does not need to be sex offense per se.

Examples: Unlawful Imprisonment (kidnapping), if the intent was to commit a rape, Burglary, if the intent was to steal underwear or other fetish items Criminal Trespassing, if the intent was voyeuristic (Peeping Tom) activity

• •

Item 1: Prior sex offense convictions / charges

Sexual Misbehavior is divided into two categories:

Category A

includes sexual behavior with minors or non-consenting adults

Category B

but: includes sexual behavior that is illegal, (1) the parties are consenting (e.g., consensual sex in public place) OR (2) there is no specific victim involved (e.g., possession of child pornography, failure to register as a sex offender).

Item 1: Prior sex offense convictions / charges

• The “Index offense” is the most recent sex offense (charge or conviction) • For sex offenses to be counted separately, the second offense must have been committed after the offender was charged with the first offense • Historical offenses detected after conviction are not counted as prior offenses

Item 1: Prior sex offense convictions / charges

• Score is based on either the number of convictions or number of charges stemming from sexual misbehavior, whichever is higher • None • 1 conviction / 1-2 charges • 2-3 convictions / 3-5 charges • 4+ convictions / 6+ charges 0 1 2 3

Item 2: Prior sentencing dates

Count the number of distinct occasions that the offender has been sentenced for any criminal offense.

• Index offense is not counted.

• Violations are not counted – only misdemeanor or felony (criminal) offenses

Scoring

3 or fewer 4 or more 0 1

Item 3: Any convictions for non-contact sex offenses

• Includes convictions for non-contact sex offenses such as: exhibitionism (exposing), obscene phone calls, possession of child pornography, voyeuristic acts, fetish burglary • Count convictions only, not charges

Scoring:

None 0 One or more 1

Item 4: Index offense – any non-sexual violence

• Convictions for violent acts which occurred in the commission of the index offense (e.g., Assault, conviction stemming from use of a weapon).

Scoring:

No Yes 0 1

Item 5: Prior non-sexual violence

• Any conviction stemming from a violent act, prior to the index offense

Scoring:

No Yes 0 1

Item 6: Any unrelated victim

• A related victim is one where the relationship would be sufficiently close that marriage would normally be prohibited (e.g., parent, uncle, grandparent, step-sister) • Spouses (inc. common-law) are related • Step-relationships less than 2 years are considered unrelated.

Scoring:

No Any unrelated victim 0 1

Item 7: Any stranger victim

• A victim is considered a stranger if the victim did not know the offender 24 hours before the offense.

Scoring:

No Any stranger victim 0 1

Item 8: Any male victim

Include any sex offense involving a male victim • Do NOT count possession of child pornography • Do NOT count exposing to mixed groups of children UNLESS there is evidence that the offender was targeting boys.

•

Scoring:

No Any male victim 0 1

Item 9: Young

• Refers to sex offender’s age at the time of the risk assessment.

• Note that Static-99 applies only to sex offenders who are over 18 years old at the time they are being rated.

Scoring:

Age 25 or older Age 18 to 24.99 years 0 1

Item 10: Single

Offender is considered single if he has never lived with an adult lover for more than two years.

Cohabitation must be continuous, with the same person.

Person must have had the opportunity to live with a lover.

Male lovers in prison do not count.

Scoring:

Yes No 0 1

Translating Static-99 score into risk categories

• Risk Level at 10 years Score 5 yrs 10 yrs 15 yrs Low Low-moderate High-moderate High 0 1 2 3 4 5 6+ 5% 6% 9% 11% 13% 7% 7% 13% 16% 12% 14% 19% 26% 31% 36% 33% 38% 40% 39% 45% 52%

Reporting the Static-99 Score

John scored a “3,” so is at low-moderate risk.

You CANNOT report that he has a risk of re-offending of 12 percent at five years, 14 percent at ten years, and 19 percent at 15 years.

Reporting the Static-99 Score

• You CAN write: “John scored a “3” on the Static-99, which places him in the low-moderate risk category. Of the sex offenders with this score, some 12 percent were re-convicted for a sex offense within 5 years, 14 percent were re-convicted of a sex offense within ten years, and a total of 19 percent were re-convicted of a sex offense within fifteen years.”

Sexual Re-offense Rates

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 “Official”rates based on Harris & Hanson (2004) “Estimated” rates based on Hanson, Morton, & Harris (2003) 10 samples; n=4,724 Percent

14% 20% 24% 27% 25%

Official Re-offense Rates Estimated Re-offense Rates

35% 40% 45%

0 5 10 Years in Community 15 20

Reporting the Static-99 Score

• You can add: “The research suggests that the actual re offense rate is about fifteen percent higher than the re-conviction rate by the ten year mark. This suggests that, for sex offenders with this score, approximately 29 percent have committed another sex offense within ten years.”

For further assistance:

• Contact the Capital District Coalition for Sex Offender Management, at: CDCSOM.com

(518) 489-7971 or the Canadian website, at: www.psepc-sppcc.gc.ca

Click: English Click: Corrections Click: Publications