Written Answers. - Sexual Offenders.
Thomas P. Broughan
Ceist:
94
Mr. Broughan
asked the
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
the number of sex offenders released from custody in 1998 and 1999 having served sentences; the number of these offenders who had completed a dedicated sex offenders treatment course; the steps, if any, he will take to ensure that all sex offenders have access to these courses; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
[2514/00]
I welcome the opportunity to respond on this matter because I believe a considerable degree of misunderstanding prevails in relation to the management of sex offenders in custody. The reality is that many sex offenders in custody are either unsuited or are unwilling to participate in intensive group programmes like the course at Arbour Hill referred to by the Deputy due to insufficient motivation, emotional immaturity or otherwise.
All convicted sex offenders, regardless of the institution in which they are held, are invited to apply for inclusion in this Arbour Hill programme All applicants are interviewed by the programme delivery team to determine suitability. Where the number of suitable applicants exceeds the number of places available on the programme, priority is given to offenders whose release dates are closest.
I have asked the Director General of the Irish Prisons Service to ensure that the treatment of sex offenders throughout the prison system is given priority attention. I have since been assured by him that this matter is being given personal attention by him. Given that there are more sex offenders in custody in the Curragh then any other prison – over 90 – except Arbour Hill, efforts are being concentrated there at present.
Public discussion and commentary about this issue frequently implies there is only one form of rehabilitation programme in place for sex offenders in Irish prisons and that it reaches a very limited number of prisoners annually. This is incorrect.
There are actually four forms of direct therapeutic intervention available to sex offenders within the Irish prison system at present. All four are aimed at enabling such offenders gain some measure of control over their personal tendencies towards offending behaviour. The first intervention method is individual counselling from my Department's psychology service and from the probation and welfare service. This is a largely demand led service to individual prisoners who ask for help. The second intervention is a multi-disciplinary thinking skills group work programme which focuses on issues such as anger management, evasion of personal responsibility and relapse prevention. This programme is in place in Cork Prison and Arbour Hill Prison since I998. The third programme which tends to receive most media coverage is an extremely intensive offence focused group work programme which is available in Arbour Hill Prison and which is delivered by officers of the probation and welfare and psychology services of my Department. The fourth intervention which perhaps deserves greater acknowledgement involves the psychiatric service which provides extensive support to prisoners in this category. This is done on a sessional basis, and an all-out basis as well as in response to particular individual crises. Of the 103 sex offenders released on completion of their sentences during 1998, 11 had completed the specialised sex offender group treatment programme in Arbour Hill Prison.
Eighty sex offenders were released during 1999. Of these, five had completed the Arbour Hill group programme prior to their release. In addition many of those released would also have undergone individual counselling either from my Department's psychology service or the probation and welfare service. These would also have had access to the thinking skills programme which targets offending behaviour and relapse prevention and about which I will have a further word to say later in this reply. I am also advised that the prisoners who were released in the period in question included as well as those who participated in the intensive group programme referred to, prisoners who decided not to participate in this programme, prisoners who after professional assessment were deemed not to be suitable to participate in it or where it was determined that it was beyond their ability to participate in it.
A working group chaired by the Prisons Service Director General and comprising representatives of all the relevant agencies and prison disciplines is currently overseeing the introduction of a number of interventions for sex offenders in the Curragh. Prisoners and staff at the Curragh have all now been notified of the inception of the new prisoner programmes there, one exclusively involving specialist staff as in the intensive Arbour Hill programme and the other programme on the same pattern as the thinking skills programmes in Cork and Arbour Hill which are delivered by multi-disciplinary teams including specially selected and trained prison officers.
The first step being taken involves the expansion of generic therapeutic services in the Curragh. The probation and welfare service and the psychology service of the Department are recruiting extra staff at present and it is intended that the Curragh will have priority in the allocation of resources. Already a member of the psychology service has taken up an assignment to the Curragh in recent days. He will be joining a probation officer who has also been assigned to duties there in recent months. They will be joined in their work with offenders at the Curragh by further members of their services as the "roll out" of support services for sex offenders at the prison continues.
The sequence which will be followed at the Curragh will be as follows; analysis of response by individual prisoners and staff to circular from Governor as to their willingness to participate in the new programme, February 2000; selection and training of local staff in all disciplines and services in thinking skills programme and selection of first prisoner participants, and; delivery of first modules of thinking skills programme, late summer 2000; roll-out of intensive sex offenders treatment programme later in the year 2000 drawing particularly on successful offender participants in the thinking skills programme at the Curragh.
The thinking skills course referred to above was introduced in Arbour Hill and Cork prison early in 1998. It is designed to target a range of offenders including sex offenders, particularly with a view to motivating the latter group to engage in the most intensive programmes. The course is run by multi-disciplinary teams, including prison officers, probation and welfare staff and teaching staff under the guidance of my Department's psychology service. The skills taught in this programme include general strategies for recognising problems, analysing them and considering non-criminal alternatives, how to consider the consequences of their behaviour – to think before they act, how to go beyond their own view of the world and consider the thoughts and feelings of other people and how to develop the ability to control their own behaviour and avoid acting impulsively. This programme is considered by the director general and his advisers to be the preferred first line of approach to rehabilitating sex offenders in custody as in many cases it builds up their frequently low personal motivation to address offending behaviour in depth.
When the intensive sex offenders treatment programme is introduced in the Curragh during the current year it will be operated by the probation and welfare service and psychology service in the same mode as the current Arbour Hill programme.
I have also been advised by the director general that he has deputed a senior member of his transition team at prison governor level and another colleague to investigate the possibility of extending the range of multi-disciplinary group work programmes with sex offenders here based on successful interventions which have been developed in prisons in Scotland and England in recent years. This particular study is not expected to be completed until early next year.
The ultimate objective for the Irish Prisons Service is to develop and put in place a wider range of rehabilitation programmes for sex offenders than are currently available, to ensure they operate on independently accredited selection, training and service methods and that they reach every sex offender in custody who is willing to participate at some level in their personal rehabilitation and relapse prevention. The latter point about willingness by prisoners convicted of sex offences to co-operate in personal rehabilitation programmes is significant because it is the experience in many prison jurisdictions including Ireland that a significant percentage of prisoners decline the opportunity to partake in this work. Compulsion is not a realistic or indeed legal option in such cases.
Finally I would like to make it known that a major review of the effectiveness of the intensive Arbour Hill sex offender programme is currently under way between the psychology service of this Department and the Department of Psychology, University College, Dublin.
