Waar moet het heen?

Wat is het doel?
Waar moet het heen?
Wineke Smid
[email protected]
Het terugbrengen van het aantal slachtoffers!
VFS Symposium, Utrecht, Nederland, 22-01-2014
What works?
What works?
(Andrews & Bonta, 2010)
Risk, Need, Responsivity model (RNR)
  Interventie is een
van de manieren
  Dat werkt redelijk
goed (Meta-analysis Hanson,
Bourgon, Helmus & Hodgson,
2009)
Mits…
Wat is het risico van recidive eigenlijk?
  Risk: higher risk levels = higher
treatment levels (intensity, duration)
  Need: focus on criminogenic needs
(dynamic risk factors)
  Responsivity: tailor the intervention to
the learning style, motivation, abilities
and strengths of the offender
Hoe kunnen we het risico per
individu bepalen?
Veroordeelde zedendelinquenten uitgestroomd
gevangenis of tbs tussen 1996 en 2002, na
gemiddeld 12 jaar follow-up, aanklacht/
veroordeling voor een nieuw delict:
  15%, seksueel
  30%, seksueel en/of gewelddadig
Overrepresentatie van hoog risico: bovengrens
(Smid, Kamphuis, Wever, Van Beek & Hoebe, 2014)
1
Prediction of sex offender recidivism
(Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2009)
Instruments
d (95% CI)
N (k)
Actuarial
.67 (.63-.72)
24,089 (81)
Mechanic (SPJ added)
.66 (.58-.74)
5,838 (29)
plus outlier
SPJ (clinical judgment)
.59 (.43-.74)
.46 (.29-.62)
1,131 (6)
Unstructured clinical
.42 (.32-.51)
6,456 (11)
Hoe doen we het in Nederland met
betrekking tot het risicoprincipe?
Risk Assessment
High:
tbs (8%)
Moderate High:
Outpatient or
tbs (18%)
Low Moderate:
Outpatient (35%)
Low:
No (40%)
474 convicted sex offenders, discharged from prison
(25%) or inpatient treatment (100%) between 1996
en 2002 (Smid, Kamphuis, Wever & Van Beek, 2014)
Clinical treatment referral
versus
Static-99R risk levels
  Correspondence between clinical judgment
and empirical actuarial assessment is
insufficient
  About 1/3 of convicted rapists significantly
undertreated (high risk/no treatment)
  About 1/3 of convicted child molesters
significantly over treated (low risk/outpatient)
2
(intensive) treatment for low risk
offenders
  Wasting resources, no significant effect
on recidivism rates
  Indication of increased risk! (Bonta, Wallace-
(intensive) treatment for low risk
offenders
  Cut off from the protective normal
parts of life
Capretta, & Rooney, 2000; Lowenkamp & Latessa, 2002)
(intensive) treatment for low risk
offenders
Composition of treatment groups in
The Netherlands
  Contact with high risk offenders
(Smid, Kamphuis, Wever & Verbruggen, in press)
Composition of an intensive outpatient treatment
group during 12 yrs
  A large part of participants from lowest
risk category (40%)
  All risk levels were present at almost all
times
  No significant differences in treatment
length between risk levels
Distribution of risk levels in the
treatment group
Distribution of risk levels in
Static-99R norm group
high
moderatehigh
low
lowmoderate
No sign. difference = no selection!
3
Comparison of nine instruments
(Smid, Kamphuis, Wever, Van Beek & Hoebe, 2014)
Recidivism data from 397 convicted sex offenders,
discharged from prison (25%) or inpatient
treatment (100%) between 1996 en 2002
4
Hoe doet Nederland het met
betrekking tot het risico principe?
Hoe verder?
Standaard en leidend gebruik van
empirisch gefundeerde risicotaxatie
What works
(Andrews en Bonta, 2010)
Risk, Need, Responsivity model (RNR)
  Risk: higher risk more and more intensive
treatment
  Need: intervention focused on
criminogenic needs
  Responsivity: treatment adjusted to the
response style of the offender
Klassieke risicotaxatie:
 
 
 
Ook dynamische risicotaxatie is
correlationeel
Empirisch
Pragmatisch
Tellen
Op inhoudelijk niveau grote problemen, bijv. geen
overeenstemming over de aard van
 
 
 
Seksuele deviantie
Hyperseksualiteit
Seksueel sadisme
5
Dynamische Risicotaxatie
‘Theory driven risk assessment’ or
‘psychologically meaningful risk factors’ (Mann
en Hanson en Thornton, 2010)
Terugredeneren vanuit de empirisch
gecorreleerde risicofactoren
Dynamische Risicotaxatie
Per dynamische risicofactor:
 Definitie bepalen
 Meetbaar maken (non-offender normgroepen)
 Specifieke interventies
 Evaluatie effect interventie op risicofactor
 Evaluatie effect afname risicofactor op recidive
Overwegingen
Terugwerkend vanuit de risicofactoren:
  Is nog niet eenvoudig
  Onderzoek moet wel laten zien dat afname
in dynamische factoren ook leidt tot minder
recidive
  Leidt tot een causale theorie van seksuele
recidive
De definitie van seksueel delictgedrag
veranderd over de tijd…
… en wisselt per plaats: Age of
consent Europa
6
Age of consent VS
Theorievorming omtrent seksueel
delictgedrag
Interventie: risicofactoren, theorie van recidive
Preventie: etiologie, theorie van delictgedrag
Theorie van seksueel gedrag
Incentive theory of sexual motivation
(Bindra, 1974; Singer & Toates, 1987; Both, Everaerd &
Laan, 2007; Toates, 2009)
7

Download Report