Sexual Offenders' Perceptions of Correctional Therapy: What Can We Learn?

Experiences of engaging in psychotherapeutic interventions for sexual offending behaviours: A meta-synthesis

“…(Drapeau, Korner, Granger, & Brunet, 2005, p. 103) Participants argued that therapy would only be beneficial if an individual admitted he required help and was motivated to change (Colton, Roberts, & Vanstone, 2009;Drapeau et al, 2004;Garrett, Oliver, Wilcox, & Middleton, 2003;Wakeling et al, 2005). Nevertheless, many offenders acknowledged their engagement was due to such reasons as receiving shorter sentences or avoiding prison and being released earlier (Connor, Copes, & Tewksbury, 2011;Drapeau et al, 2004;Williams, 2004). For individuals who were engaging despite limited motivation, a sense of going through the motions was evident (Drapeau, Korner, Granger, & Brunet, 2005;Drapeau et al, 2004).…”

“…The establishment of an effective therapeutic relationship fostered motivation and promoted honesty, thereby having a direct effect on addressing offending behaviours (Grady & Brodersen, 2008;Williams, 2004). Offenders felt they engaged best when therapists were empathic, patient, positive, genuine, caring, trusting, respectful and authoritative (Drapeau, Korner, Granger, & Brunet, 2005;Garrett et al, 2003;Grady & Brodersen, 2008;Williams, 2004). Non-judgmental and accepting therapists, who strived towards a holistic understanding of an individual rather than focussing solely on previous offences, reduced resistance and allowed participants to express themselves more freely (Drapeau, Korner, Granger, & Brunet, 2005;Grady & Brodersen, 2008;Williams, 2004).…”

“…I think that therapy has a lot to do with the provider, if not everything to do with the provider'' (Williams, 2004, p. 155); this was true for both group and individual approaches. The establishment of an effective therapeutic relationship fostered motivation and promoted honesty, thereby having a direct effect on addressing offending behaviours (Grady & Brodersen, 2008;Williams, 2004). Offenders felt they engaged best when therapists were empathic, patient, positive, genuine, caring, trusting, respectful and authoritative (Drapeau, Korner, Granger, & Brunet, 2005;Garrett et al, 2003;Grady & Brodersen, 2008;Williams, 2004).…”

Attitudes about rehabilitating sex offenders: Demographic, victimization, and community-level influences

“…First, it is possible that the lack of faith in rehabilitation potentially stems from a lack of acceptance among experts about appropriate treatment strategies for sex offenders (Eccleston & Ward, 2006;Williams, 2004). Debate exists among practitioners about which treatment programs should be used for sex offenders.…”

Autoethnography in Offender Rehabilitation Research and Practice: Addressing the “Us vs. Them” Problem

“…In the broad field of psychotherapy there is an accumulating literature suggesting that the therapeutic alliance accounts for a substantial portion of overall treatment outcome variance compared to specific intervention techniques (Horvath, 2001;Horvath & Symonds, 1991;Lambert & Barley, 2001;Martin, Garske, & Davis, 2000). However, very little attention has been given to the therapeutic alliance within offender psychotherapy, including practitioner characteristics and styles, although it is becoming recognized that these process issues are of primary importance to psychotherapeutic outcome (Drapeau, Korner, & Brunet, 2004;Marshall & Serran, 2004;Serran, Fernandez, Marshall, & Mann, 2003;Williams, 2004). Despite the widespread use of a confrontational style in treating both substance abusers (Miller & Rollnick, 2002) and sex offenders (Marshall, 1996) and the common belief in strict adherence to correctional treatment manuals, it is a positive therapeutic process with sufficient flexibility that appears to be central to effective rehabilitation efforts (Serran et al, 2003).…”