1

(2000)

37 301-330

---

Clinicians' Attitudes and Suggestions toward the Sex Offenders Treatment

Program

--- A Comparative Research Between Taiwan and Michigan

Min-chieh Lin

Address: 1515 Spartan Village Apt C

East Lansing, Michigan 48823 U.S.A.

TEL: 002-1-517-3552770

*
Min-chieh Lin. School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University, E. Lansing,
48823, U.S.A. linminch@pilot.msu.edu

Dr. Sheila Maxwell Dr. Andrew Barclay

Michigan Department of Corrections Dr. John Rushbrook
 2

( 42 91 )

33

()
()
(
)()
()

()

sex offender, sex offense, rapist, prison, sex offender treatment, treatment
program, comparative study between Taiwan and America

Clinicians' Attitude toward the Treatment of Sex Offenders and

Their Suggestions
---A Comparative Research Between Taiwan and Michigan

Min-chieh Lin*
Ph.D. Program in School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University

ABSTRACT

This study compared the clinicians of sex offender treatment programs in

Taiwan and Michigan (42 and 91, respectively) in terms of their clinical experience,
their attitudes toward the treatment of sex offender, and the interactions between them,
as well as their supportiveness and suggestions on the current treatment program.
From the valid responses (both were 33 responses), the important findings are
as the following: (1) Four factors are considered as factors of clinical experience--
attending length, numbers of clients, treating term, and treating form. All of them
reach significant difference between Michigan and Taiwan. Even treating term and
treating form are also significantly different between northern and southern Taiwan. (2)
None of the three kinds of clinical experience can significantly predict the three kinds
of perception of treating sex offenders in Taiwan. But in Michigan, the extensive
clinical experience (including the length of attending treatment and the number of
clients) can significantly predict sex offender deserving to be treated (slope is sever
negative) and also the familiarity of treatment technique (the slope is positive). (3)
The average degree of support to the current treatment program in Michigan is
significantly stronger than that of Taiwan. (4) In Michigan, the main reasons for
nonsupport current program are treatment is too short and too structural; In Taiwan,
they are only doing the diagnosis instead of treatment and not every sex offender
needs to be treated. (5) Regarding clinicians suggestions for the current treatment
program, though the priority is somewhat different, the three most favorite
suggestions in both areas are continuing community treatment program after being
paroled, providing training to clinician.

*
Correspondence may be addressed to Min-chieh Lin, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State
University. Or send e-mail to linminch@pilot.msu.edu
 4

---

()

(Relapse Prevention)

()

()

1
(rapist)(child molester)
 5

()

(1) (

(2) (

(3)

()

()

1996 5.55 8.38

(dark figure)

1996 36.1 57.0 6.5
1995 37.1 62.0 4.3
1990 41.2 78.0 2.9
1985 36.6 67.6 4.0
( 1/100,000)
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Report

()

( / ) ( / )

1995 18.71% (7271/ 38854) NA

1994 14.48% (5633/ 38896) 1.06% (380/ 36043)
(Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S.
Department of Justice) Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics

1994
36043 2.11% (1995)
(1997)
()
1.06%

()

1.

(Freeman-Longo, Bird,

Stevenson, & Fiske, 1995)

(Relapse Prevention RP) Safer

Society Foundation

(Freeman-Longo, et al., 1995)

Bandura(1977)(

)""

""(affective behavioral chain)"

" (reoffense cycle)

 7

Laws,1989; Pithers, &

Cumming, 1995 Association for Treatment of Sexual Abuser

(ATSA)(1999)

(cognitive behavioral

therapy with relapse prevention approachCBT/RP)

Paul Gendreau (1996)

(effective intervention with offenders)

(cognitive

behavioral therapyCBT)

(internal self-management)

(external supervsion)(relapse

cycle)(Pithers, & Cumming, 1995)

(educational module)

Meichenbaum (1985)( Ellis, 1973 Beck,

1963)

(1) (conceptual phase)

(2)

(skill-acquisition and rehearsal phase)

(3) (application and follow-through phase)

Meichembaum, 1985; Corey, 1996

CBT/RP CBT (Steele, 1995)

(1) Hall (1995) 1989 12

meta-analysis(effect size

Cohen, 1988) .12"" (Cohen

.30 .30-.20.20-.10 Dush (1987).33

(placebo effect)

.33-1.01.0-1.5 1.5 )

(19% vs. 27%)2

(2) Gallagher, Wilson, Hirschfield, Coggeshall, & MacKenzie (1999) 25

meta-analysis

)(augmented behavioral treatment)

7% 5% 0.43 0.47( 10 3

)() 1%

(3) (Vermont)McGrath, Hoke, & Vojtisek (1998)

122 1984 1995

(CBT)CBT

2
Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Lalumiere (1993)
(clinical significance)(statistical significance)
clinical significance Jacobson, & Truax (1991)
 9

RP O Richard Laws, Janice Marques

William Pithers Atascadero Laws Marques

Pithers Vermont

RP Safer Society Foundation

Robert Freeman-Longo Pithers RP

(Laws,1989)

RP

(1998)

(1997)

2. (1):

MichiganNew YorkKansasPennsylvania Michigan

(2)

Oregon, Massachusetts, California3

Atascadero State Hospital

(Steele, 1995)

3
Oregon 1995 Acastedero (1999)
()
Bridgewater Treatment Center (Freeman-Longo, Personal communication, June16,
1999)
 10

(Marques, Day, Nelson, & West, 1994)

3. Michigan

4(Bureau of Health Care Service in

Michigan Department of Corrections, 1993)

(1)( MMPI-II

)5

(2)

()

(3)

Multiphasic Sex InventorySone Sexual Questionnaire, Life History

Questionnaire MMPI-II()(

2000)

(4)

()

()(

(Relapse prevention)(

Multiphasic Sex Inventory Sone Sexual Questionnaire Life History

Questionnaire MMPI-II )

4
1998

5

()
 11

Safer Society Foundation( Vermont )

(5)

(Muskegon State Prison, Level

I&II)6

Resident Unit Manager

AA (Alcoholic Anonymous ) NA Narcotic

Anonymous )

()

Muskegon

Safer Society

6
Sourcebook of Criminal Justice 1996 22
(Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice)
 12

Foundation

4.

(Jackson State Prison)

1998 3

(Sexual Violent Predator Act, SVPA)7

civil commitment (

Inciardi, 1996, p621

(Christoff, 1998)

1999 2

(Megan's Law)8

()

7
() 1997 6

(Kansas v. Hendricks)
8
(registration)(notification)
1998
2 (remain intact)Michigan registration notification
1999 2 website (
www.mipsor.state.mi.us)( 48823)
 13

1.

1993 11

1994 1

()

( 231 )( 235 )

(1995)

2.

()

()

 14

()

87

1137

595 542 ()

56 (1995)

()

 15

3.

)(1995)

(1995)

(1995)

(1995)

(, , )

()

42 91

1997 9

()

 16

1.

2. ()

()

3. (7-point Likert Scale)

(1) (2)

(3)

4. (5-point Likert

Scale)

" """

6. (1)

(2)

(3)

()

1. (

)()

(1) MANOVA

 17

(2) (Multiple Regression)

2.

3.

4.

()

33 36.26% (33/ 91= .3626)

34 80.48% (33/

41 = .8048) ()

(psychologist) 87 (clinical social worker)

19 21 1

72.7%: 27.3% 66.7%:

33.3%

63.6% 33.3%

30.3%21.2% 3%

44.67 35.66

/ ()
30 / 87 (.34)
Michigan 3 / 4 (.75)
33 / 91 (.36)
16/ 19 (.84)
Taiwan 16/ 21 (.76)
1 / 1 (1.0)
 18

33/ 41 (.80)

0 16 (48.5%) 16
30 (90.9%) 16 (48.5%) 46
3 (9.1%) 1 (3%) 4

(chi-square= 21.26, p<.00)

24 (72.7%) 22 (66.7%) 46 (69.7%)

9 (27.3%) 11 (33.3%) 20 (30.3%)
(chi-square= .29, p= .59)

0 (0%) 15 (45%) 15
11 (34.4%) 1 (3%) 12
21 (65.6%) 7 (21.2%) 28
0 (0%) 11 (30.3%) 11

0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0
1 0 1

(chi-square= 40.33, p< .00)
chi-square 5 ( McNemar, 1962,
p218)

()

98.52

17.04 (p< .00)

194.18

30.85 (p< .00)

19.81

1.30 (p< .00)

 19

.71 1.85 90%

(p< .1)

(diagnostic

interview)9

()

.25

()

0 (0%) 5(15.2%) 3 (21%) 2 (10.5%)
22(66.7%) 1(4.3%) 0 (0%) 1 (5.3%)
11(33.3%) 13(39.4%) 2 (14.3%) 11 (57.9%)
0 (0%) 4(12.1%) 1 (7.1%) 3 (15.8%)

0 (0%) 10(30%) 8 (57.1%) 2 (10.5%)

() 33(100%) 33(100%) 14 (100%) 19 (100%)
(p< .01) (p< .05)

()

()

()(

)(7-point Likert Scale)

9
87 (relapse prevention)

 20

1.

4.30

3.47

(p=.10) 4.94

4.21()

(p< .05)

5.30 3.23

(p< .00)()

4.30 3.47 p =.10
4.94 4.21 p <.05
5.30 3.23 p <.01

2.

(r = .39, p< .01)

MANOVA)

(1) ()

"""".06(

()

()(
)
\
B p B p B p
 21

-.01 .13 .00 .97 .00 .51

-.00 .98 .00 .44 .00 .15
.06 .04** .01 .67 .05 .03**
(Multiple R) .36 .22 .59
(R square) .13 .05 .35
**p<.05
(2) ()

""

(3) ()

""""

.05

(4)

()


.79 *** .48***
.34**

**p<.05 ***p<.01
22
 23

(5)

(a)

B( B """"

"""""")

""""

-.85 ()()

Andrew Barclay

" "(burn-out effect)(personal communication, Jan. 27,

1998) Richard Walter

(personal communication, Feb. 21, 1998) John

Rushbrook ""

)
 24

. \ .
B p B p B p
-.01 .20 .00 .80 .00 .46
-.00 .64 .00 .74 .00 .49
.01 .88 -.03 .51 -.02 .67
(Multiple R) .44 .21 .37
(R square) .19 .04 .14
B -.85 .02** .22 .40 .56 .04**
.00 .98 -.03 -.51 -.02 .66
(Multiple R) .43 .21 .37
(R square) .18 .04 .14

. \ .
B p B p B p
-.07 .21 -.03 .38 .02 .51
.01 .41 .01 .36 .01 .35
.27 .29 .21 .16 .20 .15
(Multiple R) .39 .42 .50
(R square) .15 .18 .25
B -.22 .63 .01 .96 .44 .11
.26 .30 .21 .16 .20 .14
(Multiple R) .27 .35 .50
(R square) .08 .12 .25
**p<.05
(b) " B"

""

()

()

( 5-point Likert Scale 3 )

3.64 3.03

(p<.05)
 25

1.

()

B

B p B p
B -.07 .70 -.16 .53
-.01 .78 .25 .08*
(Multiple R) .09 .45
(R square) .01 .20
*p<.1

2. ""

""

20% 30% ()

Michigan Taiwan
B p B p
.08 .40 .09 .38
.11 .43 .37 .05**
.05 .68 .27 .18
(Multiple R) .25 .55
(R square) .07 .30
**p<.05

()

(chi-square = 5.78, p = .22)

(p<.05)()

(p<.05)
 26

0 (0%) 2 (6.5%) 2 (16.7%) 0 (0%)

6 (18.2%) 9 (29.0%) 5 (41.7%) 4 (21.1%)
7 (21.2%) 8 (25.8%) 2 (16.7%) 6 (31.6%)
13 (39.4%) 10 (32.3%) 3 (25.0%) 7 (36.8%)
7 (21.2%) 2 (6.5%) 0 (0%) 2 (10.5%)
() 33 (100%) 31 (100%) 12 (100%) 19 (100%)

X-square X-square = 5.78 p = . 22 X - square = 6.46 p = .17

3.64 3.03 2.50 3.37
T test p= .03 ** p = .03 **

**p<.05

3.

" ""

"

(1) ""

(a) (40%)""(m1, 18, 24

m t )

(m27)"" (m1) (1996

, accelerated

program1998

(b) (20%)(m22)

(m18)
 27

(c) ( 7.69%)"

"(m25)"(m27)"

(m27)"(m27)

(2) """"

(a) (30.77%) ""(t2,3,6,12t

(b) (15.38%) "

"(t2)""(t23)

(c) ( 7.69%)(t5)

(t7)

(t10)(t12)

(t16)

(t28)

(t29)

()

(
)


 28

____________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

111 104

()

()
( 33 ) ( 29 ) ( 62 )

1 32 96.97% 25 86.21% 57 91.94%
2 17 51.52% 25 86.21% 42 67.74%
3 8 24.24% 23 79.31% 31 50.00%
4 18 54.55% 14 48.28% 32 51.61%
5 17 51.52% 12 41.38% 29 46.77%
6() 15 45.45% 5 17.24% 20 32.26%
7() 4 12.12% 0 0.00% 4 6.45%
() 111 104 215

""

""

""

""

""

24 19

1. (
 29

)(m2)

(m3)(m21)

2. ""(m

18, 20)(t2)

3.

(m9)

(m10)(t6)

4.

(m9)(t3)

5.

A. (1) 1. 2.

(m1)(2)

(m16)(3)

(m18)(4)

(m29)(5)

(m32)

B. (1) (t2)(2)

(t8)

(3)

(t16)

()

1.

 30

(1)

51.6%

( 3 )
(1 )

( 1 )30.7%

(can

not be cured)(Pithers,

et al, 1995)

(2)
58.06%(18) 11.54%(3)

19.35%(6) 11.54%(3)

11.54%(3)

2.

(1) 56.67% (17) 23.08% (6)

 31

""

(i) "

" (m1)(ii) "

"(m13)(iii) " Safer Society

((Alcoholic Anonymous, AA)

)"(m29)(iv) " 4--10%"(m30)(v)"

"(t8)(vi) "

()

"(t11)(vii)

"(t26)

(2) 16.67% (4)""

(3) 13.33% (4) 7.69% (2)

""

(i)

(m18, 17)(ii) (m25)(iii)

(t13)

(4) 11.54% (3)""

(5) 3.33% (1) 3.85% (1)

""

(6) 3.33% (1) 3.85% (1)"

"
 32

(7) 10% (3) 3.85% (1)

(i)

(m3)(ii)

(m12)(iii)

(t3)

(8) 3.33% (3) 3.85% (1)

(m29)"

"(t25)

(9) 34.62%

(10) 10% (3)

(11)( 3.85%)

(i) "

(t6)(ii)

(t14)

3.

(
 33

(1) ()

Michigan Taiwan Total
1. 8 (25.81%) 3 (13.04%) 11 (20.37%)
2. 5 (16.13%) 4 (17.39%) 9 (16.67%)
3. 7 (22.58%) 2 (8.70%) 9 (16.67%)
4. 7 (22.58%) 1 (4.35%) 8 (14.81%)
5. 1 (3.23%) 7 (30.43%) 8 (14.81%)
6. 4 (12.90%) 1 (4.35%) 5 (9.26%)
7. 3 (9.68%) 2 (8.70%) 5 (9.25%)
8. 3 (9.68%) 1 (3.23%) 4 (7.41%)
9. 0 (0%) 4 (17.39%) 4 (7.41%)

(2)

(a)

( 25.81%)(b)

( 21.74%)(c)

( 17.39%)

()

1.

2.

 34

3.

()

()

(burn-out

effect) Lin, Maxwell, &

Barclay (2000)

Groth (1979)

4.

5.

6.

()

1.(1)
 35

(2000)(2)

(3) ( Muskegon

(4)

(risk assessment)

(2000)

2.(1)

(2)

(1997)
()
(1995)--
39
()
(2000)
316-340
(1998)
175-187
(1995) 25(4), 101-117
(1997)
(1995) --
 36

23
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall.
Beck, A. T. (1963). Thinking and depression: Idiosyncratic content and cognitive
distortion. Archives of General Psychiatry, 9, 324-333.
Bureau of Health Care Service in Michigan Department of Corrections (1993). Sex
offender program implementation plan. Michigan: Author.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Christoff, C. (1998). Bills would extend lockups for some killers. Detroit Free Press
(June 16, 1998).Available on the website
http://www.freep.com/news/mich/qmiller16.htm
Corey, G. (1996). Theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy. (5th ed.).
Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Dush, D. (1987). Relinquishing the placebo: Alternative for psychotherapy outcome
study. American Psychologist, 1129-1130.
Ellis, A. (1973). Humanistic psychotherapy: The rational-emotive approach. New
York: Julian Press.
Freeman-Longo, R., Bird, S., Stevenson, W. F., & Fiske, J. A. (1995). 1994
Nationwide survey of treatment programs and models: serving abuse-reactive
children and adolescent and adult sex offenders. Brandon, Vermont: Safer Society
Program & Press.
Gallagher, C. A, Wilson, D. B., Hirschfield, P., Coggeshall, M. B.,& MacKenzie, D. L.
(1999). A quantitative review of the effects of sex offender treatment on sexual
offending. Corrections Management Quarterly, 3(4), 19-29.
Gendreau, P. (1996). The principles of effective intervention with offenders. In A. T.
Hartland (Ed.) Choosing correctional options that work: Defining the demand and
evaluating the supply. (pp.117-130). Thousand Oak, CA: Sage.
Groth, A. N. (1979). Men who rape: the psychology of the offender. New York:
Plenum.
Hall, G. C. N. (1995). Sexual offender recidivism revisited: A meta-analysis of recent
treatment studies. Journal of counseling and clinical Psychology,63(5), 802-809.
Inciardi, J. A. (1996). Criminal justice (5th ed.) Fort Worth, Texas: Harcourt Brace
College Publishers.
Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to
defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of consulting and
clinical psychology, 59, 12-19.
Laws, D. R. (1989). Preface. In D. R. Laws (Ed). Relapse prevention with sex
 37

offenders. (pp. vii~ix). New York: Guilford.

Lin, M.J., Maxwell, S. R., & Barclay, A. M. (2000). The Proportions of Different
Types of Sex Offenders and the Degree of Difficulty in Treating Them--A
Comparison of the Perception of Clinicians in Taiwan and in Michigan.
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44(2),
222-231.
Marlatt, G. A., & Gordon, J. R. (1985). Relapse Prevention: Maintenance Strategies in
the Treatment of Addictive Behaviors. New York: Guilford Press.
Marques, J. K. , Day, D. M. , Nelson, C. , & West, M. A. (1994). Effects of cognitive-
behavioral treatment on sex offender recidivism: preliminary results of a
longitudinal study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 21 (1), 28-54.
McGrath, R., Hoke, S., & Vojtisek (1998). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of sex
offenders: A treatment comparison and long-term follow-up study. Criminal
Justice and behavior, 25(2), 203-225.
Meichenbaum, D. (1985). Stress inoculation training. New York: Pergamon Press.
Pithers, W. D., & Cumming, G. (1995). Relapse prevention: A method for enhancing
behavioral self-management and external supervision of the sexual aggressor. In B.
K. Schwartz and H. R. Cellini (ED), The sex offender: corrections, treatment and
legal practice (pp. 12-1~12-18). New Jersey: Civic Research Institute.
Quinsey, V., Harris, V., Rice G. & Lalumiere, M (1993). Assessing treatment
efficiency in outcome studies of sexual offenders. Journal of interpersonal
violence, 8(4).
Steele, Nancy. (1995) Cost effectiveness of treatment. In B. K. Schwartz and H. R.
Cellini (ED), The sex offender: corrections, treatment and legal practice (pp.
4-1~4-15). New Jersey: Civic Research Institute.