Rehabilitation Strategies and Risk Assessment

Criminal history is a static factor that cannot be changed.
The criminal justice system may exhibit bias, which can affect risk assessment tools based on criminal history.

Various rehabilitation approaches exist.
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT):
- Commonly used for mental health problems.
- Effective for rehabilitation programs.
- Includes CBT, ACT (Acceptance and Commitment Therapy), and DBT (Dialectical Behavior Therapy).
- Aims to change thoughts and behaviors.
Behavioral Therapy:
- Focuses on core behavior approaches.
- Used to shift unwanted behaviors, such as sexual attraction to children.
Family-Centered Therapy:
- Targets youth offending by involving families.
- Aids overwhelmed families in managing young people's behavior.
Educational and Vocational Programs:
- Vocational programs include work programs.
Culturally Specific Programming:
- Examples include Maori and Pacifica focused units in New Zealand prisons.
- Rangatahi courts or matariki courts use restorative principles.
- Yarning circles for Aboriginal and Indigenous populations in Australia incorporate traditional cultural practices.

Developed in the 1990s in Canada and now used internationally.
Based on three main principles:
- Risk Principle
- Needs Principle
- Responsivity Principle
Adherence to these principles increases the likelihood of successful behavior change.

Match the intensity of treatment to the offender's risk level.
- Low-risk offenders receive low-intensity treatment.
- High-risk offenders receive high-intensity treatment.
Intensity refers to:
- Frequency of sessions (e.g., three times a week for high intensity).
- Depth of engagement, ranging from basic literacy to deep exploration of personal history and motivations.
High-intensity treatment involves sharing deep, personal information.
High-intensity treatment should be reserved for high-risk offenders due to:
- Resource allocation
- Counterintuitive effects: high-intensity programs can increase reoffending in low-risk individuals.
The contamination effect occurs when low-risk individuals are exposed to antisocial attitudes in high-intensity programs.
Research indicates that low-risk offenders in high-intensity programs have a higher reoffending rate compared to those in minimal treatment. For instance, low-risk offenders receiving minimal treatment had a 16% reoffending rate, while those in high-intensity treatment had a 22% reoffending rate.
In contrast, high-risk offenders benefit from intensive treatment, with reoffending rates decreasing from 80% with minimal treatment to 56% with intensive treatment.

Forensic psychologists spend significant time on risk assessment.
Used throughout the criminal justice system to determine:
- Bail eligibility
- Sentencing (community vs. prison)
- Prison security level
- Appropriate treatment
- Parole eligibility
- Public protection orders (indefinite imprisonment for high-risk individuals)
- Extended supervision orders (ESOs) which cost approximately $400,000$ per year.
Historically, risk assessment was based on subjective judgment, which proved unreliable.
Release of individuals from psychiatric hospitals in the 1960s demonstrated the inaccuracy of subjective risk assessment; only 2% of those deemed high-risk violently reoffended.

Remove clinical judgment by using standardized items related to offending.
Example: Static-99, used for sexual offenders.
- Includes factors like age at release (older age correlates with lower risk) and criminal history.
- Assigns scores based on these items and calculates a risk category.
- Having a male victim increases the risk score, although the reason is not well understood.
These tools improve risk assessment accuracy to about 70%, comparable to mammography for detecting breast cancer.
A potential issue is that bias in convictions can affect these tools.
These tools primarily use static risk factors that cannot be changed, which limits their usefulness for treatment planning.

Risk factors that can change.
Third-generation risk assessment tools use both static and dynamic risk factors.
Dynamic factors provide clinical value by indicating what to target in treatment (e.g., substance abuse).
Central Eight risk factors are often used as dynamic factors, while criminal history serves as a static factor.

Treatment should target the causes of offending (criminogenic needs).
Criminogenic needs are factors that predict reoffending and can be changed.
Mental health issues, such as anxiety or depression, are not typically targeted unless they impede engagement in treatment.
Walter and Andrews advocate for high-quality services for other needs, even if they are not the primary focus of correctional rehabilitation.
Criminogenic factors must:
- Predict reoffending in research studies.
- Be changeable.
- Show a reduction in reoffending when changed.
Examples of criminogenic needs:
- Substance abuse
- Poverty
- Lack of employment
- Social and economic status
Addressing whanau (family) is crucial, but current practices often focus solely on the individual.
Victim empathy and denial of offense do not have a clear relationship with reoffending and should not be primary targets in treatment.
Lack of remorse does not predict reoffending.

Sexual deviancies (e.g., arousal to children or rape scenarios).
Emotional identification
Antisocial orientation (beliefs supporting sexual offending).
General self-regulation difficulties, including hypersexuality.
Lack of motivation for treatment is common, but offenders may become intrinsically motivated over time if the treatment is appropriate.