Issues Paper F: People Who Have Committed Sexual Offences

Issues Paper F: People Who Have Committed Sexual Offences

Introduction

1 This paper is for:

• people who work in, or have experience of, the criminal justice system in relation to sexual offences

• people who support or work with those who are responsible for sexual harm, such as in reintegration or behaviour change programs

• researchers and others interested in the subject.

2 This paper is also for people who have committed a sexual offence, and those who have supported them informally. You can also give the Commission feedback in another way by contacting us (see the Guide to our issues papers).

3 We also encourage people who have experienced sexual harm, and those who have supported them, to answer any questions in this paper that interest them.

In this paper, we mostly refer to ‘a person who has committed or been convicted of a sexual offence’, instead of using ‘sex offenders’. This recognises that sexual offending is a problem of someone’s behaviour, rather than of who they are. This is not meant to downplay the seriousness of sexual offences, which are among the most serious crimes in our community.

4 Victoria’s response to sexual offending behaviour focuses on:

• holding people who have committed offences accountable and denouncing the harm

• rehabilitating and reintegrating people who have committed sexual offences

• protecting the community from further harm.

5 In this paper, we ask if these aims are being met, and if not, how to improve our system to achieve them. We also ask how early intervention and diversion can be used for adults, and children and young people, engaging in harmful sexual behaviour.

Issues Paper F is one of eight papers.
View them at
https://lawreform.vic.gov.au/sex_offences_2020/issues_papers.
We encourage you to tell us your views on all the issues you are interested in.

Diverse needs

6 People commit sexual offences in different ways and contexts. Sexual offences can be committed by family, strangers, and those in positions of power (for example, in workplaces or in aged care homes).

7 People who commit sexual offences are diverse in their behaviour and characteristics.[1] Some people may be more likely to reoffend than others.[2] Some have complex needs and require mental health, substance abuse and housing support.[3]

8 Interventions for people who have committed sexual offences must be responsive to their diverse needs and experiences. For example, specialised responses may be needed for Aboriginal people, people with disability, and people from culturally and linguistically diverse communities.[4]

9 We want to hear if interventions are accessible to people who have committed sexual offences, and respond to their diverse needs and contexts.

Question

1 Do responses to sexual offending sufficiently address the diverse needs of different people who have committed sexual offences? If not, what more is needed?

You might think about:

• any gaps in interventions

• any programs or pilots we can learn from.

Responding to offending behaviour

10 At both national and state levels, there is a move towards improving responses to those who commit sexual offences.[5] This goes beyond holding a person accountable and denouncing their crime. It includes rehabilitating and reintegrating them, and measures that apply after a person’s sentence (post-sentence measures) for protection of the community. There is an increasing interest in early intervention and diversion.

11 This section discusses these three approaches in relation to adults. The next section discusses children and young people.

Rehabilitation

12 Rehabilitation is a goal of the correctional system.

13 Treatment programs focused on sexual offending are one form of rehabilitation. People in prison and in the community can take part in these programs.

14 While such programs are widely used, there continues to be discussion about how effective they are and who they are effective for. For example, there is debate about the impact of treatment on people who are considered to be at a low risk of reoffending.[6]

15 It is also unclear which program features, such as their timing or length, are most effective. However, it appears that treatment programs are most successful when they are made to fit the needs of individuals.[7]

Reintegration

16 The correctional system aims to support people who have been in prison to reintegrate into the community. This can occur before they are released from prison, as part of their parole or after release.

17 To reintegrate into the community successfully, a person will need a range of supports, such as housing and employment. They can also benefit from supportive networks (see box).[8]

18 In Victoria, programs are available for people convicted of serious sex offences as well as other groups such as Aboriginal people and young people. These can help people get transitional housing, connect them to treatment programs, provide cultural mentoring and educate and train them before their release.[9] Other programs for those who have committed sexual offences have been trialled elsewhere in Australia.

19 However, the stigma of sexual offending may make it harder for people to reintegrate successfully. Post-sentence measures (discussed next) may also make this harder.[10]

Circles of Support and Accountability

Circles of Support and Accountability involve two levels of support for those released from prison. An immediate circle of trained volunteers stays in touch regularly with the released person, provides them with support and monitors their progress. This circle is supported by a second tier of health, justice and other professionals.

Evaluations suggest that these circles can prevent some reoffending and support people to reintegrate into the community successfully.[11]

20 In Victoria, Support and Awareness Groups draw on a person’s established relationships to support their progress.[12]

21 We want to hear how well measures to rehabilitate or reintegrate people are working, and what improvements can be made.

Question

2 How well are rehabilitation or reintegration measures for people who have committed sexual offences working? How can they be improved?

You might think about:

• barriers to successful reintegration

• how well these measures respond to complex needs.

Post-sentence measures for sexual offending

22 The law allows for restrictions or conditions for some people who have committed certain sexual offences after they have finished their sentence. These exceptional measures are designed to protect the community from people who are considered to be at risk of serious reoffending.[13]

23 This section discusses three such measures:

• post-sentence detention

• post-sentence supervision

• sex offender registration.

Post-sentence detention and supervision

24 A person convicted of a serious sexual offence can be kept in prison, or subject to supervision, beyond the term of their original sentence if it is found before they are released that there is an ‘unacceptable risk’ they will reoffend.[14] These measures are used relatively rarely.[15]

25 The Post Sentence Authority, an independent body, manages this regime. Its main aim is to protect the community, with rehabilitation and treatment a secondary aim.[16]

26 Those kept in prison after their original sentence are meant to be housed in separate facilities and managed differently to others in prison.[17] Supervision orders may include requirements such as taking part in intensive treatment, living in a particular place, or being monitored electronically. A multi-agency panel provides intensive case management for those subject to this post-sentence regime (see Issues Paper A for questions on multi-agency approaches).[18]

Sex offender registration

27 Victoria has a register of sex offenders. The purposes of the register are to prevent people from reoffending, make it easier for a prosecution if someone reoffends, and protect children from people who have been convicted of child sexual offences.[19] The register is not public, but there is a parliamentary inquiry considering if it should be.[20]

28 Anyone who has committed certain sexual offences against a child must be placed on the register when they are released into the community. A court can order other people convicted of sexual offences, including against adults, to be placed on the list.[21] In these cases the court considers factors such as the risk of sexual reoffending, the circumstances of the case and the burden of the reporting and other requirements.[22]

29 A person on the register must report key personal details to the police, such as their contact information, internet provider and profiles, employment, and contact with children. A registered adult is required to report for at least eight years and can be required to report for the rest of their life. It is a serious offence to fail to report.[23]

30 If someone was 18 or 19 years old at the time of the offence, they can be given an exemption from registration under certain conditions. The Chief Commissioner of Police can apply for the suspension of the registered person’s reporting obligations.[24]

31 The Victorian Law Reform Commission reviewed issues relating to the register in 2012. Only some of its recommendations have been implemented.[25]

32 We want to hear if post-sentence measures are working well, and what should be improved.

Question

3 How well are post-sentence detention and supervision, and sex offender registration working? How can they be improved?

You might think about:

• the effectiveness of these measures

• how they affect rehabilitation and reintegration

• their administration in practice.26

Early intervention and diversion[26]

33 Most people who are responsible for sexual harm never enter the criminal justice system. There may be other ways to respond to this group, such as through school-based and community education programs that aim to change public attitudes (primary prevention).

Early intervention

34 Another response is through early intervention programs. These allow someone to refer themselves, or be referred, to a helpline or treatment program before they commit a sexual offence.

35 There are different models in different countries (see box).[27]

Stop it Now!

Stop it Now! is an early intervention program for child sexual abuse in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. There is a confidential helpline and a website for those worried about offending or concerned about others’ offending, as well as professionals.

Callers are given information and support, a plan to help ensure they do not offend, and referrals to specialist services for ongoing support. The program also includes primary prevention programs. In 2019, a scoping study in Victoria recommended establishing a four-year pilot for a national Stop it Now! service.[28]

Prevention Project Dunkelfeld

Prevention Project Dunkelfeld is a German early intervention program for child sexual abuse and the consumption of child abuse material. The project offers voluntary and confidential face-to-face treatment for people who are worried about their sexual interest in children (as Germany does not have mandatory reporting laws). It provides year-long medical and psychological support to prevent sexual offending behaviour.[29]

36 Evaluations indicate that these programs are used by people who have not offended or been reported to the police.[30] The use of the German program suggests that people are also open to attending treatment.[31] People using Stop it Now! have reported better skills in identifying risky activities and protecting against them.[32] Studies have further indicated an increasing demand for these services.[33]

37 Such programs would need to be aligned with mandatory reporting laws, as they are in the United Kingdom.[34] They would also need to respond to community attitudes towards child sexual offending.[35]

Diversion programs

38 Victoria runs diversion programs for young people engaging in harmful sexual behaviour (discussed later). These divert someone alleged to have committed an offence to a treatment program. There have been diversion programs for adults in other places (see box).

Cedar Cottage

One program in New South Wales, the Cedar Cottage Pre-Trial Diversion Program, was used by parents who admitted they were guilty of sexual offences against their children. It provided support to those harmed by the sexual offending and a lengthy treatment program for the parent. Although evaluations indicated that it significantly reduced sexual reoffending by people considered to be ‘low-risk offenders’,[36] the program ended in 2014.

39 Early intervention and diversion programs share some features with restorative justice (see Issues Paper G). If successful, a trial may not be necessary and these programs can encourage people to take responsibility for their actions (including for unreported harms).[37] However, the interests of people who have been harmed should also inform the use and design of these programs.[38]

40 There are other programs for men who use violence against their family, such as men’s behaviour change programs. These may also respond to sexual harm, although it is unclear if they are effective.[39]

41 We are interested in your views about the role that early intervention and diversion programs should play in addressing sexual harm, including in a family violence context.

Questions

4 Is there a role for early intervention or diversion programs for adults responsible for sexual harm? Why or why not?

5 If you support early intervention or diversion programs for adults responsible for sexual harm, what should be the features of the program?

You might think about:

• if these programs make it more likely a person will take responsibility for their behaviour or reduce sexual offending

• the models or programs that are most effective.

Children and young people engaging in harmful sexual behaviour

42 Harmful sexual behaviour by young people is different to sexual offending by adults.[40] For example, harmful sexual behaviour does not indicate that the young person will offend as an adult.[41] Such behaviour may be found in the context of experiences of family violence, child neglect and sometimes sexual or other assault.[42]

43 Harmful sexual behaviour by children and young people makes up a large part of child sexual abuse. Some studies estimate that siblings are responsible for up to 40 per cent of child sexual abuse.[43]

44 In Victoria, a mostly therapeutic response is taken to this behaviour. Children engaging in harmful sexual behaviour can be referred to Sexually Abusive Behaviour Treatment Services.[44] These programs are available for children up to 18 years of age.[45] The child or their family can contact the service or be referred by an organisation (such as a school or child protection agency).[46]

45 They can also be required to get treatment through a Therapeutic Treatment Order made by the Children’s Court.[47] These can also be used to divert their case from the criminal justice system before they are charged or once a case is in the Children’s Court.[48] The Children’s Court is discussed in Issues Paper E.

46 If the case is in the Children’s Court, the court suspends the case during treatment. If the child completes the program, the court discontinues the case.[49] Young people convicted of a sexual offence also have to take part in a treatment program.[50]

47 We want to hear if these programs are working well, and how they can be improved. We also want to know whether other programs, such as restorative justice conferencing, are needed.

Question

6 What is working well in responding to harmful sexual behaviour in children? What improvements can be made?

You might think about:

• if these programs respond to diverse needs and experiences[51]

• opportunities for earlier intervention, before sexual harm has occurred.[52]

Other views

48 We want to hear your views on other issues about how Victoria responds to sexual offending. For example, we would be interested in how to respond to less serious offending, or how to respond to offending while someone is in prison.

Question

7 What other issues need to be addressed to improve Victoria’s approach to sexual offending?


  1. See, eg, Erin Mackay et al, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, Perpetrator Interventions in Australia: Part One—Literature Review (ANROWS State of Knowledge Paper, November 2015) 37 <https://www.anrows.org.au/publication/perpetrator-interventions-in-australia/>; Antonia Quadara et al, Australian Institute of Family Studies (Cth), Conceptualising the Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse (Research Report No 33, June 2015) 9–20 <https://aifs.gov.au/publications/conceptualising-prevention-child-sexual-abuse>; Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (Criminal Justice Report, August 2017) part VIII, 363 <https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/criminal-justice>.

  2. Victorian Law Reform Commission, Sex Offenders Registration (Report No 23, April 2012) xii [18–19].

  3. Complex Adult Victim Sex Offender Management Review Panel, Advice on the Legislative and Governance Models under the Serious Sex Offenders (Detention and Supervision) Act 2009 (Vic) (Report, November 2015) 135 [5.1] <https://www.justice.vic.gov.au/justice-system/corrections-prisons-and-parole/review-of-post-sentence-supervision-scheme-for>.

  4. On the general need for perpetrator interventions to respond to diverse needs and experiences, see Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, Improving Accountability: The Role of Perpetrator Intervention Systems—Key Findings and Future Directions (Research to Policy and Practice Paper No 20/2020, June 2020) 9 <https://www.anrows.org.au/publication/improving-accountability-the-role-of-perpetrator-intervention-systems-key-findings-and-future-directions/>; Royal Commission into Family Violence: Report and Recommendations (Report, March 2016) vol 3, 278–280 <http://rcfv.archive.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/Report-Recommendations.html>.

  5. See, eg, Council of Australian Governments, National Outcome Standards for Perpetrator Interventions (Policy, 21 November 2015) <https://plan4womenssafety.dss.gov.au/national-outcome-standards-for-perpetrator-interventions/>; ‘Perpetrator Interventions Research’, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (Web Page, 22 August 2020) <https://www.anrows.org.au/perpetrator-interventions-research/>; Complex Adult Victim Sex Offender Management Review Panel, Advice on the Legislative and Governance Models under the Serious Sex Offenders (Detention and Supervision) Act 2009 (Vic) (Report, November 2015) <https://www.justice.vic.gov.au/justice-system/corrections-prisons-and-parole/review-of-post-sentence-supervision-scheme-for>.

  6. See, eg, Complex Adult Victim Sex Offender Management Review Panel, Advice on the Legislative and Governance Models under the Serious Sex Offenders (Detention and Supervision) Act 2009 (Vic) (Report, November 2015) x, 138 [5.20], 160 [5.106–107] <https://www.justice.vic.gov.au/justice-system/corrections-prisons-and-parole/review-of-post-sentence-supervision-scheme-for>; Andrew Day et al, ‘The Intensity and Timing of Sex Offender Treatment’ (2019) 31(4) Sexual Abuse 397, 397; R Karl Hanson, ‘Treating Sexual Offenders: How Did We Get Here and Where Are We Headed?’ (2014) 20(1) Journal of Sexual Aggression 3, 5–6; Erin Mackay et al, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, Perpetrator Interventions in Australia: Part One—Literature Review (ANROWS State of Knowledge Paper, November 2015) 41–2 <https://www.anrows.org.au/publication/perpetrator-interventions-in-australia/>; Martin Schmucker and Friedrich Lösel, ‘The Effects of Sexual Offender Treatment on Recidivism: An International Meta-Analysis of Sound Quality Evaluations’ (2015) 11(4) Journal of Experimental Criminology 597, 617, 622.

  7. Andrew Day et al, ‘The Intensity and Timing of Sex Offender Treatment’ (2019) 31(4) Sexual Abuse 397, 404–5, 397–8.

  8. Complex Adult Victim Sex Offender Management Review Panel, Advice on the Legislative and Governance Models under the Serious Sex Offenders (Detention and Supervision) Act 2009 (Vic) (Report, November 2015) 175 [5.183] <https://www.justice.vic.gov.au/justice-system/corrections-prisons-and-parole/review-of-post-sentence-supervision-scheme-for>; Elena Campbell, Centre for Innovative Justice, RMIT University, Integrating the Indefensible—What Role Should the Community Play? (Issues Paper, December 2017) 6 <https://cij.org.au/research-projects/integrating-the-indefensible-what-role-should-the-community-play/>.

  9. Department of Justice and Community Safety (Vic), Annual Report 2018-19 (Report, October 2019) 113 (in relation to ReConnect for people convicted of sexual offences), 13 (on the Yawal Mugadjina cultural mentoring program), 24 (in relation to young people), and 11, 22, 25 (for examples of education and training) <http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/annual-reports/annual-report-2018-19>. See also ‘ReConnect’, Jesuit Social Services (Web Page, 25 August 2020) <https://jss.org.au/what-we-do/justice-and-crime-prevention/reconnect/>; ‘Transitional Programs’, Corrections, Prisons & Parole (Web Page, 25 August 2020) <https://www.corrections.vic.gov.au/release/transitional-programs>.

  10. Kelly Richards, Jodi Death and Kieran McCartan, Community-Based Approaches to Sexual Offender Reintegration (ANROWS Research Report No 7, March 2020) 41 <https://www.anrows.org.au/project/community-based-approaches-to-sexual-offender-reintegration/>; Elena Campbell, Centre for Innovative Justice, RMIT University, Integrating the Indefensible—What Role Should the Community Play? (Issues Paper, December 2017) 6 <https://cij.org.au/research-projects/integrating-the-indefensible-what-role-should-the-community-play/>.

  11. Erin Mackay et al, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, Perpetrator Interventions in Australia: Part One—Literature Review (ANROWS State of Knowledge Paper, November 2015) 40 <https://www.anrows.org.au/publication/perpetrator-interventions-in-australia/>; Kelly Richards, Jodi Death and Kieran McCartan, Community-Based Approaches to Sexual Offender Reintegration (ANROWS Research Report No 7, March 2020) 15–16 <https://www.anrows.org.au/project/community-based-approaches-to-sexual-offender-reintegration/>.

  12. Jamie Walvisch, Kelly Richards and Lorana Bartels, ‘3 Ways to Help Sex Offenders Safely Reintegrate Back into the Community’, The Conversation (Web Page, 3 September 2019) <https://theconversation.com/3-ways-to-help-sex-offenders-safely-reintegrate-back-into-the-community-121977>.

  13. Serious Offenders Act 2018 (Vic) s 1(a); Victorian Auditor-General’s Office, Managing Registered Sex Offenders (Independent Assurance Report, 28 August 2019) 7 <https://audit.vic.gov.au/report/managing-registered-sex-offenders>.

  14. Serious Offenders Act 2018 (Vic) s 14 (regarding a supervision order) and s 63–4 (regarding a detention order). The focus is on whether the person is at risk of committing a ‘serious’ sexual or violent offence. ‘Serious sex offences’ are set out in Ibid Schedule 1. There are also general provisions (applying to sexual and non-sexual offenders) that enable the indefinite detention of a person. This is a sentencing option available if the court is satisfied that someone is a ‘serious danger’ to society: Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) ss 18A–18B.

  15. On 30 June 2019, three people were detained, 126 people were under a supervision order and 5 people under an interim supervision order: Post Sentence Authority, Annual Report 2018-19 (Report, October 2019) 42, 44 <http://www.postsentenceauthority.vic.gov.au/about-us/the-post-sentence-authoritys-2018-19-annual-report>.

  16. Serious Offenders Act 2018 (Vic) s 1.

  17. Ibid ss 255(1), (2).

  18. Post Sentence Authority, Annual Report 2018-19 (Report, October 2019) 15, 24, 44, 48 <http://www.postsentenceauthority.vic.gov.au/about-us/the-post-sentence-authoritys-2018-19-annual-report>. The Post Sentence Authority notes that most people on supervision orders live in residential accommodation managed by Corrections Victoria, such as Rivergum Residential Treatment Centre but that they can live outside the corrections system: Ibid 15.

  19. Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic) s 1. See also ‘Sex Offender Registration Statistics’, Victoria Police (Web Page, 23 August 2020) <https://www.police.vic.gov.au/sex-offender-register-statistics>.

  20. ‘Inquiry into Management of Child Sex Offender Information’, Parliament of Victoria (Web Page, 25 August 2020) <https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/lsic-lc/article/4323>.

  21. See Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic) ss 6(1), 7 sch 1–2, 11. There are a few limited exceptions: Ibid s 6(2A)–(2B) and s 6(4)–(6).

  22. Judicial College of Victoria, Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Guide, 13 February 2019) 6–7 <https://www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/sites/default/files/2019-07/Sex%20Offenders%20Registration%20Act%20Guide.pdf>.

  23. Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic) ss 14, 16–17 (on details to report); ss 34–5 (on duration of order for adults and children); s 46 (on failure to report).

  24. Ibid ss 11A–11B, 39A. The Chief Commissioner also has powers to suspend a person’s reporting obligations for a shorter period (of less than five years): Ibid 32, 45A.

  25. ‘Sex Offenders Registration’, Victorian Law Reform Commission (Web Page, 2 September 2020) <https://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au/all-projects/sex-offenders-registration>; Victorian Law Reform Commission, Sex Offenders Registration (Report No 23, April 2012) <https://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au/all-projects/sex-offenders-registration>.

  26. Jesuit Social Services, Stop It Now! A Scoping Study on Implementation in Australia (Report, January 2019) 31 <https://jss.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Stop-It-Now.pdf>.

  27. Ibid 4–8, 16, 19. Stop it Now! did exist in Bundaberg, Queensland, but it has been discontinued: Ibid 16.

  28. Klaus M Beier, ‘Proactive Strategies to Prevent Child Sexual Abuse and the Use of Child Abuse Images: The German Dunkelfeld-Project for Adults (PPD) and Juveniles (PPJ)’ in Elizabeth L Jeglic and Cynthia Calkins (eds), Sexual Violence (Springer International Publishing, 2016) 249, 257–261. There is an associated online treatment program available outside Germany: Institute of Sexology and Sexual Medicine at the Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, ‘Troubled Desire’, Troubled Desire (Web Page, 22 September 2020) <https://troubled-desire.com/en/>.

  29. Klaus M Beier et al, ‘Encouraging Self-Identified Pedophiles and Hebephiles to Seek Professional Help: First Results of the Prevention Project Dunkelfeld (PPD)’ (2009) 33 Child Abuse & Neglect 545, 548; Joan Van Horn et al, ‘Stop It Now! A Pilot Study into the Limits and Benefits of a Free Helpline Preventing Child Sexual Abuse’ (2015) 24(8) Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 853, 861 (in relation to the Dutch program particularly); Jesuit Social Services, Stop It Now! A Scoping Study on Implementation in Australia (Report, January 2019) 21 <https://jss.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Stop-It-Now.pdf>.

  30. Klaus M Beier et al, ‘The German Dunkelfeld Project: A Pilot Study to Prevent Child Sexual Abuse and the Use of Child Abusive Images’ (2015) 12(2) The Journal of Sexual Medicine 529, 538. In relation to treatment related to Stop it Now!, see Joan Van Horn et al, ‘Stop It Now! A Pilot Study into the Limits and Benefits of a Free Helpline Preventing Child Sexual Abuse’ (2015) 24(8) Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 853, 858, 865.

  31. Ashley Brown et al, Call to Keep Children Safe from Sexual Abuse: A Study of the Use and Effects of the Stop It Now! UK and Ireland Helpline (NatCen Social Research Report, June 2014) 5, 65 <https://www.stopitnow.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/stop_it_now_evaluation_uk_findings.pdf>; Joan Van Horn et al, ‘Stop It Now! A Pilot Study into the Limits and Benefits of a Free Helpline Preventing Child Sexual Abuse’ (2015) 24(8) Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 853, 864–5.

  32. Jesuit Social Services, Stop It Now! A Scoping Study on Implementation in Australia (Report, January 2019) 21 <https://jss.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Stop-It-Now.pdf>.

  33. Ibid 8, 31.

  34. On child sexual abuse as an issue that sparks intense community responses: Gemma McKibbin and Cathy Humphreys, ‘Future Directions in Child Sexual Abuse Prevention: An Australian Perspective’ (2020) 105 Child Abuse & Neglect 1, 1–2.

  35. Jane Goodman-Delahunty, The NSW Pre-Trial Diversion of Offenders (Child Sexual Assault) Program: An Evaluation of Treatment Outcomes (Report, 2009) 5, 8, 9 <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298788143_The_NSW_Pre-trial_Diversion_of_Offenders_Child_Sexual_Assault_Program_An_evaluation_of_treatment_outcomes>. The participant could be a biological parent, step-parent or de-facto spouse. The full name of the program was the New South Wales Pre-Trial Diversion of Offenders (Child Sexual Assault) Program. See also Jane Goodman-Delahunty and Kate O’Brien, Australian Institute of Criminology (Cth), Parental Sexual Offending: Managing Risk through Diversion (Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice Report No 482, September 2014) <https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi482>.

  36. Jane Goodman-Delahunty, The NSW Pre-Trial Diversion of Offenders (Child Sexual Assault) Program: An Evaluation of Treatment Outcomes (Report, 2009) 10 <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298788143_The_NSW_Pre-trial_Diversion_of_Offenders_Child_Sexual_Assault_Program_An_evaluation_of_treatment_outcomes>.

  37. In relation to reintegration, see Kelly Richards, Jodi Death and Kieran McCartan, Community-Based Approaches to Sexual Offender Reintegration (ANROWS Research Report No 7, March 2020) 104, 11 <https://www.anrows.org.au/project/community-based-approaches-to-sexual-offender-reintegration/>.

  38. Royal Commission into Family Violence: Report and Recommendations (Report, March 2016) vol 3, 273–4 <http://rcfv.archive.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/Report-Recommendations.html>. However, recent research focuses on how to best assess and improve programs: Andrew Day et al, Evaluation Readiness, Program Quality and Outcomes in Men’s Behaviour Change Programs (ANROWS Research Report No 1, April 2019) <https://www.anrows.org.au/publication/evaluation-readiness-program-quality-and-outcomes-in-mens-behaviour-change-programs>.

  39. Antonia Quadara et al, Good Practice in Delivering and Evaluating Interventions for Young People with Harmful Sexual Behaviours (ANROWS Research Report No 18, June 2020) 25 <https://www.anrows.org.au/project/good-practice-in-delivering-and-evaluating-interventions-for-young-people-with-harmful-sexual-behaviours/>.

  40. Royal Commission into Family Violence: Report and Recommendations (Report, March 2016) vol 2, 220 <http://rcfv.archive.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/Report-Recommendations.html>.

  41. Antonia Quadara et al, Australian Institute of Family Studies (Cth), Conceptualising the Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse (Research Report No 33, June 2015) 17–18. <https://aifs.gov.au/publications/conceptualising-prevention-child-sexual-abuse>; Royal Commission into Family Violence: Report and Recommendations (Report, March 2016) vol 2, 219, 221 <http://rcfv.archive.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/Report-Recommendations.html>.

  42. Antonia Quadara et al, Australian Institute of Family Studies (Cth), Conceptualising the Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse (Research Report No 33, June 2015) 17 <https://aifs.gov.au/publications/conceptualising-prevention-child-sexual-abuse>; Antonia Quadara et al, Good Practice in Delivering and Evaluating Interventions for Young People with Harmful Sexual Behaviours (ANROWS Research Report No 18, June 2020) 8 <https://www.anrows.org.au/project/good-practice-in-delivering-and-evaluating-interventions-for-young-people-with-harmful-sexual-behaviours/>; Royal Commission into Family Violence: Report and Recommendations (Report, March 2016) vol 2, 221 <http://rcfv.archive.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/Report-Recommendations.html>.

  43. Victorian Government, Annual Report 2018—Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (Report, February 2019) 10 <https://apo.org.au/node/223711>.

  44. See Children, Youth and Families Act 2005 (Vic) s 3(1).

  45. Antonia Quadara et al, Good Practice in Delivering and Evaluating Interventions for Young People with Harmful Sexual Behaviours (ANROWS Research Report No 18, June 2020) 52 <https://www.anrows.org.au/project/good-practice-in-delivering-and-evaluating-interventions-for-young-people-with-harmful-sexual-behaviours/>.

  46. Children, Youth and Families Act 2005 (Vic) ss 244–250.

  47. Ibid s 185 (before charge) and s 349(2) (after charge); see also Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (Criminal Justice Report, August 2017) part IX, 432–4 <https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/criminal-justice>.

  48. Children, Youth and Families Act 2005 (Vic) ss 352, 354A(2) (on suspension for mandated and voluntary participation in treatment program) and ss 354(4), 354A(3) (on discontinuance after mandated and voluntary participation in treatment).

  49. Victorian Government, Annual Report 2018—Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (Report, February 2019) 10 <https://apo.org.au/node/223711>.

  50. Antonia Quadara et al, Good Practice in Delivering and Evaluating Interventions for Young People with Harmful Sexual Behaviours (ANROWS Research Report No 18, June 2020) 33, 45 <https://www.anrows.org.au/project/good-practice-in-delivering-and-evaluating-interventions-for-young-people-with-harmful-sexual-behaviours/>.

  51. Gemma McKibbin, Nick Halfpenny and Cathy Humphreys, ‘Respecting Sexual Safety: A Program to Prevent Sexual Exploitation and Harmful Sexual Behaviour in out-of-Home Care’ (2019) Australian Social Work (Advance).

Voiced by Amazon Polly