AK- Alaska's prisons and sex offender therapy

9-3-2008 Alaska:

Alaska's former Governor, Frank Murkowski, cut all in-prison treatment programs (See "Cutting sex offender treatment is cutting public safety." reprinted at end of this post), previous to the cut Alaska had a very LOW sex offender recidivism rate.

The U.S. Supreme court in Smith v. Doe 538 U.S. 84 (2003), the entire discussion, during oral argument, on recidivism of sex offenders was based on the State of Alaska:

MR. ROBERTS: Here the legislature had a solid basis, a basis that this --

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. ROBERTS: -- Court has recognized, as recently as last June in the McKune case, for the conclusion that those convicted have a high rate of recidivism.
.......

QUESTION: May I ask you a question about that? I -- I understand that the -- the percentage of sex offenses in Alaska with children is extremely high, and what is -- has been the effect of this scheme if it's been employed? Has it had some effect there --

MR. OLSON: I --

QUESTION: -- in reducing the number of sex offenses?

MR. OLSON: I do not know the answer to that, and perhaps Mr. Roberts does.

But what this is -- and I think this is a proper way to think of this statute -- in connection with a class of offenses, where the -- where the rate of recidivism is significantly higher -- as this Court has held very recently -- than any other crime, people are asking their government please allow us to know when we have someone in our neighborhood. When we -- when we're hiring a new --
.......

QUESTION: Let me ask you to comment on -- on one thing --

MR. THOMPSON: But these are unique statutes.

QUESTION: I'm sorry. One -- one thing that makes it more difficult perhaps than it might be to see your side of the argument -- go back to the Chief Justice's question. What if they put every criminal conviction on the Internet?

Well, there's one difference between the situation that would obtain then and the situation that -- that you're objecting to here. That is, that there is not the same high recidivism rate for crimes generally that there is, apparently undisputedly, for sex crimes in the State of Alaska. And therefore, when you earlier made the argument that there is something very -- something less than credible in the State's claim that it's merely trying to inform the public when, in fact, it makes no differentiation between current dangerousness and un-current dangerousness, the answer is there is -- or an answer is -- there is a very high recidivism rate, and that high recidivism rate does support the claim that there is something that -- that it is credible to say that by publishing this information, we are simply trying to inform people of a probability of dangerousness, leaving them to do what they want.

What is -- is there any -- do you have any response to this claim that the high recidivism rate itself supports the argument that, in fact, this is nothing but a safety information kind of measure, whereas broadcasting all criminal convictions would not be justified as having a good fit between the object and what the State was doing? Do you have any response to that?

MR. THOMPSON: I certainly don't profess to be an expert on the statistical recidivist rates. I think that is --

QUESTION: You don't dispute the State's recidivism figure, do you?

MR. THOMPSON: Well, actually vis-a-vis the brief that was submitted by Massachusetts as an amici in this, sets forth a very different pattern of recidivist rates. I mean, when we say recidivist rates, are we talking about repeat sex offenses? Are we talking about repeated crimes? I mean, there are all different ways in which --

QUESTION: They're making specific -- they're making specific claims. They -- they set out specific percentages with respect to Alaska. Are you disputing those figures or not?

MR. THOMPSON: We do.

QUESTION: You do. All right.

MR. THOMPSON: We do, but I don't think we did it directly in our brief, but I think other -- other briefs --

QUESTION: That's -- that's the trouble. Yes.
......

Now, TalkLeft has an interesting discussion on "Palin , Prisoners and the Alaska Prison System" which gets into what happened to sex offender therapy in their prisons. The following is the portion regarding sex offender treatment and the new Governor, Palin from TalkLeft:

Joe Schmidt heads up the Alaska Department of Corrections in her (Palin) administration. The previous Governor, Frank Murkowski, cut off almost all funds for treatment in prison, including for sex offenders, obviously a terrible idea. Instead he decided to focus on post-release monitoring. The ACLU sued on behalf of three sex offenders.

Joe Schmidt admitted that cutting off treatment programs (which a court had ordered for sex-offenders) was the wrong approach. Gov. Palin tried to restore some funds for treatment programs in her budget this year. The legislature refused her funding request for sex offender treatement in prisons.

In her most recent budget, Gov. Sarah Palin included money to restart in-prison treatment, but the money for a sex offender program was taken out by the Legislature, Schmidt said.

"We asked for it this year. We are likely to ask for it next year," he said. Jason Brandeis, staff attorney for the AkCLU, said his agency is willing to wait and see what Schmidt can accomplish before embarking on a class-action suit on behalf of untreated prisoners.

While it speaks positively of Palin in terms of her intent, it's also an indication to me (TalkLeft) that she doesn't have much clout with her own legislature. That's a skill that is sorely needed in an executive. ....

Given the prior LOW recidivism rates, and proof that therapy reduces recidivism for sex offenders, it makes no sense to me why the current legislature would not approve funding for in-prison sex offender treatment.

Often legislatures simply ignore the evidence.

eAdvocate

=====================================

Cutting sex offender treatment is cutting public safety

May 5, 2003 Alaska


Gov. Murkowski proposes cutting the Sex Offender Assessment and Treatment Program at Eagle River's Meadow Creek Correctional Center. This cut is not solely economic. It reflects administrative philosophy and values.

The public has a right to know some facts about the program and to have input in the legislative process before this budget is finalized.

The Department of Corrections is taking rehabilitation out of its institutions. It will not require offense-specific treatment in custody. It will release more sex offenders without treatment. It will change laws that previously required incarceration. Murkowski is jeopardizing public safety.

Incarceration alone is not enough. Community-based treatment alone is not enough because it cannot provide the sustained structure, intensity, and daily feedback of a locked, residential community.

The SOATP works with a specialized psychology, not a popular psychology. It requires clinical structure and a team approach to facilitate it. The program is not a self-improvement experience, in which inmates would collect certificates on subjects that have no relevance to the reasons they are incarcerated. Jobs, education, and religious activities alone are not treatment programs.

The SOATP uses a focused definition of rehabilitation, which is offense-specific and victim-centered. It trains offenders to self-manage their risk factors, which have contributed to their assaults.

Therapy with the offender is done from the point of view of the victim. The program's mission has been to reduce harm to victims. Victims' present and future safety, health, and security are what public safety is ultimately about. Victims and their families have had the opportunity for many forms of access to this program, including a direct intervention, where appropriate.

The effectiveness of the program is measured by reductions in the numbers and seriousness of a new sexual offense plus the length of time before a repeat offense. Victims, families, and numerous offenders have gained benefit from all contacts with the program, regardless of the offender's discharge status. The program is intensive and extensive.

The state has not done a complete recidivism study, comparing all discharges from the program, 1987 through the present, using information from national databases. Murkowski is making cuts without accurate outcome results.

The Initial Recidivism Study by DOC and UAA in 1996 is the only follow-up study to date, covering 1987 to 1995. The men who completed their program did not sexually reoffend in Alaska.

A new database was begun in 1998. Since 1998 there have not been enough program discharges in the community to evaluate recidivism.

Public safety is not simply putting someone into confinement. It is best assessed by what an inmate does outside of confinement. Treatment is the only way for an offender to learn to manage himself outside of prison.

The program more than pays for itself with the prevention of a handful of new offenses a year. The program asserts that the sex offender who does this treatment is less likely to have another investigation, arrest, court, re-incarceration, and civil lawsuit. It reduces the costs of trauma to victims.

Members of The Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, an international organization, have repeatedly found the program to be state of the art.

Anchorage and all Alaska have a high rate of rape. The public should be looking for solutions to this problem. The problem will not go away. The Program has answers. The state should support a specialized, professional program that saves money in the long run and prevents more human tragedy. Murkowski should do more for public safety, not less.

Martin Atrops is a clinical psychologist with the Meadow Creek Correctional Center's Sex Offender Assessment and Treatment Program. ..News Source.. by MARTIN ATROPS