Sex Offender Re-Offense Risk Assessment Videotape Training Program

Reviews and Testimonials

Written by William Burke, Southeastern Offender Assessments, published in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, September 2001, pgs. 965-966.

A clinician who uses sex offender risk assessment would have to agree that Sex Offender Re-Offense Risk Assessment is necessary reading and viewing. The series of seven videotapes includes presentations by the developers of the most recent risk assessment instruments to date. The training program also includes a training manual that provides the PowerPoint presentations used by the presenters.

Three case descriptions are presented involving a 33-year-old rapist named Ray, an 18-year-old child molester named Tim and a 38-year-old child molester named Sam. These cases are used as examples for scoring several of the instruments presented.

Karl Hanson reviews the meta-analytic studies of Hanson and Bussiere (1996 and 1998) from which the RRASOR and Static-99 are derived. Hanson offers a detailed explanation of the development of these instruments, their applicability, strengths, and weaknesses. It appears that Hanson must have run out of time, as the SONAR information is in the text but not fully addressed in the video. Hanson guides us through the case description vignettes with the RRASOR and Static-99.

Perhaps the most important remarks of the video series are Thomas Grisso's presentation on the ethical issues regarding sex offender re-offense risk assessment. Although Dr. Grisso's presentation is part of the videotape series, he is not mentioned anywhere in the text. Grisso expressed concern that actuarial scales may not meet the standard for ethical application of testing instruments. He also asks that we consider what type of testimony is warranted regarding re-offense risk assessment. Grisso points out that many new testing instruments lack inter-rater reliability, do not have manuals, and do not meet the criteria for acceptance in court. He cautions against relying too heavily on these instruments until further research and validity studies are completed.

Douglas Epperson presents the development and utilization of the Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool-Revised (MnSOST-R). Epperson also refers to the three case descriptions to exemplify the use of the MnSOST-R. A copy of the MnSOST-R is provided as Epperson walks us through the scoring protocol regarding the case descriptions.

Robert Prentky's presentation of the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol (J-SOAP) includes scoring protocols and the developmental constructs of the instrument. Prentky relates the usefulness of the J-SOAP while cautioning that the present predictive validity is based on a recidivism rate of 4% after a 12-month follow-up period. More lengthy longitudinal studies are needed to increase the predictive validity of the J-SOAP.

David Thornton explains the development and use of the Structured Risk Assessment (SRA). The SRA approach draws heavily from the Static-99 and PCL-R items in compiling data to classify sex offenders by potential risk. He has found that combining static information with indications of deviance divides offenders into two strictly different groups. The low risk group was found to have a recidivism rate of 2% whereas the high-risk group was found to have a much higher rate of 43%. Thornton also addresses the rarely mentioned effect of treatment on reducing risk assessment ratings.

Dennis Doren promotes the use of multiple instruments to include deviance and violence. His focus is on the likelihood of re-offending versus predicting who will re-offend. He states that he believes actuarial scales indeed under-predict recidivism. Doren reviews the relative statistical support for the various scales used in risk prediction. He also gives examples of offenders. Included is a draft of a position paper regarding the accuracy of risk assessment instruments within the context of sex offender civil commitment evaluations.

Robert Hare presents the theory of psychopathy and the utilization of the Hare PCL-R for sex offender recidivism. Hare warns of the impact that psychopaths have on the general population and the inability of other psychological measures to identify them. Hare's survival analysis addresses sexual and violence recidivism rates. His presentation of the SPECT study of psychopaths is fascinating and supportive of the idea that psychopaths may represent another taxon.

Vernon Quinsey reviews the developmental construct of the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) and the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG). Scoring and interpretation of scores are covered for both instruments. Both instruments are provided with detailed scoring instructions.

The panel discussion moderated by Anna Salter appears to address only a few specific issues. It is this writer's opinion that the panel discussion is anti-climatic when compared to the individual presentation.

Overall, the video series is extremely helpful in understanding and using the various risk assessment instruments. This writer can recommend this video series as mandatory viewing in programs for continuing education credit given by licensing or certification agencies dealing with sex offender risk assessment in each state.

Order Sex Offender Re-Offense Risk Assessment Videotape Training Program

Back to top