|Titel:||Resource-oriented Risk Assessment and Intervention in Sexual Offenders||Sonstige Titel:||Ressourcen-orientierte Risikoeinschätzung und Intervention bei Sexualstraftätern||Sprache:||Englisch||Autor*in:||Yoon, Dahlnym||Schlagwörter:||Sexualstraftäter; Risikoeinschätzung; protektive Faktoren; Intervention; SAPROF; sexual offender; risk assessment; protective factors; intervention; SAPROF||Erscheinungsdatum:||2013||Tag der mündlichen Prüfung:||2013-08-02||Zusammenfassung:||
Despite the great development in the field of sex offender rehabilitation in the last two decades, the effectiveness of intervention programs is still a controversially discussed issue. Starting with a meta-analysis on the efficacy of rehabilitation services (Andrews, Bonta, & Hoge, 1990), the most influential theory of offender rehabilitation has been developed over the next years: the Risk, Need, Responsivity Principles. Whereas the RNR model has been focused on the effectiveness of the intervention by matching the level of risk and service, a recent development has been influenced by positive psychology (Seligman, 2002). Constructs related to pro-social behavior such as resilience (Rutter, 1985) or protective factors (Costa, Jessor, & Turbin, 1999; Jessor, 1991) were adapted to forensic mental health research. The next rehabilitation theory has been suggested as consequence: the Good Lives Model (see Chapter 1 for detailed description of these theories). Forensic questions used to focus primarily on prediction of recidivism. However, with the improvements in research and practice, those questions have become more sophisticated requiring a more detailed view on individuals and their possibility to be reintegrated into the society. Although the field consensus on the importance of applied forensic assessment as an integral part of the intervention process is given, the status quo in the clinical practice does not seem to be mature enough to reflect the theoretical development (see Chapter 6 for elaboration of current state of research regarding offender rehabilitation). In spite of the changes in the paradigm, the most standardized assessment tools commonly used are merely focused on risk factors. If both recidivism prevention and offender rehabilitation should be the goal of the penal system, a risk-only assessment is not sufficient. This type of assessment can lead to a biased assessment and distorts the view of resources that may be important for the intervention (de Vogel, de Ruiter, Bouman, & de Vries Robbé, 2009; Rogers, 2000). However, empirically based researches on protective factors in adult sexual offender populations are rare. Moreover, most studies are missing a clear operational definition of protective factors but have been investigating the factors with negative links to recidivism risk, though empirical data on the relationship between risk and protective factors in adult sexual offenders is not much available (Brown, Harkins, & Beech, 2011; Ullrich & Coid, 2011; Willis & Grace, 2008). The variety of the terminological use of protection needs a differentiated conceptualization for a better clinical risk communication and further research. Furthermore, these factors identified are not well investigated in terms of their reliability and validity. The need for improving theoretical background and empirically investigating those factors is undeniable.
The main purpose of this dissertation is to bridge the gap between the theories and practices in the field of applied forensic assessment.
|URL:||https://ediss.sub.uni-hamburg.de/handle/ediss/5239||URN:||urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-65515||Dokumenttyp:||Dissertation||Betreuer*in:||Wetzels, Peter (Prof. Dr.)|
|Enthalten in den Sammlungen:||Elektronische Dissertationen und Habilitationen|