Sex Offenders Cohort: Implications and Needs
The final release of people, who had been charged with committing sexual abuses, from prisons is a challenging procedure that can create some negative influences on the psychological stability of the offenders. The global society adopted a prejudiced and cautious attitude towards individuals, who have ‘sexual offend’ inscribed into their profile characteristics.
The history of sexual abuse provides numerous examples of cruel recidivist acts, which fuels the community’s dissatisfaction with this type of criminals reentering a society. Indeed, according to the statistic data, approximately 60 % of former sexual offenders return to prisons in the first six months (Center for sex offender management, 2007). Therefore, it is a primary task of every community to create the favorable conditions for the criminals’ reentry so that to preclude the subsequent incidents.
This work discusses the program of active integration of the sexual offenders into the American society as well as addresses their rights and priorities on the platform of the U.S. legal citizenship. According to the psychologists, a prevailing number of sexual abuse criminals suffer from harsh emotional disorders after the incarceration.
The scientists recommend treating the offenders, who strive to enter a civil life, through the rehabilitation-oriented methods rather than punishment (Rogers & Ferguson, 2011). This approach matches the needs of sexual abusers since they strive to be guided through a process of renovating their civil, moral, and cultural rights for becoming the parts of their community.
The Major Community Placement Pathways for Sexual Offenders
The usage of successful community placement pathways for the former sexual offenders contributes to their harmonious reintegration into the U.S. community. Thus, according to the study of recovery in forensic psychiatry individuals, 47 % of female and 52 % of male criminals, who were treated through protection-driven programs made a successful reentry of community (Viljoen, Nicholls, Greaves, de Ruiter, & Brink, 2011).
The appropriate level of the identified criminals’ support in the USA may be sustained through the reliance on the forensic assertive community treatment (FACT) programs that provide the former prisoner with psychiatric and mental health assistance, as well as accommodation and meal services (Cuddeback, Pettus-Davis, & Scheyett, 2011).
The method works on the basis of volunteering practices as well as state-funded projects and is represented by the so-called rehabilitation asylums. The major strength of the usage of this method is its unprejudiced orientation. However, one should consider certain limitations to the FACT, which are the manipulative usage of asylums and detachment from the real-life environment.
Interactive Community Evaluation: Sexual Abuse Orientation
The fundament of efficient sexual offenders’ rehabilitation combines the blending theoretical conceptions with strategic interactive treatment (Settles, 2009). The latter aspect dwells on the work of Interactive Community, which targets the issues of both community staffing and individual support. The global initiative reviews the matter of social welfare, disabilities, and labor distribution.
Since it maintains an elaborate program of both group and personal assistance, the Interactive Community can regard the issue of reentering as well. Due to Daly (2008), the U.S. rehabilitation centers do not provide any separate programs for the integration of sexual offender into the civil community. Nevertheless, the American Interactive Community works along several dimensions of rehabilitation standards support.
First, it improves the interaction between the patients. Second, it stipulates the engagement activities, which help the former prisoners to distance themselves from criminal affairs and start working for their community’s well-being. Finally, it maintains the psychological programs development, which helps the sexual offenders to stabilize their emotional health.
References
Center for sex offender management. (2007).
Cuddeback, G., Pettus-Davis, C., & Scheyett, A. (2011). Consumer’s perceptions of forensic assertive community treatment. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 35(2), 101-109.
Daly, R. (2008). Treatment and reentry practices for sex offenders. New York: Vera Institute of Justice.
Rogers, D., & Ferguson, C. (2011). Punishment and rehabilitation attitudes towards sex offenders versus nonsexual offenders. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 20(4), 395-414.
Settles, T. (2009). Restorative reentry: A strategy to improve reentry outcomes by enhancing social capital. Victims & Offenders, 4(3), 285–302.
Viljoen, S., Nicholls, T., Greaves, C., de Ruiter, C., & Brink, J. (2011). Resilience and successful community reintegration among female forensic psychiatric patients: A preliminary investigation. Behavioral Sciences & Law, 29(5), 752–770.