The Essential Handbook of Offender Assessment and Treatment / Edition 1 available in Paperback
The Essential Handbook of Offender Assessment and Treatment / Edition 1
- ISBN-10:
- 0470854367
- ISBN-13:
- 9780470854365
- Pub. Date:
- 10/24/2003
- Publisher:
- Wiley
The Essential Handbook of Offender Assessment and Treatment / Edition 1
Buy New
$97.75Buy Used
$18.92
-
$18.92
-
SHIP THIS ITEM
Temporarily Out of Stock Online
Please check back later for updated availability.
-
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9780470854365 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Wiley |
| Publication date: | 10/24/2003 |
| Edition description: | Revised ed. |
| Pages: | 320 |
| Product dimensions: | 6.70(w) x 9.60(h) x 0.70(d) |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
The Essential Handbook of Offender Assessment and Treatment
John Wiley & Sons
Copyright © 2003
Clive R. Hollin
All right reserved.
ISBN: 0-470-85436-7
Chapter One
To Treat or Not to Treat? An
Historical Perspective
Clive R. Hollin
University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
INTRODUCTION
We are passing from the sphere of history to the sphere of the present and partly
to the sphere of the future (Vladimir I. Lenin, What is to be Done?).
There is, it seems, one statistic that can be predicted with a high degree of accuracy:
each year crime figures are released; each year the number of recorded
crimes will have increased compared with previous years. In England and Wales,
for example, if we look back over the past few decades, the number of recorded
crimes has inexorably risen, hitting milestone after milestone with monotonous
regularity. In the 1950s there were 500 000 recorded crimes, a figure that steadily
rose, million by million, over the following decades. Thus, the Home Office
Statistical Bulletin dated 24 September 1996, notes that: "5.1 million offences
were recorded by the police in the twelve months to June 1996, anincrease of
0.4 per cent from the previous twelve months" (p. 1).
Now, there are many reasons to be cautious about crime figures, official or
otherwise (Bottomley & Pease, 1986; Coleman & Moynihan, 1996), but the point
to be made is that crime is a significant issue in contemporary society. The significance
of crime is at least fourfold: first, there are victims who suffer personal
harm or corporate loss; second, there are offenders and their families who may
lead impoverished and unhappy lives; third, there is the cost to the public purse
in running the criminal justice system and offering health care for victims; fourth,
there are the general costs of insurance, repairs, and replacement of lost goods.
There is nothing new about crime. Throughout history all societies have experienced
the unwanted effects and costs of crime. It is therefore reasonable to
assume that crime will always be part of our society; crime is not going to disappear
from our everyday lives. If we accept this assumption, and it is one that
is difficult to resist, then the crime problem can be seen as a management
problem: as a society, how are we best to contain and reduce the harm and the
costs of crime?
The quotation at the head of this chapter offers a structure within which the
question of management of crime can be considered. In seeking to understand
the current moral, philosophical, legal, political, and practical complexities associated
with the treatment of offenders, we need to consider first the sphere of
history.
THE SPHERE OF HISTORY
If we look to the sphere of history in western society, it is plain that for many
centuries the solution to the crime management problem lay in the hands of the
rich and powerful. It was royalty, landowners, judges and the like who, in arbitrary
fashion, dispensed penalties for crime. Inevitably, the punishments for crime
were severe, typically involving public humiliation, mutilation, burning, and execution:
in England in the mid-1800s there were more than 100 offences that were
punishable by the death penalty. The beginnings of the changes that heralded the
development of the current legal system took place in the mid-1700s with the
advent of classical theory.
Classical Theory
The roots of classical theory as an influence in law are traced in many texts (e.g.
Roshier, 1989; Russell, 1961; Siegal, 1986) to the influence of two key figures: the
Italian nobleman and economist, Cesare Beccaria (b. 1738), and the British
philosopher, Jeremy Bentham (b. 1748). At a time when punishment for crime
was inevitably severe in the extreme, both Beccaria and Bentham argued the case
for the principle of utility.
The principle of utility, in which Beccaria's economic influence is clear, has its
basis in a hedonistic view of human behaviour.The assumption underpinning this
theoretical position is that our actions are intended to avoid pain and gain pleasure.
It follows that crimes are committed when the criminal judges, making a
rational choice of their own free will, that he or she is able to act in a criminal
manner, avoiding pain and gaining reward. A system of criminal law, therefore,
must aim to make the individual's interests the same as those of society at large;
that is, neither the individual nor other members of society will want a crime to
be committed. Thus, criminal law must seek to prevent crime by deterring both
the individual and society from committing criminal acts by ensuring that the
pain of sanctions outweighs the pleasure of a successful crime. Indeed, Bentham
held that punishment should seek to achieve four outcomes:
1. To prevent crime.
2. If prevention is not achieved, then to convince a criminal to commit a less
serious crime.
3. To reduce the harm inflicted during a crime.
4. To prevent crime as cheaply as possible.
The practical implications of a utilitarian philosophy were to affect profoundly
the legal system across nineteenth-century Europe. Contrary to the belief of
the day, utilitarianism argued that excessive punishment is both unnecessary and
counter-productive in terms of preventing crime. The level of punishment, it is
argued, should be in proportion to the severity of the crime. The reasoning behind
this position is plain. If all crimes carry an equally harsh penalty, then there can
be no selective, differential effect of punishment. For example, if child abuse and
murder were both punishable by the death penalty, then logically the child abuser
would have little reason not to kill their victim to prevent disclosure of the abuse.
In other words, matching the crime to the punishment creates the possibility that
punishment can act as a deterrent to criminal acts.
Thus, classical theory offers an explanation for criminal behaviour, and proposes
a system based on punishment by which crime can be controlled. There are
two key assumptions inherent within classical theory: first, that we exercise free
will in making choices about our actions; second, that we act in a rational manner
in making those choices.
The legacy of classical theory is clearly seen in the modern day legal systems
of Europe and the United States. The principle of mens rea, guilty intent, lies
close to the concept of free will. The dispensation by contemporary courts of
punishments that seek to fit the crime, thereby acting as a deterrent to further
offending, clearly owes much to utilitarian thinking. Thus, classical theory, utilitarianism,
and crime prevention through punishment are powerful historical
factors in shaping the way society both conceptualizes crime and develops strategies
to manage the problems presented by criminal behaviour.
The most obvious challenge to the assumptions inherent in classical theory
arose as the new discipline of Psychology began to take shape.
Psychological Theory and Crime
A traditional starting place in the history of theoretical developments within
mainstream psychology is, of course, the psychoanalytic theory developed by
Sigmund Freud. Tracing the broad historical lineage of psychology after Freud
and psychodynamic theory, we see the influence of Ivan Pavlov and B. F. Skinner
in the development of learning theory; Raymond B. Cattell and Hans Eysenck
in the articulation of personality theory; the movement from traditional learning
theories to social learning and cognitive-behavioural theory, perhaps best typi-
fied by the work of Julian Rotter and Albert Bandura; and, most recently, the
advent of cognitive psychology as seen in the writings of John Anderson and
Ulric Neisser.
Now, the point to make about most of these theories is that they seek to offer
accounts of human action that are not always compatible with classical theory.
To take the obvious and extreme example, B. F. Skinner's radical behaviourism
seeks to account for human behaviour in terms of a genotype-environment interaction
and has no time for the ghost in the machine of free will.
As psychological theories unfolded, there were two further important developments:
first, theories became the basis of therapies; second, the theories began
to be applied to the phenomenon of criminal behaviour.Thus, to follow the broad
theories outlined above, we can chart the unfolding of therapies within the tradition
of psychoanalysis and psychodynamic psychotherapy; then behaviour
modification, behaviour therapy, and cognitive-behaviour therapy; and, most
recently, cognitive therapy. Of course, there are many variations on themes and
the distinctions often become blurred in practice, but most psychologists would,
I think, recognise these broad churches of therapy.
The application of psychological theories to offer an account of criminal
behaviour similarly follows an historical route that closely tracks theoretical
development. Psychodynamically orientated accounts of criminal behaviour are
to be seen, for example, in Alexander's use of the concept of the reality principle
to explain criminal behaviour (Alexander & Healy, 1935; Alexander & Staub,
1931). Similarly, Healy and Bronner (1936) applied the psychoanalytic concept
of sublimation to offer an account of criminal behaviour. Most famously, and
perhaps most influentially, John Bowlby's writings on material deprivation and
delinquency are a clear attempt to apply psychodynamic thought to explain
offending (Bowlby, 1944, 1946).
The influence of learning theory is clearly to be seen in Differential Association
Theory (Sutherland, 1947), and in Differential Reinforcement Theory
(Jeffery, 1965). Bandura (1973) applied his own social learning theory to aggressive
behaviour, while Ronald Akers uses social learning theory in its fullest
sense to develop a theory of crime (Akers, 1977; Akers, Krohn, Lanza-Kaduce
& Radosevich, 1979). The application of personality theory is clearly seen in
two traditions: Eysenck most famously developed the theme of personality and
crime (Eysenck, 1977), while Blackburn's experimental and theoretical work
clearly makes a major contribution within this approach (Blackburn, 1968,
1986).
The impact of cognitive psychology is seen in two conceptually distinct
research camps. The first approach is to be found in studies that are concerned
with social cognition and social information processing in offenders. A body
of evidence has accrued on the relationship between social cognition, such as
empathy, social problem solving, moral reasoning and social perception, and
offending (Ross & Fabiano, 1985). Similarly, Kenneth Dodge has developed a
comprehensive model of social information processing as applied to understanding
delinquent behaviour (e.g. Crick & Dodge, 1994).Allied to this approach
is the influential research by Raymond Novaco on the role of anger in violent
crime (e.g. Novaco, 1994). Dodge's work is concerned with the interaction
between socio-cognitive development and the aetiology of child and adolescent
problems, including delinquent behaviour. The exploration of the overlap
between this work and the findings of the longitudinal research, as exemplified
by the highly influential work of David Farrington (e.g. Farrington, 1995), is a
project waiting to be completed.
The second cognitive approach, portraying the offender as a rational decision-maker
(e.g. Cornish & Clarke, 1986), is interesting for two reasons. First, this
approach applies a particular branch of cognitive research, decision-making,
to understanding criminal behaviour. Second, the view of the offender as a rational
decision-maker stands comparison with the classical view of the offender
acting of their own free will. Indeed, the whole approach of rational decision-making
has been seen as heralding the advent of neo-classical criminological
theory.
Applying Theory: The Rise of Rehabilitation Through Treatment
Not content with the development of psychological explanations of criminal
behaviour, psychologists were eager to turn theory into practice. As the development
of treatment methods followed theoretical advances in psychology, so a
succession of therapeutic approaches was applied to work with offenders. For
example, working within a psychoanalytic tradition, August Aichhorn (1925-1955)
articulated a theory of latent delinquency. Working from this position, in
which delinquent behaviour is seen as the product of a failure in psychological
development, Aichhorn developed therapeutic methods to work with young
offenders. Throughout the years up to the 1970s, treatment with offenders was
dominated by methods following psychodynamic principles, with counselling and
group therapy particularly widely applied. In addition, educational programmes
proved popular during that period, a trend still evident today (e.g. Schweinhart,
Barnes, & Weikart, 1993).
While treatment within a psychodynamic tradition continues today (e.g.
Cordess & Cox, 1996), the decades since the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s have seen
an upsurge in offender treatment programmes based on behavioural and
cognitive-behavioural principles (e.g. Hollin, 1990; McGuire, 1995; Nietzel, 1979;
Ross & Fabiano, 1985). Thus, certainly by the late 1950s and into the 1960s, a
position had been reached in which psychological theories had been applied to
criminal behaviour, and associated treatments were relatively widely used for a
range of offender groups.
Conflict Between Criminal Justice and Treatment
It is during the 1960s that the first contemporary signs of unease can be detected.
As Jeffery (1960) notes, there are three apparent assumptions inherent within a
treatment philosophy; that is, determinism, differentiation, and pathology. Each of
these three assumptions sets advocates of treatment in potential conflict with a
criminal justice system that is configured on principles stemming from classical
theory.
First, determinism holds that factors outside of the individual's control-be
they biological, psychological, social factors, or, more likely, some combination of
all three-bring about the individual's behaviour. Second, the logical conclusion
from a deterministic position is that criminals are different from non-criminals.
The origin of this differentiation may be biological, psychological, or social, but
the position remains that criminals are in some way different from people who
are not criminals. Third, the notion of pathology, the logical next step from differentiation,
is that the difference between criminals and non-criminals is one
of abnormality. The cause of the abnormality may be individual to the offender
(i.e. biological or psychological) or social through learning from an abnormal
environment.
Continues...
Excerpted from The Essential Handbook of Offender Assessment and Treatment
Copyright © 2003 by Clive R. Hollin.
Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
About the Editor.List of Contributors.
Preface.
Foreword by David P. Farrington.
Chapter 1: To treat or not to treat? An historical perspective (Clive R. Hollin).
PART I: RISK ASSESSMENT.
Chapter 2: Assessing violence risk in mentally and personality disordered individuals (Christopher D.Webster and Gerard Bailes).
Chapter 3: Sex offender risk assessment (R. Karl Hanson).
PART II: APPROACHES TO TREATMENT.
Chapter 4: Behavioral approaches to correctional management and rehabilitation (Michael A. Milan).
Chapter 5: Programming in cognitive skills: The reasoning and rehabilitation programme (David Robinson and Frank J. Porporino).
Chapter 6: Family-based treatments (Cynthia Cupit Swenson, Scott W. Henggeler and Sonja K. Schoenwald).
Chapter 7: Delinquency prevention programs in schools (David LeMarquand and Richard E. Tremblay).
Chapter 8: Skills training (Clive R. Hollin and Emma J. Palmer).
Chapter 9: Anger treatment with offenders (Raymond W. Novaco, Mark Ramm and Laura Black).
PART III: ASSESSMENT AND TREATMENT OF OFFENDERS.
Chapter 10: Adult sexual offenders against women (William L. Marshall).
Chapter 11: The assessment and treatment of sexual offenders against children (Tony Ward, Stephen M. Hudson and Thomas R. Keenan).
Chapter 12: Firesetters (David J. Kolko).
Chapter 13: Assessment and treatment:Violent offenders (Devon L. L. Polaschek and Nikki Reynolds).
Chapter 14: Offenders with major mental disorders (Sheilagh Hodgins).
Chapter 15: Offenders with personality disorders (Mary McMurran).
Chapter 16: Property offences (James McGuire).
Epilogue.
Index.