Learning From Consumers of Mandated Sex-Offending Programs: "It's Not Treatment, I Wish It Was."

Abstract

The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore clients' perceptions of sex-offending treatment. The sample included 291 people required to register as sex offenders in the U.S. who answered an open-ended question in an online survey asking them to describe their positive and negative experiences in mandated treatment. Using qualitative analysis, three overarching themes (with several subthemes) were identified: (1) positive and (2) negative treatment experiences and (3) the affiliation between the criminal justice system and clinical services. Experiences in sex offending treatment were viewed as positive when clients had opportunities to learn about themselves, experience group cohesion, build a positive alliance with a caring therapist, learn tools and skills for emotional health, explore the roots of offense behavior, and create healthy life plans to reduce risk for re-offending. Negative themes emerged when treatments were viewed as coercive, confrontational, or demeaning; when therapists seemed inexperienced or unqualified; and when seemingly outdated or unscientific methods were emphasized without explanation or dialogue. The entanglement between court-mandated treatment providers and the criminal justice system led to concerns about confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and role ambiguity. Drawing upon literature related to therapeutic alliance, trauma-informed care, and Risk-Need-Responsivity models, we offer suggestions for integrating client feedback to improve treatment responsivity and prevent re-offending.