S p e c i a l N e e d s O f f e n d e r s

a publication of the Federal Judicial Center BULLETIN

INSIDE Sex Offender Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Sex Offender Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Investigation Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Assessing Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Changes in Registration and

Notification Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

No. 3

September

1998

I

n r ecent years, sex offenses

have caught the attention

of American legislators,

the media, and the public. State

legislators and Congress have

passed legislation that allows

for sex offender notification,

provides for longer sentences

for sexual crimes, or enhances

enforcement of existing laws.

Legislative proposals are often

a reaction to the media’s focus

on horrific sexual crimes involving children, the outcry of

the victims and their families,

and the public’s perception that

all sex offenders are a persistent

threat. The term “sex offender,”

however, covers a vast array of

offenders and offenses and leads

to a false perception of sexual

crimes and the danger that

emanates from this offender

population. While some offenders may not be amenable

to treatment and constitute a

permanent threat to community safety, many sex offenders

can, with specialized treatment,

learn to control their sexually

abusive behavior and decrease

their risk of reoffending.

There are clinical and legal

definitions of sex offenders, and

it is not uncommon for treatment providers, researchers,

and law enforcement professionals to use different terminology to define these individuals. However, for the purposes

of this bulletin, sex offenders

are defined as those who have

a history of criminal sexually

deviant behavior, such as child

molesters; rapists; those

charged with or convicted of

incest, sexual assault, or producing or distributing child pornography; and individuals who

entered the judicial system because of a paraphilia (see “Paraphilia,” page 3). These offenses

are illegal, and may involve a

non-consenting victim or

present a danger to the community.

Implications for the

Federal Judiciary

Federal jurisdiction over sex

crimes, as with all types of

crimes, is based on constitutional grants of authority, such

as Congress’s authority to regulate interstate or foreign commerce, and military posts, national parks, and Native

American reservations. The

limited scope of federal jurisdiction is reflected in the type and

number of cases prosecuted in

federal court. In FY 97, 219 offenders were sentenced for

sexual assault, and 287 were

sentenced for pornography or

prostitution. There are ten

times more sex crime offenders

in state correctional institutions than there are in Federal

Bureau of Prisons institutions.

Because of the low caseload

of sex offenders in the federal

system, some probation and

pretrial services officers may

ask, “Are sex offenders really

my business?” The answer is yes.

The Federal Probation and

Pretrial Services mission statement directs officers to protect

the public, make appropriate

pretrial release decisions, and

develop supervision plans that

appropriately manage risk. Sex

offenders pose a significant risk

to the community. Sex offenders often have more than one

pattern of sexual offending behavior and often have multiple

victims. Researchers estimate,

for example, that less than 1%

of people who sexually assault

Sex

Offenders

by Dennise Orlando

(continued on next page)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 2

are identified by the legal system and that an untreated, undetected sex offender may accrue dozens, sometimes hundreds, of victims, over his or her

lifetime.

Experienced officers also

note that the small number of

sex offender cases may be somewhat misleading. Some offenders, while not convicted of a sex

offense, may have a history of

sexual offending. For example,

of the approximately 1,000 inmates in the Federal Bureau of

Prisons currently serving time

for sexual crimes, there are another 3,000 inmates who are

sex offenders by history but who

are currently serving time for

nonsexual crimes. For example,

someone charged with or convicted of mail fraud may also

have trafficked in or received

pornography. Although an ofknown as “Innocent Images”

resulted in the arrest and conviction of individuals who use

computers and on-line computer services to facilitate the

sexual exploitation of children,

including luring children into

illicit sexual relationships.

The Special Needs

Offenders Bulletin

Probation and pretrial services

officers and their supervisors

need to add a knowledge of sex

offenders to their professional

“tool boxes.” This bulletin begins to address that need. It synthesizes information obtained

from journals, research monographs, and interviews with federal probation and pretrial services officers. Officers can use

this bulletin for individual

study. Supervisors and managers can use it as the foundation

for discussing their districts’

case management strategies

and procedures related to sex

offenders.

The information presented

here is not comprehensive.

Rather, it is intended to serve

as a springboard for investigation. The issue of sex offenders

is complex. The population

that is responsible for committing sex offenses is extremely

heterogeneous; there is no

single profile that describes sex

offenders. Offenders with

widely varying criminal histories, ages, backgrounds, personalities, psychiatric diagnoses,

races, and religions are all labeled sex offenders because

they have engaged in illegal

sexual activity. Their offenses

vary markedly with respect to

location, time, sex and age of

fender may be charged or convicted of aggravated assault, the

underlying offense may actually

be sexual assault. An offender

charged with or convicted of

bank embezzlement may also be

a child molester. These inmates

have a designation of “public

safety factor of sex offender”

under the Bureau of Prison’s

classification system and also

require specialized supervision

upon release to the community.

Experienced officers also indicate that the number of federal cases involving child pornography and the Internet is

increasing. This trend is partially due to Congress’s growing

interest in legislating against

the production and trafficking

of child pornography and the

enticement of minors to engage

in prostitution or other illicit

sexual activity. Also, an FBI online undercover operation

(continued from page 1)

Notification and

Registration

As of September 1997,

47 states had community

notification laws or

allowed access to sex

offender registration

information.

Source: Washington State

Institute of Public Policy

Broad community notification

Notification to individuals and

organizations at risk

Access to registration information
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 3

victim, degree of planning, and

level of violence. In addition,

not every sex offender poses the

same level of risk to the community or requires the same supervision or treatment regime

(e.g., an offender convicted of

pornography vs. a convicted

child molester or rapist).

Therefore, every sex offender

case requires an individualized

supervision and treatment plan,

one that specifically considers

the offender’s sexually deviant

behavior, arousal patterns, fantasies, family history, social environment, and level of risk.

An in-depth examination

of the characteristics of each

According to the American

Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual

of Mental Disorders, the essential feature of paraphilia disorders is recurrent, intense

sexual urges, fantasies, or behaviors that involve unusual

objects, activities, or situations and cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational,

or other important areas of

life. Paraphilias include

sexual fantasies and behaviors involving

• exposure of one’s genitals

to a stranger (exhibitionism);

• use of nonliving objects

such as women’s underpants and bras or shoes for

arousal (fetishism);

• touching and rubbing

against a non-consenting

type of sex offender is beyond

the scope of this bulletin.

Rather, this bulletin focuses on

the characteristics, and the investigation, treatment, and supervision issues common to

many sex offenders. When reviewing this bulletin keep in

mind that it is intended to serve

only as a foundation for officers’ ongoing efforts to learn

about sex offenders. Working

with experienced federal officers and sex offender treatment

specialists is the best way to

identify the optimal case management practices for investigating and supervising specific

sex offenders. ◆

Paraphilia

person (frotteurism);

• sexual activity with a prepubescent child, generally age 13 or younger

(pedophilia);

• acts (real, not simulated)

of being humiliated,

beaten, bound, or otherwise made to suffer

(sexual masochism);

• acts (real, not simulated)

in which the psychological or physical suffering

(including humiliation)

of a victim induces sexual

excitement (sexual sadism);

• cross-dressing (transvestite fetishism); and

• acts of observing unsuspecting persons who are

naked, disrobing, or engaging in sexual activity

(voyeurism).

The Federal Judicial Center developed the Special

Needs Offenders series of

educational products to

help probation and pretrial

services officers keep

abreast of changes in the offender/defendant population encountered in the federal judiciary.

Each program in the series deals with a different

group of offenders and defendants. An introductory

Special Needs Offenders Bulletin outlining the characteristics of the group introduces each program. Synthesizing information from

journals, research monographs, and interviews with

federal probation and pretrial services officers, the

bulletin can be used by officers for individual study

and by supervisors and

managers as a foundation

for discussing district case

management strategies.

 The bulletin is followed

up with a Center-sponsored

on-line conference, satellite

broadcast, or both, that enables officers to share effective case management practices and appropriate resources.

For more information

about the Special Needs Offenders program on sex offenders or about the Special

Needs Offenders series generally, contact Mark Maggio

at (202) 273-4115.

About the Special

Needs Offenders Series
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 4

For many, the term “sex offender” conjures up images of a

sex fiend, dirty old man, or

mentally deranged individual

who abuses impulsively or

spontaneously. According to

Glen Kersch and Lydia Long in

Supervision and Treatment of Sex

Offenders, “these popular beliefs serve to make the child

molester (or rapist) as different

and unlike the ordinary person

as possible. The appeal of this

approach is that it takes a very

complex behavior with multiple causes and reduces it to a

stereotype with a few simple

causes. The resulting stereotypes and overgeneralizations

are easier to understand and accept than the reality.”

Who Commits Sex

Offenses?

In actuality, all kinds of people

commit sex crimes. Such behavior is not unique to any one

social, economic, or racial

group. On the surface, sex offenders often look and act very

“ordinary.” Many have stable

employment, a social support

group of family and friends, and

no criminal record. Some are

prominent members of the

community, successful business

owners, or active in community

and charity events. Underneath however, individuals

who commit sexually deviant

acts may do so in reaction to a

complex set of psychological

factors, emotional traits, and

environmental conditions.

These include stress, anger, lack

of power and self-esteem, deviant sexual fantasies and attitudes, substance abuse, psychosis, lack of empathy, peer pressure, cognitive distortions, environmental opportunity, pathology, and the attributes of

the victim.

As such, there is no single

“profile” of a sex offender. However, there are certain characteristics and behavior patterns

that are associated with many

sex offenders. When viewed

collectively, these characteristics provide officers a framework for understanding and

working with this offender

population.

Denial, Rationalization,

and Other Characteristics

of Sex Offenders

Most sex offenders exhibit denial, a form of cognitive distortion that reduces an individual’s sense of responsibility

for the deviant behavior. If they

recognized the severity of what

they were about to do and the

harm they would cause, some

offenders would restrain themselves. Denial is an important

issue that must be continually

addressed throughout therapy

and supervision. There are

many forms of denial, including denial of

• the offense (“I didn’t do it”);

• the sexual intent (“I was

only trying to teach her

about body parts”);

• responsibility (“I was

drunk”);

• harm (“I touched her but

didn’t rape her”);

• sexual gratification (“I only

did it because she asked me

to”);

• sexual arousal (“I performed

Sex Offender Characteristics

As Glen Kercher and Lydia

Long state in Supervision and

Treatment of Sex Offenders,

“The prevalence of sexual

abuse by women is an issue of

debate, and the data are inconclusive. One of the difficulties

of getting good data is that the

sexual offenses committed by

women are more incestuous or

perpetrated against acquaintances . . . [victims who] are less

likely to report such incidents.”

Kercher and Long indicate that

many female sex offenders were

sexually victimized as children,

come from dysfunctional famiFemale Sex Offenders

lies, are alienated from their

family members, or suffer from

feelings of inadequacy.

According to sexual and

family therapist Noel Larson,

female sex offenders disassociate their feelings of anxiety and

fear, often commit their crimes

in concert with a male, are unable to form healthy attachments with males, and are psychosexually immature. Larson

states that female sex offenders

can be successfully treated if the

therapist can overcome his or

her own feelings about women

who molest.
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 5

oral sex on him but never

got aroused”);

• planning (“It sort of just

happened”);

• extent or magnitude of the

abuse (“In my seven years

as Cub Scout leader, I have

only touched two boys”);

and

• likelihood of re-occurrence

(“It won’t happen again, I

have found the Lord.”)

Other characteristics associated with sex offenders are

secrecy, manipulation, grooming (progressively building trust

and disinhibiting resistance to

sexual contact), and an inability to empathize with the harm

they cause their victims.

Most sex offenders know

There is considerable debate

in the field of sex offender

treatment about the nature of

criminal sexual behavior. Is it

a choice? Does the offender

sexually assault just because

he or she likes to? Or are

criminal and deviant sexual

behavior mental illnesses,

perhaps beyond the control

or awareness of the person?

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) defines pedophilia as a mental health disorder involving “recurrent,

intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity

with a prepubescent child or

children 13 years or younger.”

that their behavior is illegal or

looked upon unfavorably by

society. Some feel shame and

guilt for what they do. They

often manipulate others to obtain victims or hide their behavior. As such, sex offenders

are adept at lying and covering

up their activities. Sometimes

these offenders are very successful at convincing friends, family (even untrained officers and

treatment providers) that they

are not “sex offenders.”

Sex offenders may also suffer from cognitive distortions.

Cognitive distortions are

thoughts and attitudes which

allow a sexual abuser to minimize, justify, and rationalize deviant behavior, as well as reduce

guilt and feelings of responsibility for the behavior. Cognitive distortions allow sex offenders to overcome inhibitions

and ultimately progress from

fantasy to behavior.

Deviant sexual fantasies in

which offenders touch themselves and fantasize about what

they will do to their victims

play a central role in sexual offending.

In some cases offenders are

not even aware that their fantasies are deviant; they have

been having them for such a

long time that they consider

them normal. Often, disclosure

during therapy is the first time

an offender begins making a

connection between their fantasies and their sexually deviant behavior. ◆

Pedophile or Child Molester?

Pedophilia is present only if

the behavior causes “clinically significant distress or

impairment in social, occupational, or other important

areas of functioning.”

According to Steve

Jensen, director of the Center for Behavioral Intervention, this diagnosis implies

that individuals who molest

children, even on a predatory

basis, must feel distressed by

their crimes to qualify as a pedophile and that members of

the North American ManBoy Love Association, whose

motto is “sex before eight or

it’s too late,” wouldn’t qualify

for diagnosis. Jensen indicates that many sex offender

treatment specialists believe

the DSM-IV has serious

shortcomings and prefer to

categorize all child molesters

as pedophiles.

Andres Hernandez, director of the Sex Offender Treatment Program at the federal

correctional institution in

Butner, North Carolina,

states that “whether or not a

person meets the diagnostic

criteria for pedophilia does

not imply that he [or she] is

not a child molester. Thus,

the presence or absence of

paraphilic diagnoses cannot

be used as criteria for determining a sexual offender’s

need for specialized treatment or supervision.”

Identifying Sexual

Deviancy and

Dangerousness

According to Steve Jensen

(see “Pedophile or Child

Molester?” above), “Determining that a person

has historically engaged

in sexually deviant

behavior is the best

predictor of future

behavior. A comprehensive [psychosexual]

evaluation by an expert

in the field of sexual

deviancy is the best way

to gain helpful information regarding dangerousness to the community,

likelihood of other

crimes, and treatability.”
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 6

Sexual deviance is treatable.

The key word in sex offender

treatment is not “cure” but

“self-control.” Through treatment, offenders can learn to

manage their abusive behavior

and minimize the risk of

reoffending. Treatment for sex

offenders is similar to treating

others with addictive and compulsive patterns of behavior.

Just as an addict learns to maintain a drug-free lifestyle, sex offenders can learn to control, if

not eradicate, their deviant interests and behavior.

For treatment to work, the

offender must be an active participant in identifying risky behavior and in developing coping strategies to address them.

Offenders are solely responsible

for controlling their sexually

deviant impulses. If they choose

to remain in denial or refuse to

engage in treatment to reduce

their deviant interests, they are

a high risk to re-engage in sexually deviant behaviors.

While not all sex offenders

are amenable to treatment, experienced officers and treatment providers indicate that

many sex offenders can learn to

manage and control their sexually deviant behaviors. For offenders amenable to community-based treatment, sex offender treatment conditions

reduce future victimization and

minimize risk to the community.

Treatment Goals

Effective treatment depends on

thoroughly evaluating the offender, developing cognitive

and behavioral treatment strategies tailored to the offender

and the offense, and establishing specific and measurable

goals.

Treatment goals generally

include teaching the offender

to accept responsibility for and

modify cognitive distortions,

develop victim empathy, understand the complexity of his or

her arousal pattern, identify the

behaviors that precede the

sexually abusive behavior, develop relapse prevention skills,

and control sexual arousal and

deviant sexual behavior. Effective treatment regimes also

help the offender enhance self

esteem and self-understanding,

improve communication and

social skills, increase problemsolving and coping skills, and

develop healthy adult sexual relationships.

Treatment Techniques

The most effective treatment

programs combine behavioralcognitive approaches with

aversion conditioning, skills

training, cognitive restructuring, and relapse prevention.

These therapies are often

supplemented with family

therapy, drug or alcohol treatment, marital therapy, and individual crisis intervention.

Most sex offender treatment

professionals recommend group

therapy, as opposed to individual therapy.

Sex offender treatment programs are confrontational and

intrusive and differ from other

mental health treatment programs in several ways. Sex offender programs

• work from a nontrust basis;

• consider the community as

well as the perpetrator as

the identified client and

give priority to victim and

community safety;

• focus on the client’s responsibility for change, not just

increased awareness;

• provide consequences for

directives not followed;

• look for external verification of behavior;

• use objective measures specifically developed for evaluating and treating sex offenders, such as the plethysmograph or the Abel

Screen II;

• use a polygraph to measure

treatment and supervision

compliance;

• include a relapse prevention component and provisions for follow-up care; and

• employ waivers of confidentiality that provide for open

communication between

the provider and the supervision officer, victim,

victim’s therapist, and other

professionals involved in

treating and supervising the

offender.

Therapy is enhanced when

officers work in conjunction

with treatment providers and

furnish the treatment provider

information about the sex

offender’s outside situation and

Sex Offender Treatment
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 7

behaviors. This communication is essential because the

provider sees the offender in a

clinical setting while the officer

sees the offender in the community. Officers can assist treatment by holding the offender

accountable for progressing in

treatment and by clearly stating sanctions for lack of progress in treatment.

Psychotropic Medications

Some offenders suffer from repetitive and deviant sexual fantasies that interfere with conBased on the potential

unreliability of self-reporting

by sexual offenders, many officers and treatment providers use the plethysmograph

and the polygraph to monitor compliance with treatment and supervision conditions. In some districts, however, use of the polygraph or

plethysmograph may be limited or prohibited. Officers

should check with the chief

and follow district policies

before using these tools.

Plethysmograph

The plethysmograph measures an individual’s sexual

arousal to a particular sexual

stimuli. During the procedure, a male client places a

gauge onto the shaft of his penis. The gauge is connected

to a chart recorder. The client is presented with both

deviant and nondeviant

sexual stimuli on slides, auThe polygraph is useful for reducing denial, validating selfreporting of arousal and behavior, developing treatment

and supervision plans, and supervising compliance. Two

basic polygraph techniques

are used. The first is the discovery or disclosure test administered either during the

initial evaluation or after an

offender has been in treatment for three to six months.

The second is the maintenance polygraph administered about every six months

to check on supervision and

treatment compliance. Since

the polygraph’s reliability and

validity is not guaranteed,

failure of the polygraph

should not be the basis for revocation or for determining

innocence or guilt. However,

failure can warrant increased

supervision or confrontation

in the offender’s treatment

group.

Treatment and Supervision Tools

diotapes, or other media. The

gauge measures and records

the client’s erectile response

to the stimuli. Physiological

changes associated with

sexual arousal in women are

also measured through the

use of a plethysmograph. Although the plethysmograph

is a valuable assessment tool

for clinicians, it is not a lie detector test, nor does it predict

future behavior. The Association for the Treatment of

Sexual Abusers cautions it

should not be used independently of other assessment instruments. Some sex offender

treatment providers use the

Abel Screen II, another tool

that assesses arousal, in lieu

of the plethysmograph.

Polygraph

Many therapists and correctional officers use the polygraph during treatment and

supervision of sex offenders.

centration; others are unable to

develop behavioral techniques

that sufficiently reduce their

deviant arousal. In Ethical Standards and Principles for the Management of Sexual Abuses, the

Association for the Treatment

of Sexual Abusers states that

“evaluation for and use of pharmacological agents are useful

and necessary for some sexual

abusers. Anti-androgens, antidepressants, and other pharmacological agents, may offer the

client greater control over excessive fantasies and compulsive behaviors.”

For example, DepoProvera, a synthetically produced progesterone (female

hormone) reduces the level of

sexual arousal. Prozac, Paxzil,

and Zoloff all reduce sexual

drive. Psychotropic medications, however, are not cure-alls

for sexually deviant behavior,

nor do they work for all offenders. Depo-Provera, like some

other medications, has many

serious side effects, and its use

is controversial.

(continued on next page)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 8

Sexual Abuse Cycle and

Relapse Prevention

Sex offenders execute a series

of thoughts and behaviors before, during, and after each offense. A typical sex abuse cycle

includes triggers, certain

thoughts and feelings, seemingly unimportant decisions,

high-risk situations, target selection, sexual fantasies, planning the offense, grooming the

victim, performing the sexually

deviant behavior, maintaining

secrecy, remorse or fear, and

evasion tactics. The components of the cycle vary from offender to offender. For example,

some offenders target adolescent females; others target prepubescent males. Some offenders find that anger or low-self

esteem triggers their cycle; others find their cycle is triggered

by alcohol or job loss.

Working with the treatment provider, sex offenders

can identify the set of circumstances, events, and emotions

that happen before they commit a sexual offense and develop a relapse prevention plan.

Relapse prevention is a selfcontrol program that was developed in the field of addictive

behaviors and later adapted for

use with sexual abusers. It is

specifically designed to help

sexual abusers maintain behavioral changes by (1) identifying

problems early on and (2) developing strategies to avoid or

cope more effectively with

these problems. Relapse prevention is most effective when

the offender’s support group

(people with whom the offender has regular contact) are

included in the plan.

Once the treatment provider identifies the offender’s

sexual abuse cycle and establishes a relapse prevention plan,

officers should request a copy

of this information and meet

with the provider to discuss the

plan. Officers need to familiarize themselves with the relapse

Some question the clinical

effectiveness of treatment

and treatment modalities. In

1989, Furby, Weinhrott, and

Blackshaw reported in Psychological Bulletin that “there

is as yet no evidence that

clinical treatment reduces

rates of sex offenses in general and no appropriate data

for assessing whether it may

be differentially effective for

different types of offenders.”

However, the majority of evidence suggests that most sex

offenders respond positively

to treatment.

In 1993 Margaret Alexander analyzed sex offender

outcomes from 68 recidivism

studies and found that the

recidivism rate of treated offenders was 10.9% versus

18.5% for untreated offenders. Her analysis also revealed

that offenders treated with a

combination of behavioral

and group therapies had a

recidivism rate of 13.4%,

whereas offenders treated

with the relapse prevention

model combined with behavioral and/or group treatment re-offended at a rate of

5.9%. A ten-year recidivism

study by the Vermont Department of Corrections

found that the overall recidivism rate of 690 offenders

who participated in sex offender treatment was 7.8%;

the recidivism rate of offenders who successfully completed treatment was 0.5%.

Erik Lotke, Research Director for the National Center on Institutions and Alternatives, reported that “the

Does Treatment Work?

conclusion that treatment reduces recidivism can be refined further by distinguishing between different kinds of

sex offenders. The Vermont

[Department of Corrections]

reports offense rates after

treatment as: 19% for rapists,

7% for pedophiles, 3% for

incest, and 3% for ‘hands off’

crimes such as exhibitionism.” Offenders with multiple

paraphilias or sexual disorders

have higher rates of recidivism than offenders with

single paraphilias. One research study found that the

overall recidivism rate of sex

offenders one year after treatment was 12.2%, but offenders who abused both males

and females and children and

adolescents had a recidivism

rate of 75%.

(continued from page 7)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 9

prevention model and with

concrete examples of the risk

factors and relapse behaviors associated with each sex offender

on their caseloads so they can

develop supervision plans that

appropriately manage the

offender’s risk to the community.

Selecting a Treatment

Provider

The evaluation and treatment

of sexual deviancy is a highly

specialized area of practice. As

Steve Jensen and Coralie Jewell

explained in an article in The

Prosecutor, “many sex offenders

are [currently] being assessed

and treated by inexperienced

mental health professionals . . .

advanced degrees [in psychology or psychiatry] do not ensure

competence in the highly specialized area of sexual offender

evaluation and treatment.

Therapeutic techniques utilizing trust, support, and nondirective approaches to evaluation and treatment may allow

the sexual offender to exercise

his well-honed skills of manipulation and deception against

the practitioner. Sex offenders

are far better at manipulation

than many therapists can comprehend.”

Officers should examine the

qualifications of the treatment

provider and recommend professionals skilled in evaluating

and treating sex offenders. Experienced officers say that they

look for a provider who

• specializes in treating sexual

offenders;

• is able to discuss his or her

understanding of how to

intervene with a sexual offender in order to decrease

the risk of reoffending;

• uses objective measures for

evaluating and treating sex

offenders (e.g., polygraph,

plethysmograph, or Abel

Screen II);

• views group therapy (with

other sex offenders) as the

Treatment or Incarceration?

Law enforcement, treatment

providers, and the public

continually debate the question: should sex offenders be

placed in community-based

treatment or incarcerated?

Some sex offender treatment professionals warn that

incarceration without treatment may only increase an

offender’s pathology. Isolating them in a jail cell without treatment may reinforce

the offender’s sense of shame,

guilt, anger, or isolation, as

well as encourage continuation of deviant fantasies and

masturbation—some of the

very factors that contributed

to the sexual offense in the

first place. In contrast, other

sex offender treatment specialists believe that being in

prison reminds the offender

that his or her sexually deviant behavior is a crime, noting that the offender may decide not to reoffend as a result of imprisonment.

Some treatment providers and law enforcement professionals disagree with the

notion of making treatment

or incarceration dichotomous and question whether

offering community-based

treatment in lieu of incarceration would only minimize the importance of the

sexual offense.

For officers, the debate on

treatment and incarceration

boils down to an issue of risk

management and protecting

the community. In Supervision of the Sex Offender, Georgia Cumming and Maureen

Buell state, “Some sex offenders are in total denial about

their abusive behaviors and

prove unwilling to recognize

and give up the denial. If this

remains the case, they cannot be treated successfully,

and should be denied access

to community-based treatment. For them, incarceration is the appropriate disposition.

Some sex offenders pretend to want treatment but

choose not to meaningfully

engage in the treatment process once they are placed in

community treatment. Of

course, there are sex offenders who are amenable to

treatment but who pose such

a high risk to the community

that their treatment initially

must occur within an incarcerated setting.”

(continued on next page)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 10

Assessing the needs and risks of

the sex offender prior to supervision is critical, and the ideal

time for this assessment is during the presentence investigation. Although supervision officers make similar decisions,

presentence and pretrial services officers are often the first

to make decisions regarding the

risk the offender poses to the

victim and community and the

conditions of probation or pretrial services release that are

tailored to the offender’s sexual

abuse cycle. To make these determinations, experienced officers stress the importance of

investigating beyond the offense of conviction. During the

investigation, review all pertinent documents, obtain a detailed offense history and a personal and sexual history from

the offender, ask the court to

order a psychosexual evaluation, evaluate amenability to

treatment, and assess risk.

Reviewing Documentation

Review all documentation before interviewing the offender.

That way you can look for

“holes” between the police report, the victim’s statements,

and the offender’s version of the

offense; inquire about aspects of

the offender’s history that the

offender may choose to omit or

gloss over during the interview;

and plan how to conduct the

interview if the offender begins

primary treatment mode;

• provides the offender other

therapies as needed (e.g.,

anger therapy, sex education, victim empathy, social

skills training);

• incorporates a relapse prevention component in the

treatment regime;

• uses outside support groups

in treatment and communicates with the offender’s significant other, family members, and collateral contacts;

• offers couples counseling;

• is willing to work closely

with the officer, testify in

court, report supervision

violations, and provide

monthly progress reports;

and

Investigation Issues

• is a member of a professional organization that

deals with sex offender

treatment (e.g., Association

for the Treatment of Sexual

Abusers).

In rural areas where resources are limited, officers may

have to look beyond traditional

sources to find a provider who

specializes in sex offender treatment rather than make a general referral to a county mental

health center.

For example, a court may

order an offender to travel to a

treatment program in another

locale if an officer’s research indicates such a program exists.

Sex offender providers and experienced officers caution

against placing sex offenders in

a general psychotherapy program. ◆

denying or rationalizing his or

her behavior. If all the documents are not immediately

available, the initial interview

may proceed, but it should be

followed up with a second interview after the documents are

available.

Reviewing the documentation involves examining the

police reports and speaking to

the investigating officer; reading the victim’s statement; running an NCIC check; reviewing past pretrial, presentence,

and supervision reports and interviewing the report authors;

and reviewing incarceration

records and contacting prison

personnel.

While reading the documents, look for patterns of denial as evidenced by alibis; noting what offenses the offender

did and did not admit to, as well

as the offender’s attitude toward

the victims. Examine incidences of domestic abuse. Did

the situation involve deviant

sexual behavior that the offender was not charged with?

Also, look beyond the instant

offense. Is there something in

the records that could be associated with sexually deviant

behavior, such as an arrest or

conviction for mail fraud or impersonating a police officer? Is

there an established pattern of

high-risk, sexually deviant behaviors?

Interviewing the Offender

Interviewing the offender may

uncover information not found

in the documentation or lead

to an increased understanding

(continued from page 9)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 11

of the offender’s sexual attitudes

and behavior. During presentence and supervision interviews, consider the following:

• Anticipate that the offender may deny or minimize the sexually deviant

behavior. When dealing

with denial, avoid questions

that require a yes or no response. Also, ask questions

that require the offender to

discuss what happened, not

why it happened. If the offender is providing inconsistent information, seek

clarity by asking something

like, “Do you remember

when you said . . . ?” or saying, “Your statements are

confusing me; first you said

. . . , then you said . . . .”

Maintain control of the interview by being direct in

your questioning; do not allow the offender to interrupt or go off on tangents.

• Mix supportive comments

with confrontation. Although sex offenders must

be held accountable for

their actions, it is helpful to

acknowledge the difficulty

of being honest about hidden sexual abuses and to

offer supportive comments

when an offender accepts

responsibility for his or her

behavior. Also, let the offenders know that treatment is available to help

them gain control over

their abusive behavior. Your

objective is to show that

you have some understanding of their perceived plight

without endorsing or buying into their distortions.

• Ask questions about planning, selection of victims,

and grooming or stalking

that preceded the offense,

as well as questions about

the offense itself. How of1. Where did the assault

take place? Was the location selected randomly, or

is the location always the

same?

2. Describe in detail how

you selected the victim.

Were there certain characteristics about the victim that appealed to you

(e.g., age, sex, physical

appearance)?

3. What was the victim’s reaction? Did the victim say

anything, cry, submit, or

fight back during the assault? Did you stop at any

time during the assault

because of the victim’s reaction?

4. If the victim was a child,

how did you know the

child would cooperate?

What made you think the

child wouldn’t tell?

5. What were you thinking

and feeling during the

abuse? Were you aroused

during the assault? If so,

what was arousing to you?

6. What did you say to the

victim during the offense?

Did you ask or threaten

the victim not to say anything after the assault?

7. To what extent were

drugs or alcohol used?

Were they used to lure

the victim, to reduce the

victim’s reaction, or to

reduce your own inhibitions before the offense?

8. Did you use a weapon

during the assault? If so,

how was it used?

9. Have you ever tried to

stop the abusive behavior? How?

Adapted from Georgia Cumming and

Maureen Buell, Supervision of the Sex Offender

(Vt.: The Safer Society Press, 1997).

Questions Pertaining to the Sexual Offense

fenders talk about their offense indicates the degree of

responsibility they are taking for their actions; how

the offender chooses to offend will help you make

decisions about the risk and

supervision conditions (see

“Questions Pertaining to

the Sexual Offense,”

above).

• Although many officers are

uncomfortable doing so, it

is important to ask questions about the offender’s

deviant and nondeviant

sexual history. For example,

by asking how the offender

learned about sex may uncover additional facts about

the offender’s upbringing.

Asking offenders when they

first realized they were “different” sexually provides information about the offender’s developing pattern of

(continued on next page)

Pretrial services officers

should not automatically

assume that denial

during an interview means

the defendant is denying

the sexually deviant

behavior. Denial could

reflect the fact that the

defendant did not commit

the act for which he or she

is charged.
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 12

sexually abusive behavior

(see “Questions Pertaining

to the Offender’s Sexual

History,” above).

Making Collateral

Contacts

Multiple collateral contacts

with employers, family, friends,

clergy, the victim, support

groups such as Alcoholics

Anonymous, child protection

agency staff, local law enforcement, and others provides additional information about the

offender.

Collateral contacts also

help you evaluate the offender’s

level of honesty and potential

risk. Note, however, that sometimes family and friends—even

the victim—may erroneously

defend the offender. For example, be alert for statements

such as, “ It was the child’s responsibility to stop the offender

from abusing her,” “The of1. How did you first learn

about sex? What did your

parents tell you about

sex?

2. How often do you masturbate? How old were you

when you started to masturbate? What did your

parents tell you about

masturbation?

3. What do you think about

when you masturbate?

What are your fantasies?

Have they changed over

time?

4. When did you start to

Supervision officers should

also request a psychosexual

evaluation if one was not ordered during presentence proceedings or if the offender is

leaving prison and no recent

evaluation is available. The information in the evaluation is

helpful in determining or reviewing supervision conditions,

determining the appropriate

level of supervision, and developing the supervision plan.

A psychosexual evaluation

focuses on both the risks and

needs of the offender, as well as

identifies factors from social

and sexual history that may

contribute to sexual deviance.

Evaluation information is collected by a variety of methods,

such as clinical interview of

sexual history and social skills,

objective physiological instruments that measure sexual

arousal (e.g., plethysmograph),

specialized sex offender tests

(e.g., Abel Becker Cognition

fender could not control his

(her) behavior,” “The abuse

was the fault of perpetrator’s

wife for not having sex with

him,” and “The victim is overreacting.”

Requesting a Psychosexual Evaluation

A psychosexual evaluation is

essential for accurately identifying sex offenders and should

only be completed by a sex offender treatment specialist. Experienced officers suggest asking the court to order a psychosexual evaluation during the

presentence investigation and,

when deemed appropriate, during pretrial services release. A

psychosexual evaluation at this

stage of the judicial process

helps officers assess the risk the

offender poses to the victim and

community and the need for

supervision conditions that specifically address the offender’s

sexual abuse cycle.

date? Describe your first

sexual experience.

5. Describe your relationship patterns with adults.

6. Describe your sexual relationships with your

spouse/significant other?

How often do you engage

in sexual activity? Who

initiates sex in the relationship?

7. Have you ever been a victim of sexual abuse? What

is the first childhood

sexual experience you recall? Have you ever been

scared or humiliated

sexually?

8. Have you ever peeped in

windows? Exposed yourself? Made obscene phone

calls? Rubbed up against

another person in public

for sexual pleasure?

9. How old were you when

the sexual difficulties began? How has your sexual

deviancy affected your

life (e.g., employment,

school, family, health)?

Adapted from Georgia Cumming and

Maureen Buell, Supervision of the Sex Offender

(Vt.: The Safer Society Press, 1997).

Questions Pertaining to the Offender’s Sexual History

(continued from page 11)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 13

Assessing risk and amenability

to treatment is best seen as a

process. Offenders are first

evaluated during the psychosexual evaluation at the time of

the presentence investigation

or, when deemed appropriate,

during pretrial services. Working with the treatment provider, the officer then assesses

the offender’s risk to the victim

and the community and amenability to treatment. Assessment, however, should not end

at this point. Subsequent reassessments must occur throughout pretrial services release, supervised release, probation, and

even incarceration. Assessment

and evaluation should be an

ongoing practice in any case

involving sex offenders.

Risk assessment refers to an

evaluation of the offender’s

overall risk of sexual

reoffending. Risk assessment is

a crucial component in the

management of sex offenders

because it helps officers determine supervision plans and

conditions. According to Robert McGrath, Consultant to the

Vermont Department of Corrections and the National Institute of Corrections, most correctional risk tools are designed

for assessing risk among the

general criminal population.

They rely on an offender’s

criminal history and lifestyle

stability. These tools may not

accurately identify sex offenders because sex offenders generally have neither criminal

histories nor chaotic lifestyles.

The few specialized sex offender instruments that have

been developed have not been

validated. McGrath points out

that these instruments typically

“examine only one dimension

of sex offender risk, such as the

relative likelihood that a sex

offender will reoffend. Simply

predicting reoffense, however,

is not enough. A number of

other issues must be examined

in order to evaluate critically a

sex offender’s risk to the community.”

The variety of issues involved in assessing the risk of a

sex offender can make the process difficult. For example,

what about the twice-convicted rapist who is taking responsibility for the offense but

who has never received specialized treatment? What about the

offender who has a stable job

and family and no prior record

but who totally denies his or her

behavior? With all these variables, there is no set formula for

assessing risk. Each case must

be analyzed individually. No

matter how carefully done,

however, an assessment cannot

absolutely predict whether a

given offender will reoffend.

Scale and Multiphasic Sex Inventory), standardized mental

health tests (e.g., Minnesota

Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 and Millon Clinical

Multiaxial Inventory-III), and

the polygraph.

Providers also look at a variety of other factors during the

evaluation, often in consultation with the officer. These factors include admission of the

offense, offense history, substance abuse, social support system, motivation for treatment

and recovery, escalating pattern

of offenses, internal and external factors which control behavior, and disowning behaviors.

Officers should therefore

provide the treatment provider

as much information as possible, such as copies of police

reports, the victim impact

statement, a synopsis of any

prior criminal history, child

protection reports, any available risk assessment materials,

prior evaluations and treatment

reports, and prior supervision

records. Before sharing documentation, however, check

with your supervisor to ensure

you are following district policies and procedures regarding

disclosure and confidentiality.

The treatment provider

analyzes the data collected during the evaluation to identify

the nature, history, and associated conditions of the person’s

sexual functioning, compare

the individual’s sexual functioning to others considered

normal, as well as those known

to engage in sexual deviant behavior, evaluate the offender’s

risk of reoffending and amenability to treatment, and recommend interventions and a treatment plan that not only addresses the offender’s sexual and

social treatment needs, but

helps minimize the offender’s

risk of reoffending. ◆

Assessing Risk

(continued on next page)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 14

In 1990, an intensive residential sex offender treatment

program (SOTP) for men was

established at FCI Butner in

North Carolina. The program’s aim is to reduce risk of

recidivism by teaching offenders to manage their sexual deviance through cognitive-behavioral, self-management, and relapse prevention

techniques. The voluntary

program consists of a 60-day

assessment period during

which the inmate is evaluated and a treatment plan is

formulated; group, individual, and milieu therapy,

coupled with psychoeducational and psychiatric

before prison release;

• not have a detainer or

pending charge which interferes with his release;

• be literate and demonstrate the sufficient intelligence to participate in

psychotherapy; and

• not suffer from a serious

psychiatric illness that

prevents him from participating in the program.

Officers interested in referring an offender should

call SOTP before the sentencing hearing. Contact

SOTP Director Andres E.

Hernandez at (919)575-

4541, ext. 4462.

To begin assessing risk, calculate the Risk Prediction Index (RPI) and use the RPI score

in conjunction with all the data

collected during investigation.

The objective is to form a picture of the offender’s accountability and cooperation, sexual

deviancy, offense history,

choice of victims, lifestyle characteristics, mental and physical

health, and motivation for

treatment and recovery. In addition, McGrath advises focusing the assessment on the following five factors.

• What is the probability of

reoffense? Examine the

offender’s similarity to other

types of sex offenders, including offense type, multiple paraphilias, degree of

force, criminal lifestyle, and

deviant sexual arousal.

• What degree of harm would

most likely result from a

reoffense? Examine the

offender’s use of force and

propensity for violence. If

there is no history of violent

behavior, review the offender’s pattern of past offenses

for an increase in intrusiveness or threats of violence.

• What are the conditions

under which a reoffense is

most likely to occur? Consider the offender’s access to

victims, use of alcohol or

drugs, use of sexually stimulating material, employment and residence, access

to an automobile, and emotional state.

• Who would be the most

likely victims of a reoffense?

Review the offender’s selection of past victims. Use the

plethysmograph and polygraph (when appropriate)

to determine other potential victims.

• When is a reoffense most

likely to occur? Analyze the

offender’s pattern of past

offenses and examine the

day, season, offender age,

and reoffense patterns associated with other sex offenders. For example, studies have shown that rapists

were at the highest risk of

reoffense during the first

nine months after release

from prison. Child molesters and incest offenders

were found to be at their

highest risk to reoffend two

to three years after release.

Other studies have shown

that for many sex offenders,

the risk of reoffense is as

high in the seventh year as

in the first. ◆

Sex Offender Treatment Program at FCI Butner

treatment, as needed; and

release planning during

which staff coordinate with

the inmate’s probation officer

to identify aftercare treatment and parameters for

community supervision.

If there is space, SOTP

accepts referrals from other

federal institutions and the

federal courts. Inmates accepted in the program must:

• have been convicted of a

sexual offense;

• volunteer for the program

and demonstrate a commitment to abstain from

abusive sexual behavior;

• have no less than 18 and

no more than 36 months

(continued from page 13)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 15

Because many sex offenders

present a socially acceptable

facade, the chaos in their lives

is not readily apparent to officers who are used to dealing with

more overtly criminal offenders. These offenders usually

present few case management

problems. They generally keep

their appointments, hold jobs,

have family and support systems, and complete the conditions of supervision. They may

appear successful in their treatment. This is because the traits

they need to be successful in

their professions and with their

families are often the same

skills they use to practice their

deviant behavior.

Although sex offenders

typically present few case management problems, experienced

officers caution against assigning them to an administrative

caseload. Sex offenders require

intensive supervision because

they pose such a potentially

high risk to the community and

need constant monitoring to

ensure they are managing their

deviant behavior. Supervision

therefore focuses on surveillance, control, setting firm limits, and treatment. Effective supervision involves applying external controls on the sex offender while, through intensive

treatment, the offender learns

to use tools and techniques to

increase internal controls. Because sex crimes are crimes of

secrecy, sex offender supervision is intense and intrusive.

Internal Control

Through offense-specific treatment, sex offenders are taught

to identify and control their

inappropriate sexual impulses,

feelings, and behaviors. Some

officers, however, may feel uncomfortable delving into the

sexual aspects of a person’s life.

Nevertheless, to effectively supervise sex offenders you must

become familiar with the

offender’s deviant sexual

thoughts and behavior. In Managing Adult Sex Offenders: A

Containment Approach, researchers at the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice explain that the “effort to promote—and monitor—internal

control is an important departure from traditional criminal

justice practice with sex offenders. Traditionally, deviant

thinking lies outside the jurisdiction of the criminal justice

system. [However,] . . . in the

case of sexual offenders, deviant thinking is an integral part

of the assault pattern . . . .”

But the very planning and

patterns of assault that can

increase the likelihood of

criminal activity can also

be interrupted. Once a

sexual offender reveals his

or her thoughts and feelings as part of the sexual

assault pattern, this information can be used by

criminal justice officials to

develop individual monitoring and surveillance

plans.

External Control

By working closely with the

treatment provider, officers can

obtain information about the

offender’s deviant fantasies and

behavior patterns and develop

a system of external controls

that specifically minimize the

risks these fantasies and behaviors present. These controls include supervision conditions

and a supervision plan that

stress intensive supervision; use

of the polygraph (as part of the

treatment plan) for monitoring

compliance; notification of

those at third-party risk; sex offender registration; collateral

visits with the offender’s employer, family, treatment provider; unannounced and scheduled visits to the offender’s

home and place of employment; frequent in-person meetings with the offender; cessation of sexually deviant behavior; targeted limitations on behavior, including no-contact

requirements; verification (via

observation or collateral contacts) of the offender’s compliance with treatment and supervision conditions; and urine

analysis (as required). Behavioral monitoring should be increased when an offender is at

an increased risk to reoffend; for

example, when the offender is

experiencing stress or visiting

victims or potential victims or

when the offender demonstrates an increased level of denial.

At the beginning of supervision, the officer and offender

should discuss the details of the

offense and the offender’s highrisk behaviors, as well as the

potential risk situations that

precede the offender’s abusive

sexual behavior. Specifically

Supervision

(continued on next page)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 16

state what activities the offender should avoid. For example, child molesters should

be prohibited from serving as

Cub Scout leaders or from jogging near elementary school

yards when children are present. Unless the activity is

spelled out, the sex offender

will interpret the “no contact”

rule as “no sexual contact.”

When possible, include members of the offender’s personal

support group in the discussion,

as these individuals may be able

to help the offender avoid risky

activities or situations.

During supervision, discuss

treatment progress and issues

with the offender, as well as the

consequences for failing to

complete treatment. In consultation with the provider, evaluate and modify (as required)

treatment plans on a routine

basis. Make frequent collateral

contacts and communicate often with the treatment provider. These individuals provide additional information

about the offender’s behavior

and compliance and supplement the offender’s self-reporting. Actively monitor the

offender’s activities. Note not

only risky behaviors but the

offender’s success in monitoring

his or her behavior. Also look

for changes in the offender’s

routine and for activities and

behaviors that previously preceded sexual assault: overworking, keeping secrets, depression,

alcohol or drug use, or ending

a relationship, et cetera.

Duty to Warn

The third-party risk guidelines

set out in Guide to Judiciary Policies and Procedures apply in sex

offender cases in which there

is a reasonably foreseeable risk

of harm to an identifiable person. Generally, a duty to warn

does not arise unless individual

persons at risk are identified.

Nevertheless, officers may, for

example, want to warn an elementary school principal that

(continued from page 15)

While facilitating worldwide

information exchange, the

Internet has also posed risks

to children using on-line services. Computer technology

has enabled on-line predators to enter the homes of

children who use the games

and resources on the Web.

Keith Durkin, assistant professor of social sciences at

McNeese State University,

says that pedophiles and

child molesters use the Internet to traffic in child pornography, locate children to molest, engage in sexual communication with children,

and interact with other pedophiles and child molesters.

In December 1996, the

Parole Commission voted to

approve special computer restrictions for high-risk federal

parolees. These conditions

require parolees to obtain

written approval before using

an Internet service provider

or any public or private computer network. Other restrictions prohibit parolees from

possessing or using data encryption programs and require parolees to agree to periodic unannounced examinations of computer equipment and to allow the parole

officer to install hardware

and software on the parolee’s

computer or to monitor computer use. Some districts have

used similar conditions that

prohibit or restrict offenders’

use of computers, modems,

and the Internet.

Misuse of the Internet by

child molesters and pedophiles raises new supervision

issues for officers. Does the

Internet offender fall into the

same category as the predatory sex offender who molests

children? How does one restrict access, especially if the

offender requires a computer

for employment? How does

one monitor a person’s use of

the Internet? Do district officers have the training they

need to detect an offender’s

computer misuse? How does

one keep an offender from accessing the Internet at colleges, libraries, or other

places?

To help law enforcement

and correctional officers explore these issues, the Center will present a satellite

broadcast on sex offenders

and the Internet in December. Read the AO’s News and

Views or contact Mark

Maggio at (202) 273-4115 for

more information.

Sex Offenders and the Internet
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 17

To restrict sex offenders from

high risk situations or access

to potential victims, specialized conditions are required.

Researchers at the Colorado

Division of Criminal Justice

recently surveyed more than

700 probation and parole supervisors across the nation

about their sex offender policies. Based on the survey results, the researchers developed a model program for supervising offenders in the

community. As reported in

Managing Adult Sex Offenders: A Containment Approach,

this model recommends that

the conditions for sex offenders be extensive and based on

the offender’s offense pattern.

Following is a list of some

of the conditions that experienced federal officers use for

sex offenders. Before implementing any new conditions

in the district, check with

your supervisor and follow

district policies and procedures.

• Offender’s employment

and change of address

must be approved by the

officer.

• Offender must participate

in a specialized sex offender treatment program

that may include use of a

plethysmograph and

polygraph.

• Offender must maintain a

driving log with details

about mileage, routes

traveled, and destinations.

• Offender may not possess

any pornography.

• Offender may not directly

or indirectly contact the

victim or any child under

age 18; may not reside

with any child under age

18; and may not loiter

near school yards, playgrounds, swimming pools,

arcades, or other places

frequented by children.

• Offender must register

with local law enforcement. (Note: This may

already be required by

state law.)

• Offender may not use

sexually oriented telephone numbers or services.

• Offender may not date

women who have children.

• Offender may not use

alcohol or illicit substances.

• Offender is required to

abide by an evening curfew, as set by the probation officer.

• Offender may not have

contact with devices that

communicate data via

modem or dedicated connection and may not

have access to the Internet.

• Offender’s place of residence may not be in close

proximity to parks, playgrounds, public pools, or

other locations frequented by children.

Supervision Conditions

students may be at risk. In addition, state sex offender registration laws may be relevant in

the officer’s determination of

third-party risk. If the state has

provided certain information to

a person or persons at risk pursuant to its registration laws,

that information could be a sufficient warning in a case in

which an officer has determined that a third-party risk

warning should be given to the

person or persons.

Confidentiality

Open communication with the

treatment provider and others

involved in supervising the offender is essential. If necessary,

officers should obtain signed

waivers of confidentiality that

extend to the sex offender

treatment provider, victim,

victim’s therapist, members of

the supervising team, and other

providers treating the offender

(e.g., mental health or substance abuse treatment providers).

Terminating Treatment

Recognizing the high level of

risk associated with sex offenders, experienced officers and sex

offender treatment specialists

caution against terminating

treatment. Most sex offenders

require treatment throughout

supervision, and sex offender

treatment specialists note that

some sex offenders require lifelong treatment.

Separating the Offender

from the Offense

While sex offenders must be

held accountable for their

crimes, those who work with

(continued on next page)
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin ◆ September 1998 ◆ Sex Offenders 18

In September 1994, President

Clinton signed the Jacob

Wetterling Crimes Against

Children and Sexually Violent

Offender Act as part of the Violent Control and Law Enforcement Act. The Wetterling Act

required states to pass sex offender registration laws or risk

losing federal law enforcement

funding. It also outlined minimum features states needed to

meet in creating or revising sex

offender registration laws.

New Jersey’s Megan’s Law,

on which many states modeled

their own sex offender registration and notification laws, was

passed in October 1994. On

May 17, 1996, the President

signed the federal version of

Megan’s Law, amending the

Wetterling Act. The federal

law required states to pass legislation permitting release of

sex offender registration information to the public; the

Wetterling Act had left the

notification issue to the states’

discretion. During the past

three years, legislatures in every state have passed sex offender registration and notification laws designed to monitor convicted sex offenders,

protect the public, and provide

an intelligence network among

states to assist in investigating

and prosecuting such cases.

(See figure 1, page 2.)

In 1997 Congress amended

several sections of Title 18, directing Federal Bureau of Prison (BOP) officials, federal probation officers, and certain federal sex offenders to participate

in state sex offender registry

programs. Beginning November 26, 1998, amendments to

18 USC §4042 will become effective. The amendments will

direct federal probation officers

Changes in Registration and Notification Laws

to register certain sex offenders

with state law enforcement authorities and to advise state officials each time a supervised

sex offender changes addresses.

The mandatory registration information includes the offender’s name, address, criminal

history (including a description

of the instant offense), and conditions or restrictions placed on

the offender, as well as any information to the effect that the

person is subject to registration

requirements as a sex offender.

Also effective November 26,

applicable probationers’ and supervised releasee’s registration

responsibilities will appear as a

standard condition of supervision, and BOP officials will be

responsible for registering certain sex offenders with state officials prior to the offender’s

release from incarceration.

Recently, the Justice Department issued new guidelines

for the states to follow in bringing existing state sex offender

registration and notification

laws into federal compliance. It

is expected that these guidelines will generate additional

changes in state laws and may

have further implications for

federal officers. Prior to the effective date of the amendment,

officers should simply monitor

an offender’s compliance with

state sex offender registration

laws. Federal officers should

look for memorandums from

the AO’s Federal Corrections

and Supervision Division for

guidance on their new responsibilities regarding sex offender

notification and registration. ◆

them must be humane and respectful. This does not imply

coddling the offender or excusing his or her behavior. Rather,

effective change occurs in an

atmosphere that acknowledges

and supports offenders’ potential for change, thereby reducing the threat they pose to the

community.

Some officers may find it

hard to maintain this type of relationship. Officers must acknowledge their feelings about

sex offenders and overcome any

personal distaste for the bizarre

and predatory quality of the

sexual behavior. They must

learn to separate the offender

from the offending behavior so

they can discuss the intimate

details of the offender’s sexual

desires and conduct. If the offender is not seen as a person,

establishing the level of communication necessary for supervision will be difficult.

Even experienced officers

find working with this offender

population draining due to the

frequent contact and constant

vigilance required. Staffing

cases is one way to share the responsibility for investigating

and supervising sex offenders

and prevent officer burnout. In

some cases, transferring the

case to another officer may be

an appropriate decision. ◆

(continued from page 17)
According to Georgia Cumming and

Maureen Buell in Supervising the Sex Offender, “a lapse is an emotion, fantasy,

thought, or behavior that is part of the

offender’s relapse pattern.” Examples include engaging in deviant fantasies, buying

pornography, using alcohol or drugs, being

alone with a child, or not resolving feelings

of anger or depression. Cumming and Buell

indicate that lapses with sex offenders are

not unusual and should be anticipated. Occurring when an offender fails to monitor

warning signs or to address high-risk situations, lapses are unique to the offender and

his or her deviant behavior.

Dealing with a lapse can be as straightforward as the offender recognizing the highrisk behavior and intervening. Sometimes,

however, a lapse may require increased external control (e.g., increased monitoring

or additional no-contact conditions). It is

important, however, to set firm limits with

sex offenders. When an offender’s behavior

indicates that he or she poses a risk, officers

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic

and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

(DSM-VI). Washington, D.C., 1994.

The Association for the Treatment of Sexual

Abusers. Ethical Standards and Principles for

the Management of Sexual Abusers. Beaverton,

Or., 1997.

Berg, Thomas S. “Treating the Child Sex

Offender.” Roundtable (Autumn 1989): 20–

22.

Colorado Department of Public Safety,

Division of Criminal Justice. Standards and

Guidelines for the Assessment, Evaluation,

Treatment and Behavioral Monitoring of Adult

Sex Offenders. Denver, Colo., January 1996.

Colorado Division of Criminal Justice.

Managing Adult Sex Offenders. Ed. Kim

English, Suzanne Pullen, and Linda Jones.

Lexington, Ky.: American Probation and

Parole Association, 1996.

Counseling and Consultation Services, Inc.

“Federal Probation Training on Sex

Offenders.” Johnson City, Tenn., November

22, 1996.

Cumming, Georgia and Buell, Maureen.

Supervision of the Sex Offender. Vt.: The Safer

Society Press, 1997.

Davis, Laura; McShane, Marilyn D.; and

Williams, Frank P. “Controlling Computer

Access to Pornography: Special Conditions

for Sex Offenders. Federal Probation 59 (June

1995): 43–47.

Doherty, Joseph. The Adult Sex Offender:

Understanding Deviant Behavior, Answers to

Frequently Asked Questions. Cambridge,

Mass.: New Directions for Men, 1995.

Durkin, Keith F. “Misuse of the Internet by

Pedophiles: Implications for Law

Enforcement and Probation Practice.”

Federal Probation, 61 (September 1997): 14–

18.

“Effective Management of Sex Offenders in

the Community.” Offender Program Report 1

(May/June 1997): 1–2, 12–13.

Greenfield, Lawrence A. An Analysis of Data

on Rape and Sexual Assault: Sex Offenses and

Offenders NCJ-163392. Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of

Justice Statistics, January 1997.

Grugin, Elizabeth. “Sex Offender

Notification: Implementation Considerations for States.” Corrections Policy Profiler 1

(Fall 1997).

Jensen, Steven H., and Jewell, Coralie A.

“The Sex Offender Experts.” The Prosecutor

22 (Fall 1988): 13–20

Kercher, Glen, and Long, Lydia. Supervision

and Treatment of Sex Offenders. Huntsville,

Tex.: Sam Houston Press, 1991.

Larson, Noel R. “Profile of Female Sex

Offenders.” Treatment Today (Winter 1996):

27.

Lotke, Eric. “Politics and Irrelevance:

Community Notification Statutes.” Federal

Sentencing Reporter 10 (September/October

1997): 64–68.

McGrath, Robert J. “Assessing Sex Offender

Risk.” Perspectives (Summer 1992): 6–9.

Montgomery, Pamela. “Sentencing Federal

Sex Crimes.” Federal Sentencing Reporter 10

(September/October 1997): 98–102.

Oregon State Court Administrator’s Office,

Office of Probation. Guidelines for Probation

Officers Working With Sex Offenders. July

1997.

Reilly, Edward F., Chairman, U.S. Department of Justice, United States Parole Commission. Memorandum to Elaine Terenzi,

Chief Probation Officer (Florida Middle).

Chevy Chase, Md., December 12, 1996.

Relapse, Violations,

and Revocation

Sex Offender Training Manual, U.S. Probation

Office (Florida Middle), Tampa, Fla.

(undated).

“Study of Sex Offender Treatment Produces

a Model Program.” The Criminal Justice

Newsletter (February 2, 1997): 3–5.

Steele, Nancy M. “Sexually Violent

Predators: Dispelling the Myths and Sorting

the Hay to Find the Needle.” Offender

Program Report 1 (January/February 1998):

65–66, 76–77.

U.S. Sentencing Commission. 1997

Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics.

Washington, D.C., 1998.

Washington State Department of

Corrections, Division of Community

Corrections. Sex Offender Supervision: Practical

Application for Field Staff (Participant Guide).

Spokane, Wash. (undated).

References

should consider a system of graduated sanctions. For example, officers should respond

when the offender contacts a victim, continuously fails to avoid situations that reinforce deviant fantasies, fails to participate

in mandated specialized treatment, or vio-

(continued on next page)

Special Needs Offenders Bulletin

a publication of the Federal Judicial Center

No. 3, September 1998

Written by

Dennise Orlando

Training Specialist

Court Education Division

Designed by

Nathan Dotson

Publications & Media Division

Send questions or comments to Dennise Orlando or

Mark Maggio, Court Education Division, Federal Judicial Center, Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus Circle, N.E., Washington, D.C.

20002-8003.

This publication was undertaken in furtherance of the

Center’s statutory mission to develop and conduct education programs for judicial branch employees. The

views expressed are those of the author and are not

necessarily those of the Federal Judicial Center.
Special Needs Offenders Bulletin

Federal Judicial Center

Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building

One Columbus Circle, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20002-8003

This bulletin serves as a self-study guide

that introduces the topic of sex offenders and helps officers and managers begin exploring district case management

strategies and procedures related to sex

offenders. It is suggested that officers and

managers continue developing expertise

concerning this offender/defendant

population by reading the following

books, inviting local sex offender treatment specialists to speak at in-district

training programs, and attending the

Center’s October satellite broadcast on

sex offenders and December satellite

broadcast on child molesters and the

Internet. Additional teletraining programs on sex offenders will be available

in 1999. Consult the AO’s News and

Views and the Center’s FJTN Bulletin for

program dates. Contact Mark Maggio at

(202) 273-4115 for additional information about the Special Needs Offenders

Series on Sex Offenders.

Suggested Reading

Criminal Investigation of Child Sexual Abuse, Portable

Guides to Investigating Child Abuse. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, May 1997.

Ethical Standards and Principles for the Management of

Sexual Abusers. The Association for the Treatment

of Sexual Abusers, Beaverton, Or., 1997.

Female Sex Offenders, by Ruth Matthew, Jane K.

Matthews, and Kathleen Speltz. Vt.: Safer Society

Press, 1989.

Men Who Rape: The Psychology of the Offender, by A.

Nicholas Groth. NY: Plenum, 1979.

Supervision of the Sex Offender, by Georgia

Cumming and Maureen Buell. Vt.: Safer Society

Press, 1997.

Transforming Trauma: A Guide to Understanding and

Treating Child Sexual Abuse, by Anna C. Salter.

Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Sage, 1995.

Treating Child Sex Offenders and Victims: A Practical

Guide, by Anna C. Salter, Thousand Oaks, Cal.:

Sage, 1988.

Working With Sex Offenders: Guidelines for Therapist

Selection, by M. O’Connell, E. Leberg, and C.

Donaldson, Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Sage, 1990.

Who Am I and Why Am I in Treatment?, by Robert

Freeman-Longo and Laren Bays. Vt.: Safer Society

Press, 1988.

Developing In-District Expertise lates a condition. The challenge is to increase the sanctions, focusing on supervision versus incarceration. Some sex offenders would prefer to violate and spend

time in prison than deal with intensive

supervision and mandated treatment.

Assessing the seriousness of a violation is critical. Consider the offender’s

offense pattern, risk factors, supervision

conditions, and the circumstances of the

violation, such as criminal behavior involving violence or victimization of children. Some infractions, such as a conviction of a new offense, demand revocation. Others may not warrant revocation but should be addressed directly by

way of a warning, increased supervision,

or discussion in treatment. At the same

time, for some offenders, a minor infraction may require immediate court action.

For example, a child molester who repeatedly frequents places where children

play should be removed from the community. ◆

(continued from page 19)