A review of surveys and available information relating to sex offender civil commitment programs reveals important information about the characteristics of those programs and the demographics of those persons detained or civilly committed within. Although most of these programs provide a number of clinical services that are consistent with recommended standards, whether or not other aspects of these treatment programs meet accepted standards has not been widely researched, and standards of treatment for several components of sex offender civil commitment treatment are yet to be elucidated and established by professionals in this field.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (1999). Dangerous sex offenders: A task force report of the American Psychiatric Association. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press
3.
ArkowitzS.ShaleJ.CarabelloK. (2008). Conditional Release Programs for Civilly Committed Sex Offender. The Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 36, 000–000
4.
Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (2001). Civil commitment of sexually violent offenders
5.
BeckerJ. V.StinsonJ.TrompS.MesserG. (2003). Characteristics of individuals petitioned for civil commitment. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 47: 2, 185–195
6.
BrownC. J.FitchW. L. (2006). Enforcing the right to treatment for civilly committed sex offenders. In SchlankA. (Ed.) The Sexual Predator: Law and Public Policy, Clinical Practice, Volume III. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, Inc
7.
CohenF. (1999). The law and sexually violent predators—Through the Hendricks looking glass. In SchlankA.CohenF. (Eds.) The Sexual Predator: Law, Policy, Evaluation and Treatment. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, Inc
8.
CornwellJ. K. (2003). Sex offenders and the Supreme Court: The significance and limits of Kansas v. Hendricks. In WinickB.J.LaFondJ.Q. (Eds.) Protecting Society From Sexually Dangerous Offenders: Law, Justice, and Therapy. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association
9.
DemingA. (2007). Civil commitment program demographics and characteristics. Sex Offender Law Report, 8: 3, 33, 44–45
10.
DesLauriersA. T.GardnerJ. (1999). The sexual predator treatment program of Kansas. In SchlankA.CohenF. (Eds.) The Sexual Predator: Law, Policy, Evaluation and Treatment. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, Inc.
11.
DorenD. M. (2006). The model for considering release of civilly committed sexual offenders. In SchlankA.CohenF. (Eds.) The Sexual Predator: Law and Public Policy, Clinical Practice, Volume III. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, Inc.
12.
DourdJ. (2007). Loathing the sinner, medicalizing the sin: Why sexually violent predator statutes are unjust. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 30, 36–48
13.
FitchW. L.HammenD. (2001). Sex offender commitment: A survey of the states. Unpublished manuscript
14.
FitchW. L.HammenD. A. (2003). The new generation of sex offender commitment laws: Which states have them and how do they work? In WinickB.J.LaFondJ.Q. (Eds.) Protecting Society From Sexually Dangerous Offenders: Law, Justice, and Therapy. Washington. DC: American Psychological Association
15.
GoodnoughA.DaveyM. (2007, March 5). A record of failures at center for sex offenders. The New York Times
16.
HaavenJ.SchlankA. (2001). The challenge of treating the sex offender with developmental disabilities. In SchlankA. (Ed.). The Sexual Predator: Legal Issues, Clinical Issues, Special Populations, Volume II. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute
17.
HeldA. (1999). The civil commitment of sexual predators—Experience under Minnesota's law. In SchlankA.CohenF. (Eds.) The Sexual Predator: Law, Policy, Evaluation and Treatment. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, Inc.
18.
HennessyM. T. (1999). A survey of the nation's sexual predator treatment programs. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Denver
19.
JacksonR.SchneiderJ.TraviaT. (2007. October). Surveying sex offender civil commitment programs: Program and resident characteristics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA), San Diego. CA
20.
JanusE. (2004). SVP Laws: Psychiatry in service to a morally dubious enterprise. The Lancet, 364, s1–50
21.
Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407 (2002).
22.
Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997).
23.
LiebR. (2003). State policy perspectives on sexual predator laws. In WinickB.J.LaFondJ.Q. (Eds.), Protecting Society From Sexually Dangerous Offenders: Law, Justice, and Therapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
24.
LiebR.NelsonC. (2001). Treatment Programs for Sexually Violent Predators—A Review of States. In SchlankA. (Ed.) The Sexual Predator, Volume II. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute
25.
MarquesJ. K. (2001). Professional standards for civil commitment programs. In SchlankA. (Ed.). The Sexual Predator: Legal Issues, Clinical Issues, Special Populations, Volume II. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute
26.
MassW. J. (2006). Erosion of constitutional rights in commitment of sex offenders. Part IV. Sex Offender Law Report, 7: 3, 33–34, 43–45
27.
Mental Health America (2006). Confining “sexual predators” in the mental health system
28.
MorseS. J. (2003). Bad or mad?: Sex offenders and social control. In WinickB.J.LaFondJ.Q. (Eds.) Protecting Society From Sexually Dangerous Offenders: Law, Justice, and Therapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
29.
National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors (1997). Position statement on laws providing for the civil commitment of sexually violent criminal offenders. Alexandria, VA
30.
National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors (1999, April 25–27). Medical Director's Council Technical Report, Portland, OR
31.
OPPAGA (2008, February). The delays in screening sexually violent predators increase costs' Treatment facility security enhanced. Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, an office of the Florida Legislaure, Report No. 08–10
32.
PetrilaJ.OttoR. K. (2001). Admissibility of expert testimony in sexually violent predator proceedings. In SchlankA. (Ed.). The Sexual Predator: Legal Issues, Clinical Issues, Special Populations, Volume II. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute
33.
SchlankA. (1999). Guidelines for the development of new programs. In SchlankA.CohenF. (Eds.) The Sexual Predator: Law, Policy, Evaluation and Treatment. Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, Inc
34.
Sex Offender Civil Commitment Programs Network (2007). SOCCPN Member Website. Retrieved June 5, 2008, www.soccpn.org
35.
Turay v. Seling 108 F. Supp. 2d 1148 (W.D. Wash. 2000).
36.
Washington State Institute for Public Policy. (2005, March). Involuntary commitment of sexually violent predators: Comparing State Laws
37.
WillisG. M.GraceR. C. (2008). The quality of community reintegration planning for child molesters. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 20, 2, 218–240
38.
WinickB. J. (2005). Civil commitment: A therapeutic jurisprudence model. Carolina Academic Press: Durham, NC
