6-18-17 Pennsylvania:
At the United States Penitentiary at Lewisburg, Pa., prisoners with serious mental illness are handed crossword and sudoku puzzles instead of counseling, according to a lawsuit that says prisoners at one of the most violent federal prisons are denied routine mental health care.
The lawsuit also alleges that prisoners at Lewisburg are cut off from the medications they were given at other prisons and housed in small cells, where they often spend up to 24 hours a day with other prisoners, who also often have serious mental illnesses.
Filed on June 9, McCreary v. The Federal Bureau of Prisons says the meager mental health treatment violates the U.S. Constitution's protections against cruel and unusual punishment. It also says the inadequate treatment is in violation of the Bureau of Prisons' own rules, which say men with serious mental illness should, in most cases, be removed from the Special Management Unit for violent prisoners at Lewisburg.
A spokesman for the Bureau of Prisons declined to respond to the lawsuit, saying in an email, "the Bureau of Prisons cannot comment on matters that are the subject of legal proceedings."
Last year, an investigation by NPR and the Marshall Project showed high rates of violence at Lewisburg, where inmate-on-inmate assaults are six times more common than at all federal prisons. The investigation linked the heightened violence to the lack of mental health care, the practice of double-cell solitary confinement — putting two men in one small cell — and the frequent use of restraints. ..Continued..
June 18, 2017
Lawsuit Says Lewisburg Prison Counsels Prisoners With Crossword Puzzles
January 11, 2017
Sex offender law badly flawed to detriment of all
1-11-17 National:
Indeterminate sentencing for sex offenders is an outdated system that is not only costing the state millions but is failing to rehabilitate sexual predators and imposing lifetime sentences on those who would otherwise see a day of freedom.
The state must fix its Sex Offender Treatment and Monitoring program so those in custody in Colorado can receive the help they need, be released to society and spend the rest of their days on probation and a sex-offender registry program.
It’s hard when looking at the competing needs for our tight state budget to allocate additional resources to a treatment program for sex offenders. Never has there been a less sympathetic recipient of state resources.
But how we treat those incarcerated in our system is a basic question of human rights, and holding certain sex offenders indefinitely while they await space in a treatment center fails the basic test of humane treatment. ..Continued.. by The Denver Post Editorial Board
November 18, 2016
Is it time to modify traditional treatment programs in America's correctional facilities?
11-18-16 National:
Offenders who suffer from mental health and substance abuse disorders do not respond well to traditional alternative sentence programming
The federally ordered massive closure of mental health institutions and movement to de-institutionalize the system in the 1970s ultimately resulted in a disservice to the mentally ill incarcerated and fracture of the correctional system.
Recent statistics reflect about 56 percent of the incarcerated population suffers from mental health disorders. Further, 68 percent of the incarcerated population at the local jail level have substance abuse disorders. Among the incarcerated population in both state and jail facilities, about 75 percent have co-occurring mental health and addiction disorders. This equates to nearly seven million Americans who are under correctional or other justice system supervision (e.g. probation or parole).
From a treatment perspective, the arrest and subsequent crisis thereafter actually hold the potential of having a positive outcome in an arrestee’s life. Because an arrest is such a significant and typically shocking experience for the offender, it can be difficult to deny substance abuse or the effects of a criminal lifestyle. An arrest may open the door for an individual to voluntarily seek and find substance abuse and mental health treatment.
Alternatives to incarceration
For an arrested individual, the pretrial services stage may offer treatment as a part of court proceedings. Diversion to treatment can occur at several points before incarceration. Unfortunately, not all jurisdictions have established programs for those who are substance addicted. This can be a big disservice for an arrested individual.
It appears that treatment through diversion or alternative sentencing options remain a low priority in some criminal justice systems across the U.S. Even though it may reduce jail populations, outside of formal drug court or diversion programs, programming access is still limited. For those jurisdictions that offer alternative sentencing options, a common condition upon release from custody is a mandatory participation in some form of treatment which is then monitored through a pre-trial or probation department.
Co-occurring complications
Many incarcerated individuals with co-occurring addiction and mental illness don’t respond well to traditional interventions. The co-occurring problems are too complex and require a more specific level of individualized care and treatment which may require a multi-faceted approach.
Defendants can sometimes experience significant cognitive and emotional disruptions as a result of their arrest which can make them difficult to engage with. This disruption can influence a counselor’s ability to get the defendant’s willing collaboration for treatment. For others, the arrest is so stressful and destabilizing that the disposition of their case leaves them less receptive to treatment options, and sometimes the incident of arrest can serve as exceptional motivation to participate in an alternative sentencing program.
Collaborative and effective
On many levels, the modern justice system offers broad based, collaborative, holistic interventions along with the appropriate justice supervision. In many communities, program resources include public health features in addition to treatment of addiction and mental health services. The offered resources can even fall under the umbrella of the Federal Affordable Care Act and align with requirements for mental health treatment and medical services under the insurance plans. ..Continued.. by Melissa Mann: is recently retired from the field of law enforcement. Her experience spanned 18 years which included assignments in Corrections, Community Policing, Dispatch Communications and Search and Rescue. Melissa holds a BS in Criminal Justice and MA in Psychology with emphasis in studies on the psychological process of law enforcement officers. She holds a deep passion for researching and writing about the lifestyle of police and corrections work and the far reaching psychological effects on the officer and their world. For comments or inquiries, please contact: melissa.mann@correctionsone.com
September 11, 2016
In a first for city, minor sexual offenders get group counselling
9-11-16 Country: India:
The discussion is part of a group counseling session initiated by the Juvenile Justice Board in Mumbai, headed by Principal Magistrate Gauri Jadhav.
Seated in a circle, eight boys discuss the difference between ‘good’ and ‘bad’, on awareness of their actions and impulse control. While this could be true for any group of teenagers, this discussion is being held at the Child Guidance Clinic of the Dongri Observation Home.
The boys are children in conflict with the law — boys booked in alleged cases of sexual abuse. The discussion is part of a group counseling session initiated by the Juvenile Justice Board in Mumbai, headed by Principal Magistrate Gauri Jadhav.
While the Juvenile Justice Act has provisions for group counselling, it is not often that such sessions are organised at the pending-inquiry stage for the youngsters, experts said. The Mumbai Board gave its go-ahead to the plan after various stakeholders, including the socio-legal project Resource Cell for Juvenile Justice, felt the need for it to address issues faced by adolescents in custody.
“We conduct one-on-one sessions with the children, but have initiated group counselling for the first time in Mumbai. The idea is that children, when in a group of people having gone through similar experiences, feel they are not alone. On an individual basis, they may have a defence to deal with what is being told to them. In a group, we feel that the guard is down and hearing others share their experiences gives them a space to vent,” said Dr. Shrirang Joshi, visiting psychiatrist, CGC Dongri, who led the session. He says that while the criminal justice system has two sides, the victim and the accused, some intervention for the offenders is also significant.
The sessions, held in three parts, also involve the parents of the children, counselled separately. “We usually put questions in a simple manner to the teenagers, to make them distinguish between the choices they have made. The focus is on looking at them in terms of their future, as teenagers are very receptive,” he said.
The recently amended Juvenile Justice Act prescribes preliminary assessment of those children between 16-18 years who have been apprehended for heinous offences, to determine whether they can be tried as adults. While sexual abuse cases too fall in this category, those working with children in conflict with the law feel rehabilitation is an important factor for the group.
“Everyone keeps scaring us about the case and how it will ruin my son’s life forever. This was the first time we heard others in the same situation. My son and I have never discussed the case in detail but he keeps assuring me that once he comes out, he will focus on his studies. I will help him in all ways possible once he is out,” said the mother of one of the eight boys.
The single mother, whose son has been inside the Home for over six months, also participated in the session. ..Source.. by Sadaf Modak
May 24, 2015
Who Are Woman Sex Offenders and Why Are They Treated Like Men?
5-2-15 National:
For the first quarter of my life, I didn’t think much about sex offenders. Call it thoughtlessness or a naïve little bubble; it was probably both. This thoughtlessness might not be unique. But I began thinking about sex offenders when, at age 25, I was charged with a sex crime.
I had had sexual contact with my 17-year-old neighbor. I’m not proud of this and, if given the chance, would absolutely reverse that decision. But I slept with him once and joined the burgeoning ranks of women charged with sex offenses.
I think of these ranks both as a demographic and a way of life. These are two ways to approach this one idea, and I think they’re important to understanding the women who are caught up in these crimes.
First of all, the demographic. While women sex offenders are a low portion of the population, they do exist and in higher numbers than before 1994 (when the Jacob Wetterling Improvements Act was established). There is a trend toward sexual contact with teenage males. Often, the women are motivated by a desire for companionship or have a sense that their current adult-age relationships are unfulfilling.
In other instances, the women are prison guards or case managers who have had sex with inmates. In the state of Colorado, any incarcerated person is legally incapable of consenting to sex, so that any sexual contact he or she does have is considered a crime. Once in a while, a woman will have sexual contact with an intellectually disabled person, sometimes without realizing that this person’s consent is not actually legal.
Women very rarely have sexual contact with children younger than 13. I’ve known only two women in this category and both were motivated by other factors: anger, a history of abuse in their own childhoods, resentment, and a feeling of being trapped. Most female sex offenders aren’t motivated by power and control, which, among male offenders, is the leading motivation for sexual contact with someone before the age of puberty. Actually, regardless of the victim’s age, power and control are a much more compelling motivator for men than for women.
Of course, I don’t condone this behavior in the least. I’m not saying that women who sleep with 17-year-olds should be given a free pass or skip blithely past the consequences. But I do believe we need to rethink the way that we treat and rehabilitate these women. We need to focus less on the scintillating sexual details and more on the emotions and needs that motivated them.
Here lies perhaps the greatest injustice: in the sex offender system, women are treated exactly like men. Treatment providers aren’t given special instruction in dealing with women. The treatment programs are written for men, using statistics about male offenders and past treatment models of men. Imagine! Although women’s motivations and victims are diabolically different, they receive the same treatment model as men who rape women, prey on young children, and commit serial crimes.
At the moment, the justice system hides behind the fact that there isn’t enough research into female offenders. This is partly true: women offend at a much lower rate than men, and so studying their motivations takes a little more work. But as the sex offender laws expand to include more and more actions, there are an increasing number of women caught in sex crimes.
A lack of evidence should never be the reason for poor rehabilitation. It should be the impetus, in fact, for working harder to understand why some women commit sex crimes and how to prevent it in the future. When I asked a treatment provider for data about the effects on teenage males of sex crimes committed by women, she had one study. It was a tiny example, too: 13 males from the Midwest. Only that. In a nation that routinely penalizes women for sexual contact with teenage males, only one study existed that documented this phenomenon. By contrast, decades of research and hundreds of studies have informed the treatment material and methods for men who commit sex crimes.
Research about recidivism rates is also based primarily on male populations and varies drastically. Estimates about recidivism rates for sex offenders range from 2.5% for another sex crime to to 43% for any crime at all. But since the law doesn’t differentiate among sex offenders, these studies are nearly useless. A woman who has sex with a teenager is in the same category with a developmentally disabled person who is an exhibitionist, and those two are in the same category with a man who raped and murdered a child. The lumping-together of sex offenses creates confusion even while it feeds public hysteria.
Secondly, joining the ranks of sex offenders can also become a way of life. It affects which grocery aisle a woman walks down, whether she talks to the cashier who might be 17, whether she takes the long way around instead of driving past a liquor store, how many hours she spends preparing for a polygraph. It cuts her off from her family because she is not allowed to go places where children are. This means no family dinners, no big Christmases with extended family, no graduation ceremonies, no school plays or soccer games.
This isolation sinks deep into the bones. It makes a person unsure of herself. How do “normal” people act in this situation? What if someone finds out I committed a sex crime? Am I talking and behaving the way women my age do?
In this way, the punishment for sex crimes is partly physical, restricting a person’s movements in the community, and partly psychological, making her afraid to engage with other people.
All of this psychological pressure – the extensive restrictions, the polygraphs, the fear of losing hard-won privileges – takes an enormous toll on a person. She begins to fear public places and unfamiliar situations. She begins to look for a quick exit and excuses in case something “not allowed” would happen. She must either follow every rule perfectly (which rips away all self-esteem) or she must self-justify the choices she makes (which engrains criminal thinking, even if it wasn’t there before).
Treating sex offenders, especially women offenders, has become drastically un-therapeutic. “Treatment” revolves around complex rules, low self-esteem, and the constant fear of punishment. It does nothing to address the complex emotional choices that led people to their crimes. Rather, the justice system beats down already hurting women. ..Source.. by Sonia Van den Broek is currently living in Colorado, raising cats and hydrangea bushes. She is a free woman, which means lots of walks to local coffeeshops. In her spare time she pretends that she's good at knitting and other crafts.
March 4, 2015
Undersheriff: 'They're really not criminals; they're mental health patients'
Addressing the Lake County Board's Law and Judicial Committee on Tuesday, Lake County Undersheriff Ray Rose described a pattern of recidivism that can form when an individual with mental-health issues ends up being arrested.
"They go through this classification and recognition that there's some treatment needed, and medication is given to them to stabilize them while they are in the jail," Rose told the committee. "Once they leave, we try to get them on affordable care and give them documentation and help them fill it out, but then they leave and if they don't want to follow up on – or if they can't follow up on it – then that's where it drops off again.
"If we don't make sure that treatment and that medication continues, that's why this cycle keeps going around and around and around," Rose added, saying "they're really not criminals; they're mental health patients. So how should we be counting them, and how should we be treating them? Those are the questions that we have to find solutions for."
Committee members listened to more than an hour of discussions about mental-health issues and their impact on the judicial system as agencies from both the public and private sector embark on the Lake County Behavioral Health Treatment Court Collaborative.
Funded by a four-year federal grant, the effort was described by Steve Fabbri, the county's assistant director of adult probation services, as an attempt to recognize that "going through a county jail can be traumatizing" for someone with mental illness.
"Evidence is showing us that the majority of people who come through the criminal-justice system – especially through jail – have sustained some sort of trauma, usually in their childhood, whether it's physical abuse, sexual abuse or what have you," Fabbri said. "We're not saying you have to turn the whole system on its head. But maybe we can change some of our culture, a little bit about the way we treat these people, both in environments like jail and the courtroom and in interaction." ..Continued.. by Dan Moran
December 27, 2014
A California law about reporting child porn puts psychotherapists in a bind
12-27-2014 California:
A middle-aged man feels a spark with a co-worker that he hasn’t felt in years with his wife and wants to start an affair. He remains faithful. A teenager longs to lash out in rage against her parents. She instead composes an angry song. A new mom in the throes of severe sleep deprivation and exhaustion feels a sudden urge to smother her child. She does not do so. A man feels aroused by sexual images of children. He never acts on those desires.
Our desires need not compel us to act. We are free to choose our own course of action. These truths may be among the most liberating that my psychotherapy patients learn in treatment.
Beginning next month, however, I will be hampered in my ability to hear the full range of my patients’ desires and to assure them that they can discuss these feelings without fear. Under an amendment to California’s Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act, psychotherapists and psychiatrists will be required to report to the authorities any patient who “downloads, streams, or accesses images of any person under the age of 18 engaged in an act of obscene sexual conduct.” In the same way that I am required to break confidentiality to report child abuse, I will be mandated to report consumption of child pornography.
California is often a bellwether state when it comes to issues of psychotherapy and the law. The state’s recent, highly commendable decision to bar the practice of “gay conversion therapy” on minors has already been copied by New Jersey and the District. The child porn reporting requirement could likewise begin to serve as a national standard.
On the face of it, the amendment may seem like a helpful addition to the reporting mandates for psychotherapists and psychiatrists. Child pornography is, after all, a damaging and illegal practice. As a society we surely want to decrease its production, distribution and consumption.
On closer inspection, however, the law falls short on three fronts: First, it will not protect children from either the production or distribution of child pornography, which is its intent. Second, it violates therapist-patient confidentiality and decreases the likelihood that people will get the psychological help they need to stop accessing child pornography; if the goal is to undercut production by reducing demand, the law will likely have the opposite effect. And, third, it conflates desire with action.
There is little evidence to suggest that consuming child pornography causes individuals to commit sexual abuse. While it’s true that individuals who commit sexual abuse are more likely than others to have consumed child pornography, this is a clear case of correlation and not causality. Given the ease and privacy with which people can access sexual images of children and teenagers, data on consumers of child pornography are neither complete nor reliable. The majority of the evidence we have comes from those convicted of what is termed a “hands-on” sex offense against a child.
In contrast, a 2009 study by Swiss psychiatrist Frank Urbaniok and colleagues was unique in that it included a large number of consumers of child pornography who had never committed a hands-on sexual offense against a child. The study found that “previous hands-on sex offenses are a relevant risk factor for future hands-on sex offenses among child pornography users, just as they are among sex offenders in general. The consumption of child pornographic material alone does not seem to predict hands-on sex offenses.” In fact, this research found that less than half of 1 percent of child pornography viewers without a prior hands-on child sex offense went on to commit a hands-on child sex offense.
For many years, psychotherapists and psychiatrists have been required to break patient confidentiality only when we believe a minor or dependent adult is in imminent danger of serious abuse or neglect, or a life is imminently at risk. As a psychotherapist, I am not required to report any other illegal activity that a patient may report to me, including drug abuse, drinking while driving, stealing, sexual assault, assault or even a murder that has been committed. This has allowed psychotherapists and psychiatrists to help patients discontinue illegal or potentially harmful behaviors. And it has enabled patients to speak freely about their thoughts, feelings and desires without fear of exposure. Thoughts and feelings are not equivalent to actions. One of the desired outcomes of psychotherapy is that patients will understand precisely this distinction.
People are motivated to come to psychotherapy because the expression of their deepest desires and fears will be met with a commitment to help, not judgment or censure. Laws such as California’s may cause patients to think twice before embarking on psychotherapy, depriving them of the help that they need. The solution to the problem of child pornography is to enforce existing laws regarding its production, distribution and consumption, not to violate therapist-patient confidentiality. ..Source.. by Leslie C. Bell who is a sociologist and psychotherapist in private practice in Berkeley, Calif.
December 24, 2014
Hillsborough's controversial sex offender court is disbanded
This is sad, very sad, a better answer would be to rotate judges into this division; each serving some period of time. Its a shame there wasn't a professional study done which could have determined the effectiveness of such a court.12-24-2014 Florida:
TAMPA — For 14 years, criminal cases involving accused rapists, molesters and child abusers in Hillsborough County have been heard by a single judge in the sex offender division.
Advocates of this highly specialized court for pedophiles and predators call it a smart, efficient way to handle difficult cases with unique sensitivities. But critics say no judge can hear the horrifying details of rape and abuse day after day without becoming biased — particularly when children are victims.
And they point to Circuit Judge Chet Tharpe — known for his dramatic pronouncements, his sometimes lengthy sentences and his recent rebuke from an appeals court — as proof. Now Hillsborough's sex offender court is no more.
This week, Circuit Judge Manuel Menendez Jr. dissolved the division in one of his last acts as chief judge before he retires. Menendez informed the judges that as of Jan. 1, sex and child abuse cases will be randomly distributed among criminal court judges who hear felony cases ranging from grand theft to murder.
The move, he said, had been "contemplated for a while."
"I thought we needed resources elsewhere, and this is a way of doing that," Menendez said, pointing out that no special division exists for murders, which are also complex and important cases.
Tharpe, on the bench for 24 years and in sex offender court for eight, could not be reached for comment Wednesday.
So-called "boutique" courts allow specially assigned lawyers and judges to get steeped in the nuances of a specific area of law. Hillsborough has drug court, probation court, veterans court and animal court, among others. None has drawn the attention of sex offender court under Tharpe — particularly after the case of accused child pornographer Peter Barnhill.
Caught with thousands of graphic images on his hard drive, Barnhill had no record and passed a lie detector test indicating he had never touched a child. A psychologist called him low-risk.
At the sentencing, an emotional Judge Tharpe called child pornography "epidemic" and indicated Barnhill had a 50-50 chance of molesting a child. Tharpe gave him 22 years.
In a strongly worded opinion, the 2nd District Court of Appeal ordered a new sentencing by a different judge. The appeals court noted that Tharpe spoke of his struggle with such cases "every single day of my life since I've been put into this division" and said the judge equated Barnhill with those similarly charged rather than considering his individual case. Clearly, Barnhill did not get "a hearing in a dispassionate environment before a fair and impartial judge."
Other Tharpe sentences have gotten attention, including four life terms for the rapist of a 75-year-old woman and 690 years for a man who beat and molested boys.
Citing the Barnhill rebuke, Hillsborough Public Defender Julie Holt sent a letter to the chief judge in August saying sex offender court was no longer necessary or efficient, particularly since DNA and other scientific evidence are now commonplace in cases from petty theft to murder.
The specialized division "can also lead to the development of personal biases, perceptions and beliefs on the part of the court as well as the lawyers" assigned there, Holt wrote. The Hillsborough County Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers also wrote of concerns about "predictable 'rubber-stamped' sentences."
"We feel that one person can only listen to so many sexual cases before it can take a toll on the person's objectivity," the letter said. "We fear, with great respect, that this may now be the case." Other lawyers spoke of the possibility of using the Barnhill decision to get Tharpe recused from their own similar cases.
Tharpe is assigned to a criminal division and will continue to hear cases involving convicted sex offenders who may be held under civil commitment under the Jimmy Ryce Act.
A spokesman for Hillsborough State Attorney Mark Ober said the sex offender division, like other specialty courts, served Hillsborough County well. "We were hopeful it would not be disbanded," Mark Cox said.
Tampa defense lawyer Lyann Goudie said she believed this was a good decision for the court system overall.
"It's got to be difficult to handle those kinds of crimes, especially crimes that involve children," she said. "If that's all they were seeing day in and day out, it would be the very rare person that would be able to maintain objectivity and neutrality." ..Source.. by Sue Carlton
December 10, 2014
Doctor on Demand launches virtual mental health visits
12-10-2014 National:
Mobile telemedicine company Doctor on Demand has found a promising new use for its technology platform — enabling customers to have virtual visits with a mental health professional.
The San Francisco-based startup has completely redesigned its app to reflect the expansion of its services to mental health. It has also set up a whole new network of mental health professionals in all 50 states to answer customers’ calls. In total, the network consists of 300 licensed therapists.
Providers must have a PhD or an MD behind their name to participate. They also have to commit to 15 hours a week to take calls on the service.
Unlike Doctor on Demand’s virtual medical doctor visits, the mental health sessions aren’t “on demand.” Rather, they’re scheduled in advance. Customers can, however, specify in their request that they’d like a same-day therapist meeting, Doctor on Demand cofounder and CEO Adam Jackson told VentureBeat.
Another difference is that customers can choose their therapist for mental health sessions, while in the medical part of the app, a doctor is chosen for them.
The mental health sessions cost $50 for 25 minutes (Doctor on Demand takes $10 of it), or $95 for a full 50-minute meeting (Doctor on Demand takes $15).
A virtual therapist meeting starts with the customer answering a few logistical and demographic questions in the app. The customer is then asked a series of questions about the mental health issue or issues he or she is seeking help with. The app might ask how often the person is experiencing anxiety, for example. Then the customer selects the duration of the meeting, inputs payment information, and the session begins.
According to the CDC, 50 percent of Americans will experience mental and emotional health issues at some point in their lives, but only 40 percent receive treatment.
Virtual mental health visits might help clear away a common barrier to getting help for mental health issues, said Doctor on Demand chief medical officer Dr. Pat Basu. Many people — especially men — tend to ignore mental health problems, and/or self-medicate with drugs or alcohol. More people might receive proper care if all they had to do was launch an app, Basu said.
Doctor on Demand is also launching virtual lactation consultant visits for nursing mothers in cooperation with UpSpring. New moms often get just a short training session on how to breastfeed — usually at the hospital right after the baby is born — and they often have questions later on, Jackson explains. The cost of a video visit with a Doctor on Demand/UpSpring lactation consultant is $40 for a 25-minute session and $70 for a 50-minute session.
Doctor on Demand offers its services directly to consumers as well as through employers, health systems, and health plans. The company, which was founded by Jackson and (Dr. Phil’s son) Jay McGraw in 2012, has raised $24 million from Venrock, Shasta Ventures, Andreessen Horowitz, Google Ventures, Lerer Ventures, angel investor Sir Richard Branson, and Athena Health CEO Jonathan Bush. ..Source.. by Mark Sullivan
December 5, 2014
Top police officer: many viewing child abuse images should be treated on NHS
12-5-2014 United Kingdom:
Norfolk chief constable Simon Bailey believes thousands on police database ‘pose no threat’ and don’t belong in prison
Thousands who view child abuse images online should be treated as patients by the NHS rather than sent to prison because they pose no threat to children, says one of Britain’s leading police officers.
In an interview with the Guardian, Simon Bailey, chief constable of Norfolk police and the Association of Chief Police Officers’ (Acpo) lead on child protection and abuse investigations, said that while police had a database of 50,000 people who regularly viewed indecent images of children, research suggested not all were an immediate threat.
“What academic research would say is between 16% and 50% of those people who have viewed indecent images of children are then likely to be ‘contact abusers’ [of children]. That can be as high as 25,000 or as low as 8,000. [This group] poses a threat,” he said. However, the remaining group of child sex offenders – who are committing a crime by viewing the material online – are “non-contact abusers” who Bailey says do not “need to come into the criminal justice system in terms of being put forward before a court”.
He added: “We have to think about an alternative solution. [We] need to engage with service providers from mental health and the health service to work with us to say these people need help.”
The new approach provoked a debate among child protection experts and health professionals over whether the police were in effect decriminalising child sex offences at a time when online abuse appears to be increasing.
David Cameron will call next week for further controls over child abuse images. There are thought to be more than 100m of them in circulation on the web, up from 7,000 in 1990.
Admitting the new strategy appeared “a very unpalatable response from a senior police officer,” Bailey said the decision to give priority to active paedophiles rather than browsers of images that include the rape and torture of children was “based on realism ... it is based upon the fact there will be a significant number of those people who will simply not go on to contact abuse.”
This week a doctor, Myles Bradbury, was jailed for 22 years for “grotesque” abuse of 18 vulnerable children in his care. Police in Canada had told their British counterparts he was buying indecent images of children on the internet, but UK investigators failed to act for 14 months, classifying him as low risk. ..Continued.. by Randeep Ramesh, social affairs editor
November 17, 2014
The Rise of the Robot Therapist
11-17-2014 Global:
Over the past few decades, we've seen a rise in different interactive technologies and new ways of using them to treat various mental problems. Among other things, this includes online, computer-based, and even virtual reality approaches --to-- cognitive-behavioural therapy. But what about using robots to provide treatment and/or emotional support?
In recent years, the field of robotics has advanced to the point that social robots have become increasingly common. Defined as an "artificially intelligent system that has a physical embodiment, is autonomous, and interacts and communicates with humans," social robots such as Tico, Jibo, and iCub are already moving beyond the laboratory to interacting with people in real-life environments. Some social robots such as Hitchbot have even become media stars and their potential to do far more is just beginning to be understood.
Some researchers have already coined a new term, robotherapy, to describe the different ways that social robots can be used to help people in need. This includes specialized robots for helping children, adults, or the elderly with cognitive, social, or physical problems. Not only can robots be available twenty-four hours a day, but they may also help with the growing shortage of trained support workers, especially for older adults with dementia. Research has already shown that social robots can help improve the quality of life for many people who might otherwise "fall between the cracks" due to not having the help they need.
To read more, check out my new Psychology Today post. ..Source.. by Providentia
October 30, 2014
Suzio attacks prison credits program, Bartolomeo critical of 'violent pedophile' source
10-30-2014 Connecticut:
CHESHIRE — Standing in front of the Cheshire Correctional Institution Wednesday afternoon, two Republicans again called for the governor and state Department of Correction to suspend the risk reduction earned credit program and investigate alleged flaws.
Len Suzio, a former state senator hoping to regain the 13th District seat, said the “system is being manipulated.”
Standing beside him was state Sen. Joe Markley, R-Southington, who said the program needs to be reevaluated.
Both Republicans have vocally opposed the prison credit program since it was approved in 2011. Under the program, inmates can earn credits toward early release through good behavior and participating in anti-recidivism activities.
They said they had heard from inmates and correction officers who described problems with the implementation.
Markley and Suzio said they visited Osborn Correctional Institution in Somers last Friday to speak with one inmate and handed out two letters they received from an inmate and a former inmate outlining concerns.
Suzio said he has spoken to several prison guards who believe the program is ineffective. On Wednesday, Suzio and Markley said they couldn’t reveal their sources.
But Suzio’s opponent Democratic state Sen. Dante Bartolomeo said she had obtained information on the inmate Suzio and Markley met with in Somers, calling him “a violent pedophile.” While she said she also believes the prison credit program is flawed, Bartolomeo voiced concerns that two Republican candidates were consulting with an inmate with that kind of record.
Karen Martucci, acting director of the DOC external affairs division, said the inmate Suzio and Markley interviewed “has an extensive criminal history record totaling over 30 arrests and most recently incarcerated for his third parole violation based on repetitive lies and manipulative tactics, proven as failure to comply with parole conditions while under supervision in the community.”
He’s also a registered sex offender, accused of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old in 1989 when he was 17, according to the DOC. A year earlier, the man was charged with risk of injury to a minor for physically abusing two boys, ages 3 and 7. The inmate’s recent criminal history includes several counts of larceny, forgery, burglary and threatening.
Suzio said the inmate’s past is irrelevant because the focus of their interview with him was to determine if the risk reduction earned credit program is flawed or not. What the inmate is saying may or may not be true, he said, but the state should investigate. Both Suzio and Markley said Wednesday they thought the inmate they interviewed was credible.
Many of his recent crimes are petty as well, Suzio said. “If Dante wants to ignore the facts because she thinks this program is working fine, God bless her. But I’m on a mission to expose it for all the failings it’s got,” he said.
Markley said he didn’t know the inmate was listed on the state’s Sex Offender Registry at the time of the interview. But the information the inmate provided “I thought was very credible and believable,” he said. “I wasn’t there to judge his soul.”
For example, Suzio and Markley said, inmates can earn credits for signing up for a class, even if they aren’t able to take the class because of a waiting list.
“By waiting in line, they’re getting credits,” Suzio said.
By following an Offender Accountability Plan established by prison officials, inmates may earn up to five days a month off their sentences. Suzio and Markley said they were told by prison sources that inmates are encouraged not to follow through with the plan so they can continue to earn credits. They said that, according to what they’ve been told, inmates are no longer eligible to receive credits if they finish their plan.
Also, they were told that programs that inmates take part in to earn credits have been shortened from months to weeks. By providing shortened programming, “It’s not going to give you the same experience,” Markley said.
Suzio said the DOC and state officials are allowing the risk reduction earned credit program to be abused to reduce prison population and save money. In speaking with prison guards, Suzio said, “they told me they don’t consider it to be a safe program for the public.”
Mike Lawlor, the criminal justice adviser to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, said an investigation isn’t necessary because the program has proven successful.
“It’s not like we don’t know what’s going on,” Lawlor said. “We know what’s going on, and we know it’s working.”
Crime rates are at their lowest in four decades, and fewer people are being released early since Malloy took office in 2011, he said.
From 2008 to 2010, under the Rell administration, 25,205 inmates were released early. With Malloy in office between 2011 and 2013, 22,720 inmates have been released early. In that same time frame, there have been about 45,000 fewer arrests.
In 2013, the first full year the program was in effect, Lawlor said, the violent crime rate dropped by more than 10 percent. That Suzio is using information from a sex offender “absolutely affects his credibility,” Bartolomeo said. “This is the sort of person that Suzio has as his advisor.”
Suzio questioned how Bartolomeo was able to obtain information about the inmate he interviewed since he didn’t reveal any names.
“My question is whose side is she on?” Suzio said of Bartolomeo. “It seems like she’s joining Mike Lawlor in the cover-up of this program.”
Markley’s opponent for the 16th District Senate seat, Chris Robertson of the Working Families Party, said he also opposed the program in its current form. ..Source.. by Andrew Ragali Record-Journal staff
September 29, 2014
Department Announces $17.6 Million in Awards to Support Sex Offender Registration, Intervention and Treatment
9-29-2014 Washington DC:
The U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) Office of Justice Programs (OJP) today announced more than $17 million in Fiscal Year 2014 grant assistance for states, territories, tribal governments and other entities to use to implement, enhance and maintain sex offender programming throughout the United States.
"These awards provide a wide range of assistance to help states, communities, tribes, and even institutions of higher learning manage sex offenders," said Dawn Doran, Acting Director of the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking (SMART). "They will give jurisdictions the tools they need to protect their citizens, intervene in cases involving deviant sexual behavior, and offer families, neighbors, and students valuable information and resources."
These grants, administered by OJP's SMART Office, provide funding for the implementation of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), the development of a campus sexual assault perpetrator treatment program, continued support for sex offender management fellows and the SORNA Tribal Training and Technical Assistance Program. They also support partnerships between the SMART Office and the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), as well as the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Website (NSOPW).
Of the $17 million awarded, nearly $13 million will be used to develop or enhance sex offender registration programs, improve law enforcement and other justice agency information sharing as it relates to sex offender registration and notification, and implement other efforts aimed at furthering the objectives of SORNA.
More than $1.3 million will be used to create and implement a treatment curriculum for individuals who commit sexual assault on college or university campuses through the SMART FY 14 Campus Sexual Assault Perpetrator Treatment Project.
The SMART Office continues to collaborate with OJJDP in support of the Youth with Sexual Behavior Problems (YSBP) Program. The SMART Office contributed $900,000 to the program to help fund multidisciplinary approaches to treating youth with sexual behavior problems and their child victims and families, document the evolution of intervention models developed to respond to these cases, and evaluate the YSBP program. For the first time, these funds will be available to develop YSBP programs in Indian Country. Additionally, the SMART Office is collaborating with NIJ by providing $1 million to support research related to a key component of SORNA: information sharing and its effect on tracking sex offenders and promoting community awareness.
A supplemental award of $45,000 was made for the Sex Offender Management Fellowship Program to help SMART broaden programming that supports the fellowship that focuses on victims' issues in sex offender management.
The SMART Office also continues to support the SORNA Tribal Training and Technical Assistance Program, awarding $500,000 to provide training and technical assistance to help tribal jurisdictions substantially implement SORNA. This year, funds will be used to qualitatively evaluate SORNA implementation in Indian Country.
An award of $899,748 will provide continued support for the maintenance, operations and enhancements of NSOPW, the Sex Offender Registry Tool, the SORNA Exchange Portal and the Tribe and Territory Sex Offender Registry System. NSOPW contains links to state, territory, and tribal sex offender public websites to provide a free service to the public to search for registered sex offenders on a national scale and provides prevention and educational resources to users. ..Source.. by Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs
September 16, 2014
Self-referrals for sexual behaviour treatment increasing, says The Royal
9-16-2014 Canada:
More people are talking to their doctors seeking referrals to The Royal’s sexual behaviours clinic to receive treatment for sexually deviant behaviour such as exhibitionism, voyeurism and pedophilia, says a clinic coordinator in the forensic treatment unit.
Lisa Murphy said in the last five years there has been an increase in self-referrals from concerned individuals who were not sent there by the courts.
“We are seeing people come in and say they either went to their doctor and got a doctor referral or they contacted the clinic and said, ‘I have these interests, I don’t want to have these interests, I don’t want to act on them, I need help,’” said Murphy.
“That’s obviously ideal for us in that we are able to see these individuals that have these interests before they go ahead and act on them and create a victim.”
It’s this increase that has got The Royal’s staff thinking of ways to ramp up prevention efforts and create more awareness about the services available for people who want help curbing their sexual interests.
Murphy will be speaking Thursday about the clinic and Canada’s approach to the sex offender registry at a panel discussion moderated by Dr. Paul Fedoroff, director of the sexual behaviours clinic. Staff Sgt. Dana Reynolds and Det. Mark Horton of Ottawa police will also speak to their experiences of managing of high risk offenders.
Since its inception in 1983, the sexual behaviours clinic has treated more than 4,100 people and nowadays, it typically sees 100 new men each year.
Since Dr. Fedoroff took over the clinic, no one who has received treatment after committing sexual abuse has gone on to reoffend, according to Murphy.
Treatment can range from group therapy sessions, testosterone blocking medication, and psychiatric sessions, to support from social workers.
Murphy suspects the recent surge in self-referrals might have to do with a societal acceptance that not all child abusers are “monsters,” and in some cases they don’t want to hurt children.
“More people are finding out that this treatment is out there,” said Murphy, “and I also think that more people are finding that we are saying, ‘you’re not unfixable.’”
More information about the panel discussion is available at theroyal.ca. ..Source.. by Joe Lofaro
September 6, 2014
Op-ed: More can be done to stop sexual abuse by therapists
9-6-2014 Utah:
Each major mental health profession subscribes to a code of ethics that strictly prohibits sexual contact between a therapist and client due to the imbalance of power and innate vulnerability associated with the fiduciary context of the therapeutic setting. While the majority of therapists are ethical, those who are not create a significant problem for both the credibility and integrity of the mental health professions.
Most importantly, the damage and hurt imposed on a vulnerable client when sexual contact occurs often ruins individual lives, breaks up families and disrupts communities. It is insidious and often kept secret. Clients report feeling embarrassed and confused, and they blame themselves. Worse yet, the issues which prompt individuals to seek assistance are often compounded, leading to an overwhelming sense of despair and even suicide. Many times, but not always, clients who report sexual contact with therapists are also victims of childhood sexual abuse, rape or other sexual trauma.
It shouldn’t happen, but it does. And it happens in Utah. To highlight the prevalence of sexual misconduct by mental health professionals, we need not look further than our own neighborhoods. Comparing registered sex offenders in Utah to therapist sexual misconduct offenders in Utah, a troublesome image is brought to reality. As of May 2014, the state lists 7,006 registered sex offenders out of 2,900,872 people, or 0.24 percent. In the therapist group, there were 77 offenders just in the past 18 months, out of 7,206 total workers = 1.07 percent. This is more than 4 times the rate of the population! This is a highly statistically significant increase and is evidence that the therapist group commits offenses at a higher rate than sex crimes in Utah’s general population.
So where does a person turn for help when the help hurts? The state relies on self-policing therapists, ethics codes and governmental boards which can only offer professional sanctions. With existing loopholes in Utah law, there are no real deterrents to significantly curtail this type of sexual exploitation and truly protect the public.
A set of national recommendations, in the form of model legislation, is currently being considered by lawmakers for the upcoming 2015 legislative session. The four pillars of the policy proposal are mandatory criminal background checks, with an emphasis on administrative findings containing sexual misconduct, information linkage to prevent state hopping for licenses, requiring mental health ethics boards to become mandatory reporters and providing guidance on a consumer awareness packet which educates clients on expectations for therapy.
Cultural shifts are sorely needed to stop victim-blaming and to make this behavior criminal. Therapists and governmental entities are not immune from this way of thinking. In fact, the bourgeoisie attitude among many practitioners and governmental decision-makers is one of mere toleration concerning the proletariat consumer-victim.
It takes considerable effort on the part of advocates to explain the nature of damage that comes from this type of exploitation. Additionally, when the Utah Criminal Code (76-5-406) entitled, "Sexual offenses against the victim without consent of victim — Circumstances," states that you must reasonably resist. It implies that victims must act in a specific way and that one is not a victim if they don’t resist enough.
While the intent may be to protect vulnerable people from being exploited, the paternalistic fashion and burden placed on the victim does not serve the purpose of the statute, nor does it furnish needed protections for vulnerable people.
Therapist-client sex may never go away completely, but efforts to secure protective laws and create a culture which does not tolerate exploitation of any kind are worthwhile. ..Source.. by Amy Coombs is a policy advocate, lobbyist and national responder for the Therapy Exploitation Link Line network (T.E.L.L.). She lives in Lehi.
August 20, 2014
County's legislative priorities could include sex offender treatment funding
8-20-2014 Nebraska:
Lancaster County officials will consider lobbying state senators in coming months for state health funding to be spent on sex-offender treatment programs and to increase the fees that counties can charge for marriage and locksmith licenses. ... ...
The board also may ask senators to change the state Mental Health Commitment Act.
Now, the law doesn’t recognize mental abnormalities or personality disorders that cause a person to commit sexual violence as forms of mental illness, according to the county. As a result, the state doesn’t provide funding for community-based sex-offender treatment through its behavioral health regions.
County commissioners are hopeful that changing the Mental Health Commitment Act would allow state money to help pay for the STOP program, which works to keep sex offenders from re-offending. County officials say they won’t be able to continue offering the program without state funding.
“That sex-offender treatment is a key piece to keep people safe,” said Commissioner Brent Smoyer, who is seeking the Legislature’s District 26 seat. “If I go to the Legislature, that is one of the first things I would lead.” ... ...
“The state may have tightened their belts, but we consider it cost-shifting to the county,” Raybould said. ..Source.. by KEVIN ABOUREZK
June 30, 2014
Therapists are turning to the web to help revolutionize mental health treatments
6-30-2014 National:
We all know how effective the talking cure can be, but for many people, carving the time out of their schedule to meet a psychotherapist can be impossible, not to mention daunting. Services like Pretty Padded Room have sprung up to provide a solution to these problems, offering secure video chats with mental health professionals as an on-demand service. In a report by WNYC, a 24-year-old entrepreneur reveals that, rather than the confrontational setting we imagine, a spot of online therapy is more akin to "Skyping with a friend."
Informality aside, another benefit is the cost, given that a 30-minute session costs less than $50, whereas a real-world meeting would be anything up to three times that price. It's also a neat way to circumvent restrictions if none of the local therapists are signed up to your insurance provider. Online therapy has also been established to be as effective as its counterpart, although it is believed that it's not as useful for people with severe conditions.
There are some issues to overcome, such as privacy concerns, non-qualified service providers and the fact that practitioners are only able to practice in the state where they are licensed. Still, in the same way that Netflix revolutionized movie rental and Uber's changing transportation, perhaps the Tony Soprano of 2020 will spend more time with their tablet than in the waiting room. ..Source.. by Daniel Cooper
May 7, 2014
Most Colorado sex offenders don't get treated in prison
UPDATE 5-10: DOC disputes 9WTK sex offender investigation5-7-2014 Colorado:
A six-month investigation by 9Wants to Know discovered most sex criminals were not allowed to attend specialized sex offender therapy programs while in prison.
The Colorado Department of Corrections is responsible for rehabilitating the 5,000 sex offenders currently behind bars, but the DOC strategic plan indicates just 103 actually completed the sex offender treatment program in the last state fiscal year.
Kellie Wasko, executive deputy director of corrections, says her department is trying to expand the size of the in-prison program, but she admits it's hard to find enough therapists. As of last month, more than 25 percent of program positions were vacant.
Until recently, corrections officials say they only allowed inmates sentenced under the state lifetime sentencing law to begin treatment in prison. Those offenders' sentences required them to stay in prison until they show satisfactory progress in treatment. Lifetime sex offenders make up one-third of the convicted sex criminals behind bars. The other two-thirds of offenders, inmates with traditional sentences, were specifically excluded.
Convicted child molester Donald Chapman, serving a traditional 32 year sentence for child molestation, told his parole hearing officer last month he needed treatment and "I can't seem to get treatment in here."
"I've been on a waiting list since the day I walked into this facility," inmate Donald Little said during his parole hearing. "I think my options for getting treatment would be much better on the outside."
If the inmates with traditional, determinate sentences reach their mandatory release dates, they must be paroled to the community, even if they haven't received treatment.
"What's to stop them from doing it again?" asked Kimberly Weeks, a sexual assault survivor who works in the criminal justice system. "They are not going to understand that these actions are not OK. They are just going to create more victims."
"Victims will tell you, if treatment is the way to help ensure this won't happen again to anyone else, then that's what they are most interested in," Erin Jemison said, executive director of the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault.
Treatment programs likely improve public safety. According to a 2002 study, Colorado sex offenders who attended the prison therapy were more successful on parole and remained arrest-free longer. Wasko says sex offenders who don't receive treatment in prison, usually must receive it as part of their parole.
9Wants to Know how often sex criminals are being paroled without completing treatment and whether those people are more likely to prey on new victims. For six months, 9Wants to Know made repeated requests to the DOC for specific data about offenders paroled from January 2009 to September 2013. Public records custodians refused to release the information on specific inmates, saying it would violate their medical privacy rights.
Prison officials did provide limited information on treatment enrollment and parole releases. Based on those figures, 9Wants to Know determined seven percent of sex offender parole releases involve an inmate who completed treatment. Approximately 93 percent of the time, the sex offenders released received no treatment while behind bars.
When asked about the public safety repercussions, Wasko said, "We have had offenders who have released who have committed new offenses, but they are not sex offenses."
District attorneys in Colorado say they do have repeat sex offender cases. Leora Joseph, who oversees the 18th Judicial District Special Victims Unit, says "I can think of a number of cases over just the past year alone where individuals who were sentenced, were receiving treatment, reoffended on multiple children, or even just one child."
9Wants to Know also identified several repeat offenders.
Convicted sex offenders incarcerated in Colorado prisons as of 3/31/2014
3499 - Inmates with determinate (traditional) sentences
1736 - Inmates with Lifetime Supervision sentences
5235 Total Convicted Sex Offenders
Picture in Original
Convicted sex offenders released on parolee January 2009 – September 2013:
4,870 Releases of Inmates with determinate (traditional) sentences
349 Releases of Inmates with Lifetime Supervision sentences
5,219 Total Releases of Convicted Sex Offenders
Some national studies say sex offender recidivism for new sex crimes is three percent, but victim advocates say the rate is really much higher because many sex crimes go unreported.
"I don't think, in my case specifically, that this offender can be rehabilitated," Weeks said.
State officials admit to 9Wants to Know they don't keep track of any statistics about sex offenders who commit new sex crimes. They did say convicted sex offenders have lower overall recidivism rates than the general prison population. For all 2010 Colorado prison releases, 15.3 percent returned to prison within three years on a new crime. For sex offenders, 13.1 percent landed back in prison within three years on a new crime of any kind.
Parole Board Chairman Brandon Shaffer said, "Honestly, I think DOC is doing the very best that they can." Shaffer says he's never paroled someone expecting them to quickly return to prison.
When 9Wants to know asked Wasko if she would be concerned to live near a sex offender who hadn't finished treatment, she responded, "Not at all." ..Source.. by Melissa B Blasius, KUSA
April 27, 2014
Sex Offender Treatment: Federal Bureau of Prisons
The Federal Bureau of Prisons has a total inmate population of 215,383; at present, 11,699 are incarcerated for federal sex offenses (most often possession, receipt, or production of child pornography). This amounts to 6.1 percent of the Federal Bureau of Prisons entire inmate population.
There are 162 federal institutions (62 of which are true stand-alone prisons). For the vast majority, these are general character prisons, tasked with housing a broad swath of inmates convicted of any number of federal crimes. While these prisons are of many different security levels, they are regular prisons, housing all variety of offenders (including federal sex offenders).
Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP) Prisons
Due to the special needs of incarcerated sex offenders (e.g., enhanced monitoring for offending behaviors, protection from other inmates, the sometimes more sophisticated criminality of this population, etc.), the Federal Bureau of Prisons has 10 prisons which specifically house sex offenders. These are called Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP) institutions, which house inmates with a variety of instant offenses, but also a stronger psychology department, which takes a more active role in the monitoring of sex offender populations for deviant or "risk relevant" behaviors.
According to the BOP, "This higher concentration of sex offenders within a [SOMP] institution helps offenders feel more comfortable acknowledging their concerns and seeking treatment." While this could be the case for some, it is more likely that incarcerated sex offenders are happy to merely be at a prison where they aren't going to be assaulted, and, possibly killed for the nature of their instant offense, or for a prior conviction of similar character.
The sad fact is that the stories are true. Incarcerated sex offenders have a rough time in prison. At the higher security levels (e.g., high and medium security federal prisons), they tend to be harassed, attacked, and brutalized. This is part of an institutional culture if not supported by the prison administration, then accepted by it as inevitable. This creates real problems for incarcerated sex offenders, who often must "check in" to the Special Housing Unit (i.e., solitary confinement) for their own protection. If not, they are known to be "beat off" a yard, where a group of fellow prisoners knock the sex offender to the ground (often in the chow hall or in front of the lieutenant's office), and stomp them in sight of the prison guards. In this manner, the guards know that it is time for the sex offender to be placed in the hole for their own protection (called "protective custody") and possibly transferred elsewhere.
In an effort to protect inmate sex offender populations, the Federal Bureau of Prisons has tasked a total of 10 prisons to specifically house sex offenders (either those who are in prison for a sexual offense or those who have one in their criminal history). These are the SOMP prisons. Due to the higher percentage of sex offenders at these prison -- some suggest upwards of 40 to 60 percent of the inmate population at these prisons -- they tend to be much easier prisons, where inmates incarcerated of less savory crimes can survive.
What follows is a list of all 10 Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP) prisons in the Federal Bureau of Prisons:
Administrative Security Sex Offender Prisons
1. FMC Carswell (Fort Worth, TX)
2. FMC Devens (Ayers, MA)
Low Security Sex Offender Prisons
3. FCI Elkton (Elkton, OH)
4. FCI Englewood (Littleton, CO)
5. FCI Seagoville (Seagoville, TX)
Medium Security Sex Offender Prisons
6. FCI Marianna (Marianna, FL)
7. USP Marion (Marion, IL)
8. FCI Petersburg Medium (Petersburg, VA)
9. FCI Tucson (Tucson, AZ)
High Security Sex Offender Prisons
10. USP Tucson (Tucson, AZ)
Sex Offender Treatment Programs in Federal Prisons
At these institutions, the Federal Bureau of Prisons also offers their Sex Offender Treatment Programs (SOTP). The BOP offers both residential (SOTP-R) and non-residential sex offender (SOTP-NR) treatment programs. The difference is in the intensity of the programs, residential or non-residential treatment modality, and which inmates can enroll in this voluntary treatment. Federal prisoners can learn more about these treatment programs, and can enroll in them, by speaking with a member of their prison's Psychology Department or by reading our blog post on the Federal Bureau of Prisons' recently promulgated sex offender management program statement.
Non-Residential Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP-NR)
The Federal Bureau of Prisons' Non-Residential Sex Offender Treatment Program is offered at all of the above mentioned federal prisons, with the exception of FMC Devens and USP Marion. This program is restricted to "offenders evaluated to have low to moderate risk of reoffending." The program lasts 9 to 12 months and participants meet 2 to 3 times each week in their prison's Psychology Department for the treatment sessions. According to the BOP, program participants "learn basic skills and concepts to help them understand their past offenses and to reduce the risk of future offending," through various levels of treatment.
Residential Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP-R)
The Federal Bureau of Prisons' Residential Sex Offender Treatment Program is, at present, offered only at USP Marion and FMC Devens. Program participation is restricted to "offenders with an elevated risk of reoffending." This program is 12 to 18 months in duration and participants engage in treatment 5 days each week. Due to the residential treatment modality, monitoring, supervision, and treatment is intensive. According to the BOP, "Participants benefit from a therapeutic community on a residential housing unit where they work to reduce their risk of future offending." The residential housing units also have increased conduct regulations, i.e., restrictions on certain media and recreational activities, such as role playing games.
Where to Go For More Information
The topic of sex offenders in the Federal Bureau of Prisons is very taboo. As such, not many news outlets, prison consultants, or attorneys like to publicly touch upon it. We at the Prison Law Blog are not like these entities. When we see a need, we strive to fulfill it. With this being said, in the coming months, we will be publishing several more pages concerning sex offenders in the Federal Bureau of Prisons, how criminal defendants can seek a judicial recommendation for designation to a SOMP facility, and what incarcerated sexual offenders should do to protect themselves in prison. ..Source.. by Christopher Zoukis, Prison Law Blog
March 10, 2014
Little-Known Health Act Fact: Prison Inmates Are Signing Up
3-10-2014 National:
In a little-noticed outcome of President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, jails and prisons around the country are beginning to sign up inmates for health insurance under the law, taking advantage of the expansion of Medicaid that allows states to extend coverage to single and childless adults — a major part of the prison population.
State and counties are enrolling inmates for two main reasons. Although Medicaid does not cover standard health care for inmates, it can pay for their hospital stays beyond 24 hours — meaning states can transfer millions of dollars of obligations to the federal government.
But the most important benefit of the program, corrections officials say, is that inmates who are enrolled in Medicaid while in jail or prison can have coverage after they get out. People coming out of jail or prison have disproportionately high rates of chronic diseases, especially mental illness and addictive disorders. Few, however, have insurance, and many would qualify for Medicaid under the income test for the program — 138 percent of the poverty line — in the 25 states that have elected to expand their programs.
Health care experts estimate that up to 35 percent of those newly eligible for Medicaid under Mr. Obama’s health care law are people with histories of criminal justice system involvement, including jail and prison inmates and those on parole or probation.
“For those newly covered, it will open up treatment doors for them” and potentially save money in the long run by reducing recidivism, said Dr. Fred Osher, director of health systems and services policy for the Council of State Governments Justice Center.
He added that a 2009 study in Washington State found that low-income adults who received treatment for addiction had significantly fewer arrests than those who were untreated.
In Chicago, inmates at the Cook County Jail are being enrolled in Medicaid under the health care law as part of the intake process after they are arrested; the county has submitted more than 4,000 applications for inmates since Jan. 1.
In Colorado, state prisoners are being signed up when they need extended hospitalization; 93 applications for inmates and 149 for parolees have been submitted so far.
In the Portland area, more than 1,200 inmates have been enrolled through the state exchange, Cover Oregon, while Delaware and Illinois expect to start soon.
Devon Campbell-Williams, an inmate serving time for assault in the Multnomah County Inverness Jail in Portland, Ore., applied for Medicaid in January with the help of an eligibility worker hired by the county to enroll inmates. When he gets out of jail in May, he said, he will have health insurance for the first time, coverage that will allow him to get treatment for his ankle, which he broke in 2007 and has been bothered by ever since.
“It’s going to mean a lot,” Mr. Campbell-Williams said, adding that in the past, “I just went to the hospital, that was really about it.”
Opponents of the Affordable Care Act say that expanding Medicaid has further burdened an already overburdened program, and that allowing enrollment of inmates only worsens the problem. They also contend that while shifting inmate health care costs to the federal government may help states’ budgets, it will deepen the federal deficit. And they assert that allowing newly released inmates to receive Medicaid could present new public relations problems for the Affordable Care Act.
“There can be little doubt that it would be controversial if it was widely understood that a substantial proportion of the Medicaid expansion that taxpayers are funding would be directed toward convicted criminals,” said Avik Roy, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative policy group.
Language in the health care law also allows private insurance plans purchased through state exchanges to cover health care for people who are in jail awaiting trial, even in states that have not expanded Medicaid. But few prisoners have incomes high enough to afford the plans, even with federal subsidies, and most state and county correction systems are not yet set up to benefit from that coverage.
In the past, states and counties have paid for almost all the health care services provided to jail and prison inmates, who are guaranteed such care under the Eighth Amendment. According to a report by the Pew Charitable Trusts, 44 states spent $6.5 billion on prison health care in 2008. In Ohio, health care for prisoners cost $225 million in 2010 and accounted for 20 percent of the state’s corrections budget. Extended hospital stays — treatment for cancer or heart attacks or lengthy psychiatric hospitalizations, for example — are particularly expensive.
Stuart Hudson, managing director of health care for Ohio’s Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, said his department, which plans to start enrolling inmates in Medicaid when they have been in the hospital for 24 hours, expects to save $18 million a year through the practice, “although it’s hard to know for sure, because there’s other eligibility factors we have to keep in mind.”
Nancy Griffith, Multnomah County’s director of corrections health, said the county expected to save an estimated $1 million annually in hospital expenses by enrolling eligible inmates and passing the costs to the federal government.
More money could be saved over the long term, she added, if connecting newly released inmates to services helps to keep them out of jail and reduces visits to emergency rooms, the most expensive form of care.
“The ability for us to be able to call up a treatment provider and say, ‘We have this person we want to refer to you and guess what, you can actually get payment now,’ changes the lives of these people,” Ms. Griffith said.
Rick Raemisch, executive director of Colorado’s Department of Corrections, said that billing Medicaid for hospital care would save “several million dollars” each year. But as important, he said, was the chance to coordinate care for prisoners after their release.
About 70 percent of prison inmates in the state have problems with addiction, he said, and 34 percent suffer from mental illness.
Without health coverage, inmates leave prison with 30 days’ worth of medication and are then mostly left to their own devices.
“If they go off their medication, oftentimes it can once again lead to more criminal activity,” Mr. Raemisch said. “So by keeping them medicated and keeping them mentally healthy, it really helps us in our re-entry efforts.”
It costs far more to keep an inmate in prison than to provide treatment outside. Yet most health care experts agree that health coverage alone is not enough to keep chronic offenders on track.
As essential as health insurance is for people trying to put together their lives after being incarcerated, the challenge of getting them into treatment, when they often did not have housing or jobs, was “a whole other kettle of fish,” said Bradley Brockmann, executive director of the Center for Prisoner Health and Human Rights in Providence, R.I. He is an author on articles in a collection on the topic in the March issue of The Journal of Health Affairs.
“The potential for this is so huge,” he said, “and it will take a lot more than just getting returning prisoners their Medicaid cards.” ..Source.. by ERICA GOODE
