Though well-intentioned, policies and practices regarding sexual offending that are advocated by lawmakers and their constituents all too often result in efforts that are counterproductive for the long-term safety of the community. Just as problematically, they fail to adequately take into account the needs of the victims of abuse and do not adequately promote actions that can help individuals who have abused avoid re-offending.
This webinar presentation and interview will focus on the existential lives of men and how much of men’s concerns can be understood through the functioning of the penis. Additionally, the abusive and problematic sexual behavior of some men will be examined through an existential psychotherapy lens with clinical strategies for treatment the ultimate goal. The webinar will begin with a brief overview of existential psychotherapy and the evolution of couples and sex therapies and explore how sexual dysfunction can result from trauma.
Promoting consensual sexual relationships can be a challenge, particularly in the context of working with clients who have a history of problem sexual behaviors. Bringing discussions of healthy sexuality and positive, non-coercive, and pleasurable sexual expression to our clients necessitates candor and a comprehensive sexuality education approach. Using a public health model which incorporates sexual health, sexual pleasure, sexual wellbeing, and sexual justice (Mitchell et al., 2021) and the Circles of Sexuality model (Dailey, 1981), we can offer our clients an opportunity to develop the tools they need for consensual sexual and intimate relationships. This session will
It is critical that clinicians are skilled in group facilitation principles and techniques, given that treatment of individuals who sexually abuse is typically group-based. In this webinar, Jerry Jennings and Steven Sawyer will discuss the essential qualities of effective treatment groups and group facilitators. They will discuss research, methods, and techniques relevant to group therapy and client motivation. They will then answer your questions about how to improve your clinical practice by facilitating cohesive and dynamic groups.
In this brief presentation, David Thornton will talk about the need to use multiple static actuarial instruments in carrying out psychosexual assessments to aid sentencing, prioritize treatment approaches, or in the context of potential SVP commitment.
In this webinar, Gwen, David, and Sharon will talk about the journey leading to the development of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors against Sexual Offending (SAPROF-SO), Version 1 and why they believe best practices should include consideration of both risk factors and strengths-based, protective factors.
In treatment geared towards men who have committed sexual offenses, we often talk about cognitive distortions and how they led to their crimes. However, it may be helpful to consider whether their “distorted” thinking is not an aberration, but rather an integral part of how manhood and masculinity are defined in our societies. We will explore the implicit and explicit instructions men receive from birth, how the ideals set forth are attainable by only a few, and how the rest of us manage this “failure.” We will discuss the impact of masculinity in treatment, how we can work to redefine it for better mental health, and how we can prevent further sexual abuse along the way.
The jury is back in on what kinds of approaches can help reduce crime, make our communities safer, and build better lives along the way. Newly published findings report that 45% of all state prison admissions in the United States are due to violations of probation or parole—by way of new offenses or technical violations. Community corrections has become a paradox, not only failing in its mission to divert and remediate, but making matters worse.
The presence of people who pose a risk to the community has, understandably, been a concern to communities across time, place, and culture. What can communities (and the concerned professionals within them) do to best reduce the likelihood of harm? In which directions does the evidence point?