Bruce Cameron MS, LPC-S, LSOTP-S Dallas, Texas (214) 431-2032
Is it true that Federal Sex Offenders recidivate less than their state counterparts?
If so, it may be because the vast majority of cases we receive are from Federal Probationary child pornography offenders. These offenders are under constant supervision and intense sex offender treatment requirements.
Monitoring and supervisory measures for the treatment of recovering sex offenders
Offenders are under routine supervision and submit themselves to clinical polygraphs regularly. They are placed on GPS monitoring for periods if there is evidence of any risk factors. The officers assigned to supervise federal offenders have specialized experience and extensive training in working with sex offenders.
Requirements for Treatment Specialists
Treatment specialists must be ATSA (Association for Treatment of Sexual Abusers) members and are required to follow ATSA guidelines and hold frequent meetings with federal probation officers. Additionally, many of the USPO offenders have transitioned from BOP (Bureau of Prisons) regional correctional centers while receiving sex offender treatment and other services.
What makes Federal Treatment Different?
The level of service being provided to Federal Probation Offenders and the application of stringent Containment Model supervision and treatment make the difference. Our state-level cases at the clinic receive less supervision and must pay for services independently. Lastly, federal probation offenders often have very long periods of supervision vastly exceeding those of state sex offenders. Federal offenders are often required to undergo polygraphs at a minimum of once a year or more often keeping their behavior under close supervision.
An offender who may have completed his treatment is often referred back to treatment if polygraph results show evidence that he has returned to use of erotica or adult pornography.
Federal probation districts differ in the level of service provided to child porn offenders and offenders convicted of solicitation of minors. The very low rate of recidivism for these cases that we see for sex offender treatment is difficult to compare against State cases because the variables aren’t the same; most notably the index offense history. It is worth noting that the Andrews and Bonta RNR model directly applies to the Federal Probation sex offender cases after the offender has received treatment. The close level of supervision and treatment for a while warrants a change to the RNR model.
