|
|
Overcoming Denial Among Sexual Offenders
With the Use of the Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest and Polygraph
Examinations
by Gerry D. Blasingame,
MA, LMFT
Program Director, Sexual Offender Rehabilitative Treatment Program
Redding, CA
One of the initial barriers to effective assessment, treatment and
community management of sexual offenders is that of overcoming denial.
Recent publications and professional presentations have come under
fire for supporting the idea that offenders who are "in denial"
should be treated or understood from a reframed paradigm (Northey,
1999; Steen, 1999). Community based programs need to have established
protocols of criteria for accepting clients into their programs,
with admission of offenses typically seen as a primary criteria.
Regardless of how the treatment programs define admission, some
level of ownership of the sexually offensive behavior is assumed
to be a necessary component of effective treatment (ATSA, 1997).
It may be inevitable that some deniers will be ordered into community
based treatment. Frequently, these individuals are persons released
from prison, or who are involved in child protective services cases
where there is insufficient case information to generate a criminal
charge. In such community based settings, overcoming denial is relevant
from the initial assessment, throughout treatment and continuing
during supervision (ATSA, 1997). This raises the question of how
can clinicians break through denial in these clients, so as to enable
moving on with the formalized sexual offender specific treatment.
Psychological testing has had limited success in defining specific
categories of sexually deviant interests ( Marshall & Hall,
1995; Schlank, 1995). Clearly the penile plethysmograph has been
the most useful in assessing the sexual arousal patterns of offenders,
although not without its challenges ( Maletzky, 1995). Polygraphy
has also been promoted as another tool for use in the process of
assessing and treating sexual offenders (Blasingame, 1998). The
Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest has been promoted as an alternative
to the penile plethysmograph (Blasingame, 1996). In recent years,
the number of clinicians using the Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest
has grown. Additionally, the Abel Assessment is beginning to develop
a supportive research base regarding its reliability and validity
(Johnson & Listiak, 1999; Letourneau, 1999).
The present author directed a pilot project involving paroled sexual
offenders. All had been convicted of sexual abuse of at least one
child, with criminal counts ranging from one to five. Within the
first week of enrollment into the treatment program, each client
was interviewed and completed the Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest,
and was forewarned that he would be required to submit to a full
history polygraph examination subsequent to completion of the assessment
phase of the treatment program.
Two of the original twelve parolees were in complete denial when
they presented for the intake interview, and two admitted only that
they had been charged for molestation (but made no real admissions).
After completion of their Abel Assessments, review of the victim
information in their charges was found to be congruent with the
sexual interest categories identified by the Abel Assessment. Three
of the four admitted to their offenses when confronted with this
information and the reminder that there would be a polygraph examination
soon. The fourth client was returned to prison on a parole violation
within two weeks, making him unavailable for follow-up. Polygraph
examinations were subsequently administered, with two of the clients
requiring two opportunities to polygraph, and the third client three
opportunities to polygraph, before obtaining a truthful rating regarding
the disclosures in their sexual histories. The three had been charged
with a total of three victims, and while their original admissions
after the intake was at one (1) victim/charge, their final admissions
totaled nineteen (19) victims with approximately two-hundred and
fifty (250) acts committed against those victims, all in the age
and gender categories identified on the Abel Assessment for Sexual
Interest.
While the Abel Assessment had accurately identified the age and
gender of the offenders' offense categories, it was not considered
as proof of victimizing, nor could it have determined how many victims
each offender had, given their position of denial on self-report.
However, the objective data obtained from the clients' viewing of
the slide stimuli was able to be used in challenging the offenders'
position of denial. This, in conjunction with the pressure of the
polygraph examination, lead to subsequent admissions of numerous
victims and deviant acts committed. These subsequent disclosures
were reviewed at the point of the polygraph examinations, with the
eventual outcome being verified by a truthful rating from the polygraph
examiner.
The small number of subjects in the present data makes it unreasonable
to generalize this information to all offenders in denial. However,
the Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest was able to accurately identify
the ages and genders of victim preferences of the offenders who
were in denial. The clinical polygraph examinations verified the
specific number of victims and offenses. This approach lends significant
support to the combination of the Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest
and clinical polygraph examination in the process of breaking through
the denial of sexual offenders.
References
Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA;1997) The
ATSA Practitioner's Handbook. ATSA, Beaverton, OR.
Blasingame, G. (Spring, 1996). Identifying the sexual interests
of sexual offenders: A look at the Abel assessment. California Coalition
on Sexual Offending Newsletter.
Blasingame, G. (January, 1998).Suggested guidelines for the clinical
use of polygraphy in community-based sexual offender treatment.
Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, Plenum Press,
New York, vol.10-1
Johnson, M., and Listiak, A., (1999). The measurement of sexual
preference- A preliminary comparison of phallometry and the Abel
assessment, in B. Schwartz, ed. (1999), The Sexual Offender: Theoretical
Advances, Treating Special Populations and Legal Developments, Volume
3, ; Civic Research Institute; Kingston, NJ
Letourneau, E. (October, 1999). A Comparison of the Penile Plethysmograph
and Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest on Incarcerated Military
Sex Offenders. Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers annual
conference, Orlando, FL.
Marshall, W. L., and Hall, G.C.N. (1995) The value of the MMPI in
deciding forensic issues in accused sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse:
A Journal of Research and Treatment, July, vol. 7-3.
Maletzky, B (1995) Stimulus materials and the protection of victims.
Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment , April, vol.
7-2.
Northey Jr., W. (July/August 1999). The politics of denial: A postmodern
critique. Offender Programs Report , Civic Research Institute, Inc.,
Kingston NJ, vol. 3-2.
Schlank, A. (1995) The utility of the MMPI and the MSI for identifying
a sexual offender typology. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research
and Treatment, July, vol. 7-3.
Steen, C., (May, 1999). Treating Deniers Plenary address, California
Coalition on Sexual Offending, second annual conference; Long Beach,
CA.
|
