Sex offender treatment providers are ethically responsible for their client’s treatment; yet they are morally bound to protect society. Those who treat court-mandated clients are required to violate client confidentiality and report to authorities any disclosures made by clients during the treatment process. Using in-depth interviews (n = 22), this study focused on the perceptions of community-based sex offender treatment providers to explore ethical issues stemming from balancing a duty of care to the client with the mandated reporting requirements of the criminal justice system, and the difficulties of working within two bureaucratic systems (i.e., correctional and health systems). Results are discussed, followed by study limitations, suggestions for future research, and policy recommendations.
Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. (2017). Ethical standards and principles for the management of sexual abusers.
6.
Attride-StirlingJ. (2001). Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/146879410100100307
7.
BennerP. (1985). Quality of life: A phenomenological perspective on explanation, prediction, and understanding in nursing science. Advances in Nursing Science, 8(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1097/00012272-198510000-00004
8.
Bird EdmundsS. (1999). The personal impact of working with sex offenders. In Bird EdmundsS. (Ed.), Impact: Working with sexual abusers (pp. 11–30). Safer Society Press.
9.
BirgdenA.CucoloH. (2011). The treatment of sex offenders: Evidence, ethics, and human rights. Sexual Abuse, 23(3), 295–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063210381412
10.
BontaJ.AndrewsD. (2010). Viewing offender assessment and rehabilitation through the lens of the risk-needs-responsivity model. In McNeillF.RaynorP.TrotterC. (Eds.) Offender supervision: New directions in theory, research and practice (pp. 19–40). Willan.
11.
BrockiJ.WeardenA. (2006). A critical evaluation of the use of interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) in health psychology. Psychology and Health, 21(1), 87–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/14768320500230185
12.
ClarkeJ. (2011). Working with sex offenders: Best practice in enhancing practitioner resilience. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 17(3), 335–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2011.583781
13.
CollinsS.NeeC. (2010). Factors influencing the process of change in sex offender interventions: Therapists’ experiences and perceptions. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 16(3), 311–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600903497453
14.
DreyfusH. (1990). Being-in-the-world: A commentary on Heidegger’s being and time. MIT Press.
15.
DuffeeD. E.CarlsonB. E. (1996). Competing value premises for the provision of drug treatment to probationers. Crime and Delinquency, 42(4), 574–592. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128796042004005
16.
EdensJ. F.PetrilaJ.KelleyS. E. (2018). Legal and ethical issues in the assessment and treatment of psychopathy. In PatrickC. J. (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 732–751). The Guilford Press.
17.
FarkasM.MillerG. (2008). Sex offender treatment: Reconciling criminal justice priorities and therapeutic goals. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 21(2), 78–82. https://doi.org/10.1525/fsr.2008.21.2.78
18.
FarrenkopfT. (1992). What happens to therapists who work with sex offenders?Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 18(3–4), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1300/J076v18n03_16
FriedmannP.DucharmeL.WelshW.FrismanL.KnightK.KinlockT.… Abdel-SalamS. (2013). A cluster randomized trial of an organizational linkage intervention for offenders with substance use disorders: Study protocol. Health and Justice, 1(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/2194-7899-1-6
21.
GlaserB. (2003). Therapeutic jurisprudence: An ethical paradigm for therapists in sex offender treatment programs. Western Criminology Review, 4(2), 143–154.
22.
HachtelH.VogelT.HuberC. (2019). Mandated treatment and its impact on therapeutic process and outcome factors. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10(219), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00219
23.
HallG. (1995). Sexual offender recidivism revisited: A meta-analysis of recent treatment studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63(5), 802–809. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.63.5.802
24.
HansonR.BroomI.StephensonM. (2004). Evaluating community sex offender treatment programs: A 12-Year follow-up of 724 offenders. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 36(2), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087220
25.
HansonR.ThorntonD. (2000). Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales. Law and Human Behavior, 24(1), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005482921333
26.
HeideggerM. (1927). Being and time (John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson [1962],Trans.). Harper.
27.
HelmusL.HansonR.ThorntonD.BabchishinK.HarrisA. (2012). Absolute recidivism rates predicted by Static-99R and Static-2002R sex offender risk assessment tools vary across samples: A meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39(9), 1148–1171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854812443648
28.
HenninkM.HutterI.BaileyA. (2012). Qualitative research methods. SAGE.
29.
KadambiM.TruscottD. (2003). Vicarious traumatization and burnout among therapists working with sex offenders. Traumatology, 9(4), 216–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/153476560300900404
30.
KimB.BenekosP.MerloA. (2016). Sex offender recidivism revisited: Review of recent meta-analyses on the effects of sex offender treatment. Trauma, Violence, and Abuse, 17(1), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838014566719
31.
KramerU.DrapeauM. (2009). The cognitive errors and coping patterns of child molesters as assessed by external observers: A pilot study. The Open Criminology Journal, 2, 24–28. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874917800902010024
32.
LarkinM.WattsS.CliftonE. (2006). Giving voice and making sense in interpretative phenomenological analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 102–120. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp062oa
33.
LevensonJ.D’AmoraD. (2005). An ethical paradigm for sex offender treatment: Response to Glaser. Western Criminology Review, 6(1), 145–153.
34.
LevensonJ.WillisG.PrescottD. (2018). Incorporating principles of trauma-informed care into evidence-based sex offending treatment. In JeglicE.CalkinsC. (Eds.), New frontiers in offender treatment (pp. 171–188). Springer.
35.
LuckenK.BalesW. (2008). Florida’s sexually violent predator program: An examination of risk and civil commitment eligibility. Crime and Delinquency, 54(1), 95–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128707306692
36.
MackeyS. (2005). Phenomenological nursing research: Methodological insights derived from Heidegger’s interpretive phenomenology. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 42(2), 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2004.06.011
MarquesJ.WiederandersM.DayD.NelsonC.Van OmmerenA. (2005). Effects of a relapse prevention program on sexual recidivism: Final results from California’s Sex Offender Treatment and Evaluation Project (SOTEP). Sexual Abuse, 17(1), 79–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11194-005-1212-x
39.
MarshallW.FernandezY.SerranG.MulloyR.ThorntonD.MannR.AndersonD. (2003). Process variables in the treatment of sexual offenders: A review of the current literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 8(2), 205–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-1789(01)00065-9
40.
MartinD.GarskeJ.DavisM. (2000). Relation of the therapeutic alliance with outcome and other variables: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(3), 438–450. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.68.1.114
41.
McGrathR.CummingG.HoltJ. (2002). Collaboration among sex offender treatment providers and probation and parole officers: The beliefs and behaviors of treatment providers. Sexual Abuse, 14(1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013029510999
42.
MonicoL.MitchellS.WelshW.LinkN.HamiltonL.Malvini ReddenS.… FriedmannP. (2016). Developing effective interorganizational relationships between community corrections and community treatment providers. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 55(7), 484–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2016.1218401
43.
MonkkonenE. (2001). Estimating the accuracy of historic homicide rates: New York City and Los Angeles. Social Science History, 25(1), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0145553200012098
44.
MorseJ. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212–1222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501
45.
MouldenH.FirestoneP. (2010). Therapist awareness and responsibility in working with sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse, 22(4), 374–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063210382047
46.
MurrieD.BoccacciniM.TurnerD.MeeksM.WoodsC. (2009). Rater (dis)agreement on risk assessment measure in sexually violent predator proceedings. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 15(19), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014897
47.
NewstromN.MinerM.HoeferC.HansonR.RobinsonB. (2019). Sex offender supervision: Communication, training, and mutual respect are necessary for effective collaboration between probation officers and therapists. Sexual Abuse, 31(5), 607–631. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063218775970
48.
PolizziD. M.MacKenzieD. L.HickmanL. J. (1999). What works in adult sex offender treatment? A review of prison-and non-prison-based treatment programs. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43(3), 357–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X99433008
49.
ReidK.FlowersP.LarkinM. (2005). Exploring lived experience: An introduction to interpretative phenomenological analysis. Psychologist, 18(1), 20–23.
50.
Revised Code of Washington section 9.94A.670(8)(a).
51.
RossE.PolaschekD.WardT. (2008). The therapeutic alliance: A theoretical revision for offender rehabilitation. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13(6), 462–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2008.07.003
52.
SchmuckerM.LöselF. (2015). The effects of sexual offender treatment on recidivism: An international meta-analysis of sound quality evaluations. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11(4), 597–630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-015-9241-z
53.
SerranG.FernandezY.MarshallW.MannR. (2003). Process issues in treatment: Application to sexual offender programs. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34(4), 368–374. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.34.4.368
54.
ShelbyR.StoddartR.TaylorK. (2001). Factors contributing to levels of burnout among sex offender treatment providers. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16(11), 1205–1217. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626001016011006
55.
SmithJ.OsbornM. (2003). Interpretive phenomenological analysis. In SmithJ. (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 53–80). SAGE.
56.
TischlerV. (2011). Loss and tomorrow’s doctors: How the humanities can contribute to personal and professional development. International Journal of Person Centered Medicine, 1(3), 547–552. https://doi.org/10.5750/ijpcm.v1i3.48
WardT.BrownM. (2004). The good lives model and conceptual issues in offender rehabilitation. Psychology, Crime and Law, 10(3), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160410001662744
Washington Administrative Code section 246-930-040.
62.
Washington Administrative Code section 246-930-338.
63.
WillisG. M.WardT. (2011). Striving for a good life: The good lives model applied to released child molesters. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 17(3), 290–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2010.505349
64.
YoussefC. (2017). The importance of the therapeutic alliance when working with men who have committed a sexual offence. Journal of Criminal Psychology, 7(3), 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCP-09-2016-0027
