The New South Wales Pre-Trial Diversion of Offenders Program
(child
sexual assault)
CEDAR COTTAGE
28 Railway Parade
PO Box 45
Westmead NSW 2145
Tel: (02) 9891-6199
Fax: (02) 9891-1080
email: cedarcottage@swahs.health.nsw.gov.au
Who We Are, What We Do
The terms we use
- Throughout this presentation we use “X” to refer to persons who have been charged with, or convicted of, sexual offences against a child or children
- Child Sexual Assault refers to a range of criminal offences
- The term “offender” accurately describes persons guilty of those offences once convicted
- The term “Offender” does not represent the whole personal identity. It describes conduct of the persons that come to this Program
NSW Pre-Trial Diversion Program (PTDP, Cedar Cottage)
- Established by the Pre-Trial Diversion of Offenders Act (Child Sexual Assault) in 1985, amended in 1993 (bipartisan support)
- One of a number of legal reforms implementing the recommendations of the NSW Child Sexual Assault Task Force
- Started operation in 1989
Purpose: the protection of children
- Incentive for X plead guilty: Satisfactory completion of treatment requirements precludes imprisonment or other sentences
- X is convicted and required to register with NSW Police under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (as are all convicted child sex offenders in NSW)
- Funded by the NSW Dep. of Health
- Administered by the SWAHS
- Interdepartmental Advisory Board with representatives from:
- Health
- SWAHS
- DoCS
- NSW Police
- Attorney General’s
- Relevant NGO Representative
- The legislation allows for certain categories of adults who have sexually abused a child with whom they are in a parental relationship, to be diverted from the usual outcomes of the criminal justice system to a treatment program for a minimum of 2 years or up to a maximum of 3 years
- Sexual abuse by a father figure was identified as the least likely to be prosecuted (NSW Task Force)
- Incentive for children to be believed
- X in order to participate in the diversion program is required to enter a plea of guilty, the child is then not required to give evidence in court
Unique Features of the Diversion Process:
- Non judicial decision making
- The interests of the child prevail
- Presumption of X’s guilt not innocence
- Throughout this presentation the male gender is used to refer to the offenders because the vast majority of offenders are male
- The Program is open to female perpetrators. To date no female offender has been referred
Goals of the PTDP
- The protection of children
- The prevention of further child sexual assault in families where a parent has already offended against one or more children
- To increase responsible thinking and responsible behaviour in X, this includes to develop self-respect and personal integrity
Note: Family reunification is not a goal
The Objectives of the Program:
- For X to cease his sexually, physically and psychologically abusive behaviour, and to assist those he has victimised
- To lift the secrecy that X has set up around his abusive conduct
- To change the balance of power within the family so that X is less able to repeat the abuse
- To restore the mother-victim relationship, and other significant relationships undermined by X
Premises of the Treatment Model:
- SAFETY
- RESPONSIBILITY
- IMPACT
- VICTIM FOCUS
Premises Into Practice
- SAFETY
The children’s safety, their physical and emotional well being are paramount.
To this purpose a number of lifestyle constraints are placed on X. These are set out in the Treatment Agreement that he signs and which is enforced through an Undertaking to the District Court
Examples of lifestyle constraints placed on X while participating in the PTDP
- No contact with children under 16
- Employment, accommodation, require Director’s approval
- Exclusion zone
- Not frequent family orientated venues / activities
- GP, dentist different from family’s
- No photographs of children
- Accountability re hours / places of shopping, recreational activities
- RESPONSIBILITY
- X is 100% responsible for his abusive actions (planned, controllable behaviour solely serving his interests)
- The victim is never to blame for the abuse
- The victim’s mother is not responsible for X’s actions
- CSA is not caused by, or the result of, family dysfunction. However, X’s actions have affected all members of the family and services should be provided for them
- X Is Expected To:
- Face up to:
- Acts of abuse
- Planning / secrecy
- Setting the context
- His conduct at and after disclosure
- His abuse-related thoughts, feelings and beliefs
- Other irresponsible practices
- Relieve others of burdens by taking responsibility for his actions and for the impact of his actions
- Assist those he has harmed
- Develop a responsible explanation for his choice to sexually abuse
- Develop a Relapse Prevention plan
Relapse Prevention Is More Likely When X has developed:
- Internal controls:
- Awareness of full impact of his behaviour on others
- Ability to self-evaluate on standards of responsibility
- Understanding of the sequence leading to sexual abuse (feelings, thoughts, actions)
- External controls:
- X has broken down the secrecy he created around his actions, by facing up to significant others in the victims’ lives and in his own life
- He has established a group of significant people to whom he remains accountable
Premises of the Treatment Model:
- IMPACT
- CSA is a form of child abuse that has long term serious consequences for a substantial proportion of the victims
- Children who are sexually abused (particularly if abused within the family) are often further victimised by traditional societal responses (e.g. participation in a criminal trial, long-term placement in alternate care, and ejection from the family)
- All family members are likely to have been affected by X’s actions, therefore services must be provided accordingly
Premises of the Treatment Model:
- VICTIM FOCUS
- A major component of the rehabilitation of X is for him to address the harm he has caused, and to assist the primary and extended victims of his abusive actions and their significant others
The services offered by Cedar Cottage are not limited to the treatment of the parent who has sexually abused
A substantial proportion of our work involves counselling, assistance and support to primary and extended victims, as well as training, consultancy to other agencies, and public education
Counselling
- Individual counselling, support and group work, for non-offending parents (most usually mothers), child victims and their siblings
- Individual work with extended family
- Conjoint family therapy as deemed appropriate
The Treatment for the Parent who has sexually abused
- Individual therapy
- Group therapy
- Workshops:
- “Contemplating Change”
- “Changing”
- “Maintaining Change”
- Referrals to other specialist services
- Face-ups to those harmed, and affected in some way, by the offenders actions
- Meetings with Audience and M.A.S.S. (Maintenance And Support System)
- Maintenance therapy and “In-recovery” group
Victim Focus / Accountability to Victims
Throughout the treatment of X we attempt to maintain contact with family members, even if they are not engaged in ongoing counselling with us:
- To convey information emerging from the treatment of X that may assist their healing
- To consult with them, in relation to their needs and wishes
- To assist us in evaluating X’s current conduct
To inform them of decisions we make in relation to X that may impact on them - To keep them informed (if they wish) of X’s progress in treatment
The Treatment Approach
- Is based on a perspective that acknowledges as the core dynamics of intrafamilial child sexual abuse:
“secrecy, the abuse of power, avoidance of responsibility and the manipulation of loyalties by the perpetrator” (Laing, 1987)
Referral Process
- Charged with Child Sex offences
- At Local Court X requests referral to the Program via the ODPP (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions)
- adjournment
- Screening by ODPP
- If he meets criteria
- referred for assessment to PTDP
- 8 weeks adjournment
Note: only source of referral is ODPP, charges must be laid before referral, no plea entered yet
Client work is not time limited:
Need to offer in-recovery, maintenance therapy to offender clients
Need for “open door” policy: given the sensitivity of the information clients share with us, they prefer to come back to us. Often families engage in counselling after X has completed his court-supervised treatment
The theoretical and practice model
has been significantly influenced by the work of Alan Jenkins and Michael White:
- “Invitations” to Responsibility
- “Demonstrating” Responsibility
- “Facing up”
- Self-respect
- Concept of restraints
- Strong emphasis is placed on X making his actions “visible” (Laing & Kamsler, 1990), making himself accountable and making his internal processes explicit to significant others in his life (audience, MASS)
- Making himself accountable includes recognising the impact that his actions had and continue to have on others.
- Focus on current as well as past conduct, X is expected to demonstrate a responsible lifestyle in a wide sense
Assessment
- Purpose:
- To determine whether X is suitable to participate in a specific programme, the PTDP. This is an assessment of suitability, not tractability. A finding of “unsuitable” does not mean the person cannot be treated at all
Main Areas to Explore
- X’s account of the abuse (validation of child’s statement to the police)
- His acknowledgement of self as 100% responsible for the abuse
- His acknowledgement of the impact of his words and actions
- His account of his conduct in the family, prior to, and while abusing, at and since disclosure (current conduct)
X to
- Provide account validating child’s statement
- Start acknowledging abuse-related sexual thoughts, beliefs and practices
- Provide account of context of abuse beyond acknowledgement of incidents, so that the sexual abuse is not seen as rare and “out of character”
- Plan practical and immediate assistance for the child victim and family
- Provide argument for conditions of his treatment agreement
- Prepare face-up to partner/ ex-partner (child victim’s mother)
- Prepare face-up to siblings of child victim
- Plan for first 4 months in therapy
- Recruitment of an appropriate “audience”
Audience
X’s actions have involved secrecy and avoidance of responsibility. Making himself accountable to significant people in his life is a central component of his treatment.
In the course of his assessment and therapy he needs to identify people who are aware of his history and of his participation in treatment, and who are well-placed to evaluate the changes he is making in himself
Main Conditions in Treatment Agreement
- Move out of family home
- Exclusion zone
- No contact with children under 16
- May be required to relocate to the Sydney Metro Area
- No illegal drugs, abstain from alcohol (if substance abuse present)
- Accommodation and employment require the Program Director’s approval
- Make satisfactory progress
- Additional conditions re employment, education, AA attendance, etc may apply
Facing up
- ‘Owning up’, re-attributing responsibility to himself
- Process over time, not a one-off event, beginning during assessment, focussing on matters of:
- Information (knowledge)
- Impact (meaning)
- Begins during assessment
Two Main Dimensions:
- Facing up to self (includes internal processes, work on “Crime Description”)
- Facing up to others (X’s internal process not included in early face-ups, focus on actions and omissions)
Alan Jenkins (1990) applied the term and concept of facing up to the therapeutic work with sex and domestic violence offenders
Components of Face-up
- How X set up context for abuse (tactics)
- Description of abusive practices
- Description of sexual abuse (important to assess what is appropriate, e.g. information to V’s mother should give a clear account of sexual assaults, same information to V may replicate abuse)
- Words said to child
- How X established secrecy
- X’s actions at disclosure and after disclosure
- Clear statement of responsibility
- Ways in which X rolled responsibility on to others
- Components of face-up (cont.)
- On-going process, not limited to past actions / inaction:
- Current conduct including participation in treatment
- Identifying differences in account / actions, accounting for differences
- Statement of apparent and potential impact
- (Risk of X determining other’s experience, Jenkins 1993). Needs to fit with words, actions, and acts of omission acknowledged by X
M.A.S.S. (Definition)
- A network of at least 5 people who are aware of X’s abusive actions and of his participation in the Program
- Concept is introduced at the time of assessment. Different from “audience”
- Emphasis on accountability (tendency to focus on the support aspect)
Important
- M.A.S.S. members are not responsible for X’s actions. They are not responsible for whether X re-offends or not
- M.A.S.S members must be committed to take action if X shows signs of lapsing into abuse or abuse-related behaviours
