The level of treatment available for sex offenders is grossly inadequate and must be made much more widely available if society is to be given greater protection from sex crimes, according to the Irish Penal Reform Trust (IPRT).
The director of the trust, Dr Ian O'Donnell, yesterday rejected "the widespread misconception that sex offenders are untreatable and certain to reoffend". He said the reality was that treatment could work "and it must be made widely available if we are serious about creating a safer society".
Publishing a document called The Treatment of Sex Offenders the IPRT, which campaigns for reform of the penal system, said there were 250 convicted sex offenders in Irish prisons at the end of May 1997. This constituted one in eight of the male sentenced prison population. In addition it pointed out that many sex offenders were not apprehended or convicted in the first place.
Treatment should be long-term, preventive and provided to all offenders, according to the trust. At the moment a sex-offender treatment programme is available only in Arbour Hill prison and caters for a maximum of 10 inmates each year. "If every eligible prisoner requested a place on this course it would take until the year 2023 to deal with those currently in the system," the trust says.
Mr Paul Murphy, a clinical psychologist at the Department of Justice, told a press conference yesterday that international studies showed that sex offenders who received treatment had a 15 to 20 per cent reduction in their likelihood of reoffending. The rate of recidivism varied from up to 60 per cent of men identified as high-risk down to 8 to 10 per cent of those at the lower end of the risk scale.
Such a reduction in recidivism amounted to enormous saving in terms of human suffering. Treatment was not a panacea, but was an effective way of contributing towards community safety.
The trust made four key recommendations:
The introduction of a sex-offender treatment programme to the Curragh prison.
An end to the blanket denial of temporary release to sex offenders.
Post-release supervision and support.
Co-ordination of prison treatment with community-based programmes.
The trust maintains that criminal justice initiatives such as the introduction of a register of sex offenders will do little on their own to reduce sex crime.
It points out that "few sex offenders are apprehended and convicted. They are not usually strangers who must be identified and registered so that the community can protect itself. They are often well known to victims and their families and are sometimes in positions of trust. Registration will not protect society from such abusers".
It says that about one in three cases of child sex abuse are perpetrated by adolescents, some of whom have been abused themselves.
The emphasis should be on long-term treatment and prevention, the trust says, and should include the following priorities:
Prevention of child abuse.
Treatment of those at risk of becoming abusers.
Treatment of sex offenders in prison and under supervision in the community.
Supervision of those who have rejoined society after serving a prison sentence for a sex offence.
The trust said it supported the idea that when sentencing sex offenders, consideration should be given to incorporating a post-release period involving mandatory support and supervision as an integral part of the sentence.
It also called for the development of a greater variety of community-based treatment programmes for sex offenders who do not go to prison.