Outpatient civil commitment in Texas for management and treatment of sexually violent predators: A preliminary report

International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology

Volumn 47, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 396-406

  Meyer III, Walter J ^a   Molett, Maria ^b   Richards, C David ^b   Arnold, Liles ^b   Latham, Janet ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH   (United States)

^b Department of Health State of Texas   (United States)

Author keywords

Civil commitment; Outpatient; Sex offender; Sexual violent predator

Indexed keywords

CONFERENCE PAPER; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; GROUP THERAPY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OFFENDER; OUTPATIENT; PSYCHOTHERAPY; SEXUAL CRIME; VIOLENCE;

AMBULATORY CARE; COMBINED MODALITY THERAPY; COMMITMENT OF MENTALLY ILL; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT CARE TEAM; PATIENT DISCHARGE; RECURRENCE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEX OFFENSES; TEXAS; VIOLENCE;

EID: 0043172226     PISSN: 0306624X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0306624X03253846     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (22)

1. Alexander, R. (2002). Civil commitment of sex offenders to mental institutions: Should the standard be based on serious mental illness or mental disorder? Journal of Health and Social Policy, 11, 67-78.
2. Association of Treatment of Sexual Abusers Public Policy. (2001). Civil commitment of sexuality violent offenders. The Forum, 13, 4-5.
3. Connor, J. M. (2002). Seling v. Young: Constitutionally protected but unjust civil commitment for sexually violent predators. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy, 18, 511-541.
4. Doren, D. M. (2000). Evidentiary issues, actuarial scales, and sex offender civil commitments. Sex Offender Law Report, 1, 65-79.
5. Epperson, D. L., Kaul, J. D., Huot, S. J. Hesselton, D., Alexander, W., & Goldman, R. (1999). Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool-Revised (MnSOST-R): Development, performance and recommended risk level cut scores. Retrieved from http://psych-server.iastate.edu/faculty/Epperson/MnSOST-R.htm
6. Erickson, P. E. (2002). The legal standard of volitional impairment: An analysis of substantive due process and the United States Supreme Court's decision in Kansas v. Hendricks. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 1-10.
7. Ferrara, M. L. (2000a). The civilly committed sex offender in Texas. Texas Resource, 7, 1-4.
8. Ferrara, M. L. (2000b). Lifestyle enhancement and development. Correctional Rehabilitation Services (Version 2.01). Austin, Texas: Correctional Rehabilitation Services.
9. Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (2000). Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: A comparison or three actuarial scales. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 119-136.
10. Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. North Tonowanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems.
11. Holmgren, B. (2002). A comparative analysis of state statutes providing for the involuntary commitment of sexually violent predators. In B. K. Schwartz (Ed.), The sex offender: Current treatment modalities and systems issues (Vol. 4, pp. 1-30). New Jersey: Civic Research Institute.
12. Janus, E. S. (2000). Part I: The future of sex offender commitment laws: Treatment as a factor in offender commitment laws. Sex Offender Law Report, 1, 67-80.
13. LaFond, J. Q. (2000). The future of involuntary civil commitment in the U.S.A. after Kansas v. Hendricks. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 18, 153-167.
14. Lund, C. A. (2000) Predictor of sexual recidivism: Did meta analysis clarify the role and relevance of denial. Sex Abuse, 12, 275-287.
15. Morey, L. C. (1991). Personality Assessment Inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
16. Mumley, D. (2002). Sex offender laws: Separate finding of volitional impairment not required for civil commitment of sexually violent persons. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 30, 313-314.
17. Myers, R. (2000). State civil commitment law withstands constitutional challenges. Sex Offender Law Report, 1, 71-77.
18. Noffsinger, S. G., & Resnick, P. J. (2000). Sexual predator laws and offenders with addictions. Psychiatric Annual, 30, 602-608.
19. Parsons, C. (2000). Sex offender program criticized. Dallas Morning News, 28, 4.
20. Sreenivasan, S., Kirkish, P., Garrick, T., Weinberger, L. E., & Phenix, A. (2000). Actuarial risk assessment models: A review of critical issues related to violence and sex-offender recidivism assessments. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 28, 438-448.
21. Stirpe, T. S., Wilson, R. J., & Long, C. (2001). Goal attainment scaling with sexual offenders: A measure of clinical impact at post treatment and at community follow-up. Sex Abuse, 13, 65-77.
22. Wollert, R. (2001). ADVERSARIAL FORUM: An analysis of the argument that clinicians under-predict sexual violence in civil commitment cases. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19, 171-184.