Recidivism rates of sex offenders managed under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003: an evaluation of actuarial justice.

According to the Dangerous Prisoners Sexual Offenders Act 2003 (DPSOA), an offender is considered 'dangerous' if there is an 'unacceptable risk' that he will commit 'serious sexual harm'. Current legislation operates within an actuarial justice framework, whereby increasing resources are spent on those considered at greater risk. There is limited research on the efficacy of this approach. The current study examines sexual recidivism rates of a sample of DPSOA offenders. Court files of 104 community-supervised dangerous sex offenders (M age = 50.7 SD = 10.8) were examined to determine date and type of re-offending. Recidivism was operationalised as time until arrest (for a sexual conviction/contravention). The overall level of sexual recidivism was low (7.69%). Kaplan-Meier analyses of survival curves identified no difference in rates between risk categories. While this likely suggests that they are not dangerous or an unacceptable risk, the strict conditions of supervision may be effective in preventing sexual re-offending. Further, limitations in empirically understanding the construct need to be considered.

Psychological and Legal Aspects of Dangerous Sex Offenders: A Review of the Literature.

The purpose of this article is to review legislation on 'dangerous sex offenders' critically. Most modern legislation determines an individual to be 'dangerous' if he or she is at unacceptably high risk of committing further sexual violence. While the decision is judicial in practice, clinical testimony is utilised to inform courts' decision-making. Dangerousness may be a normative (legal) construct, but it is reliant on clinical assessment. Offenders are not at risk only due to historical factors; the possibility of committing sexual violence in the future is likely affected by temporal factors such as response to therapy, substance misuse, and proximity to victims. It is not clear that mental illness would place an offender at risk, although certain personality disorders are considered to be risk factors. In reporting actual risk, clinicians need to consider a range of variables, and not exclusively use actuarial measures or unstructured clinical interviews.