Long Term Recidivism Rates Among Individuals at High Risk to Sexually Reoffend

Preventive detention provisions in the US and Canada assume we can identify, in advance, individuals at high risk for sexual recidivism. To test this assumption, 377 adult males with a history of sexual offending were followed for 20 years using Canadian national criminal history records and Internet searches. Using previously collected information, a high risk/high need (HRHN) subgroup was identified based on an unusually high levels of criminogenic needs (n = 190, average age of 38 years; 83% White, 13% Indigenous, 4% other). A well above average subgroup of 99 individuals was then identified based on high Static-99R (6+) and Static-2002R (7+) scores. In the HRHN group, 40% reoffended sexually. STATIC HRHN norms overestimated sexual recidivism at 5 years (Static-99R, E/O = 1.44; Static-2002R, E/O = 1.72) but were well calibrated for longer follow-up periods (20 years: Static-99R, E/0 = 1.00; Static-2002R, E/O = 1.16). The overall sexual recidivism rate for the well above average subgroup was 52.1% after 20 years, and 74.3% for any violent recidivism. The highest risk individuals (top 1%) had rates in the 60%-70% range. We conclude that some individuals present a high risk for sexual recidivism, and can be identified using currently available methods.

Dignity, Social Reintegration of Prisoners, and the New Penal Power: European Human Rights, Experiences of Belgian Prisoners, and Professional Practices

Over the last 30 years, prisoners' dignity and fundamental rights have increasingly been protected by European human rights bodies such as the European Court of Human Rights and the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. This protection is aimed particularly at the traditional power relations between prisoners and uniformed staff. More recently, social reintegration of prisoners has also been recognized by these European human rights standards as a fundamental element of human dignity and an equally important aim of imprisonment as retribution and deterrence. However, it is also accepted that some offenders may be too dangerous to be returned back to society. Psychiatric/psychological assessments are a major element in this decision-making. This "new penal power" receives much less attention in human rights protection. This article compares three intertwining perspectives on this issue: the European human rights perspective on dignity and social reintegration; the experiences and mental suffering of Belgian prisoners who find themselves being stuck in prison as a result of structural problems in the risk assessment and risk management practices; and the professional perspective on how professional standards and good practices based on scientific insights might alleviate some of these threats to human dignity.

Stable-2007 and indeterminate detention

Public safety is the primary reason to assess future risk in men with a history of sexual offending. Over the last twenty-five years our knowledge of, and ability to assess, dynamic risk factors in men with a history of sexual offending has meaningfully improved, but understanding, adoption, utilization, and reasonable implementation of the fruits of this new knowledge is not universal. This article presents a brief overview of the development of dynamic risk assessment for men with a history of sexual offending, primarily following the work of R. Karl Hanson and his associates. This is followed by a review of a meta-analysis on the reliability and validity of STABLE-2007 and two other independent studies that provide useful ancillary information. Utilizing STABLE-2007 with men faced with, or under sanction of indeterminate detention is the focus of this paper and we will review how mental health diagnoses affect recidivism assessment, some concerns about implicit assessment biases, how to employ stable dynamic assessment in secure facilities, address treatment implications resulting from dynamic assessment, and present ideas for future research. I will close by presenting nine (9) arguments why using STABLE-2007 is recommended practice with indeterminate detention populations.