Search results for ‘Subject term:"learning disabilities"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 3 of 3
A comparison of the application of the self-regulation model of the relapse process for mainstream and special needs sexual offenders
- Authors:
- KEELING Jenny A., ROSE John L., BEECH Anthony R.
- Journal article citation:
- Sexual Abuse a Journal of Research and Treatment, 18(4), October 2006, pp.373-382.
- Publisher:
- Sage
The self-regulation model of the relapse process (Ward & Hudson, 2000) has been developed and empirically validated on general sexual offender populations (Bickley & Beech, 2002), but not on specific sexual offender populations. This paper aims to investigate whether special needs offenders, as compared to mainstream sexual offenders, can be categorized into the offence pathways described in the model. In addition, this paper aims to evaluate the application of the self-regulation model in highlighting the treatment needs of the special needs group. Special needs sexual offenders are defined as a treatment population that includes individuals with lower functioning, limited social and communication skills, and literacy deficits. Participants were classified into the self-regulation model using a method developed by Bickley and Beech (2002). Demographic and offence information were collected and comparisons made between the special needs and mainstream groups. The results showed that the sexual offenders with special needs could be reliably classified into the offence pathways of the self-regulation model. The largest group of special needs offenders was in the approach-automatic group, followed by the approach-explicit group. The results indicated no significant differences in representation in the offence pathways between the special needs and mainstream sexual offenders. The results also indicate that the special needs group would benefit from a responsive approach to treatment, which incorporates appropriate treatment targets identified by the self-regulation model.
Assessment of intellectually disabled sexual offenders: the current position
- Authors:
- KEELING Jenny A., BEECH Anthony R., ROSE John L.
- Journal article citation:
- Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12(2), March 2007, pp.229-242.
- Publisher:
- Elsevier
Treatment relies on appropriate assessment, guided by the ‘What Works’ approach. As such, the assessment of sexual offenders with intellectual disabilities has three primary purposes: addressing the risk, needs, and responsivity principles. The aim of this paper is to examine different assessment methods for this population. Existing risk assessment protocols are discussed, as well as specific dynamic risk assessment tools for sexual offenders with an intellectual disability. The paper also investigates use of existing, adapted and new psychological tests to assess treatment needs. Assessment of responsivity specific to this population is discussed in terms of intellectual and adaptive functioning, as well as comprehension. Suggestions are made for moving towards a comprehensive assessment strategy for this population.
Comparing sexual offender treatment efficacy: mainstream sexual offenders and sexual offenders with special needs
- Authors:
- KEELING Jenny A., ROSE John L., BEECH Anthony R.
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 32(2), June 2007, pp.117-124.
- Publisher:
- Taylor and Francis
This paper investigates the efficacy of a treatment program for sexual offenders with special needs in comparison to treatment outcomes for mainstream sexual offenders in Australia. Follow-up data is also presented for the group of offenders with special needs. Participants from the two groups were matched on four variables (risk category, sex of victim, type of offence and age). All participants completed an assessment battery pre- and post-treatment and the scores on these tests were analysed for each group. Change on these measures was also compared between the two groups. Follow-up data for the special needs cohort were collected from an offender database. Overall, both groups made few significant changes on the tests post-treatment, however individual results demonstrated that some offenders in both groups had achieved reliable change. In comparing treatment results between the two groups, the sexual offenders with special needs differed only on progress relating to "avoidant" relationship styles. The results also indicated that social desirability bias played a significant role in self-report assessment for both groups. Follow-up data for the group with special needs identified that none of the offenders had committed further sexual offences, after an average release time of 16 months. There are a number of limitations to this study, particularly as a result of the experimental design and the small number of participants, and these should be considered as a major limitation on the conclusions drawn from the results. However, it is suggested that the program had some positive effects for some offenders, with little difference in progress detected between the two groups. Possible explanations for the varied outcomes are discussed.