Forensic Psychology For Dummies (127 page)

The change in lifestyle that’s so central to participating in a therapeutic community is particularly useful for people whose problems centre on substance abuse. For this reason, these communities are often a framework for those institutions that provide rehabilitation for celebrities whose careers are being destroyed by their drug addiction or alcoholism.

Therapeutic communities, however, are very expensive to run (which is why they work well for the addicted rich and famous). They require special buildings and many dedicated staff. Impoverished prison systems rarely have the resources to maintain such institutions, despite any benefits they may have.

Deciding what interventions work

In the UK and elsewhere, a concerted effort has been made to evaluate various forms of intervention, which is much more difficult than you may think.

One crucial question is what criterion of success to use. Some experts prefer to look at whether a person’s attitudes or behaviour in prison have changed subsequent to participation in an intervention. The problem with this approach, however, is that offenders may just discover how to adopt a therapeutic vocabulary to describe their actions and get to know what sort of opinions they’re supposed to express, without ever fully embracing the attitudes involved. This problem leads to the possibility that their behaviour changes back to their criminal ways when they leave the institution.

Other evaluations focus on offending activity after the intervention. But again, the question arises of what exactly should be monitored – reduction in criminal activity or total cessation? And over what time period? Should it cover serious crimes, arrests or all illegal activity?

The possibility also exists that interventions make offenders more aware of the risks of getting caught, and so they don’t reduce their criminality but merely their coming to the attention of the police. They learn how to talk their way out of situations where they’re challenged about their crimes or even just learn more in the group sessions about how others got away with their offending.

A somewhat different approach to considering these interventions with offenders, is to make sure that at least they’re professionally conducted and follow appropriate guidelines so that programmes are as effective as possible. This approach led to the accreditation of programmes in the UK to ensure that required standards are maintained as follows:

A clear model of change:
An explicit model is necessary to explain how the programme intends to bring about relevant change in offenders; that is, specifying how it’s going to do this and what’s achieved at each stage of the programme. The model must describe why this combination of targets and methods is likely to work with the offenders selected.

Selection of offenders:
Clear specification is required of the types of offender for whom the programme is intended and the methods used to select them. The programme has to identify the characteristics of the offenders selected, such as the nature of their offences that the programme is tackling, risk, motivation, learning style, gender and race. The programme must have ways for dealing with offenders who have started and are then found to be unsuitable.

Targeting a range of dynamic risk factors:
A range of risk factors known to be associated with re-offending must be addressed in an integrated manner within the programme. The programme needs to focus overtly on the factors that are open to change – the dynamic risk factors I consider in Chapter 10.

Effective methods:
Evidence needs to show that the treatment methods used are likely to have an impact on the targeted dynamic risk factors. For example, CBT methods work well with most types of offenders, including sex offenders (check out the earlier section ‘Using cognitive behavioural methods’). Structured therapeutic communities are helpful in changing the lifestyle of people with drug or alcohol addictions or other patterns of antisocial behaviour (see the earlier section ‘Treating in therapeutic communities’).

Skills orientated:
The programme needs to facilitate the learning of skills that support involvement in legitimate pursuits, including literacy, numeracy and general problem solving, as well as how to find work and make and keep relationships.

Sequencing, intensity and duration:
Length of programme needs to match risk. The amount of treatment provided must be linked to the needs of programme participants, with the introduction of different treatment components timed so that they complement each other. Offenders with a high-fixed risk (for example, they have a history of antisocial behaviour) need programmes long enough to change established attitudes and habits. For lower-risk offenders, a shorter programme may be sufficient.

Engagement and motivation:
The programme must be structured to maximise the engagement of participants and to sustain their motivation throughout. Staff need to be positively committed to the programme.

Continuity of programmes and services:
Clear links are necessary between the programme and the overall management of the offender, both during a prison sentence and in the context of community supervision. Relevant information needs to be shared. Key agencies concerned with protection of the public are to be kept informed, to aid work with victims and to monitor offenders.