What is The Diana Screen?

The Diana Screen is a two-part computerized test, developed by Gene Abel M.D., of Abel Screening Inc.. This non-invasive assessment is used to determine the risk of the test-taker having sexually abused a child in the past.
While The Diana Screen is a pass / fail test, it goes beyond a simple questionnaire to include objectively measured sexual interest in children. While The Diana Screen is new, the technology that identifies sexual interest, which is a major part of The Diana Screen formula, has been empirically validated and has been in use by therapists and criminal justice professionals more than 100,000 times.

Who should use it?

Any organization where there are professionals or volunteers who work with children. The Diana Screen protects children from sexual abuse and helps protect the organization from sexual abuse litigation.

We already do criminal records and background checks…why should we use The Diana Screen?

While criminal record checks, background checks, sex offender registries, interviewing, and even psychological evaluations are all important and should be done, none of these specifically address sexual interest in children. Furthermore, only about 4% of all child sexual abusers have a criminal record; the majority of individuals who molest children have never been convicted and therefore, would likely pass a criminal background check and could end up having unrestricted access to children within the organization.

Questions?

Contact Project Impact today to find out how to protect children in your organization.

Sex offender treatment is a standard condition of probation and post-prison supervision or parole for offenders who have committed a sexual crime. Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers on Monday, applauded the Oregon Legislature and Governor Kulongoski for passing and signing into law House Bill 3233 which creates the Sex Offender Treatment Board overseen by the Oregon Health Licensing Agency.

“Passage of House Bill 3233 creates a process by which qualified mental health professionals can be readily identified as having the expertise and training necessary to effectively treat sex offenders,” said Myers. “This process will improve community safety and prevent future victimization by reinforcing a critical component of the response to sex offenders in Oregon.”

Until the passage of HB 3233, Oregon was among a minority of states that did not have minimum professional requirements for sex offender treatment providers.

Sex offender treatment is a standard condition of probation and post-prison supervision or parole for offenders who have committed a sexual crime. HB 3233 was sponsored by state Representative Greg Macpherson (D-Lake Oswego), and Representatives Jeff Barker (D-Aloha), Vicki Berger (R-Salem), and Gene Whisnant (R-Sunriver), at the request of the Attorney General’s Sexual Assault Task Force and the Oregon Sex Offender Supervision Network.

The sex offender treatment and certification board created by passage of HB 3233 will establish standards of practice and professional responsibility and adopt training and continuing education requirements for certification.

The new law also creates the professional titles of Clinical Sex Offender Therapist and Associate Sex Offender Therapist. The Sex Offender Treatment Board will be administered by Oregon Health Licensing Agency, a state consumer protection agency that provides regulatory oversight for health and related professions.

“We look forward to collaborating with the wide range of stakeholders involved in sex offender treatment to establish an effective and responsive regulatory program,” said Susan K. Wilson, OHLA Director. “It is an extensive and complex task, but the benefits to the public are substantial.”

The SOTB will consist of seven experts in the field of sex offender treatment and management, including licensed mental health professionals.

The bill provides that the Governor nominate and state Senate confirm members’ appointments to three-year terms.

The Oregon Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, the Oregon Adolescent Sex Offender Treatment Network, the Oregon Association of Community Corrections Directors and the Oregon Juvenile Department Directors Association will recommend appointments to the Governor.

House Bill 3233 recognizes that a majority of convicted sex offenders ultimately return to the community upon completion of their sentences.

Sex offender treatment providers assume a vital role in protecting the public from offenders who return and remain in the community. “It is critical that the treatment providers who work with sex offenders have the specific skills, knowledge and training necessary to reduce recidivism, prevent future victimization and work collaboratively with management professionals to protect the community,” said Heather J. Huhtanen, Program Director for the Attorney General’s Sexual Assault Task Force.

Myers hailed the passage of HB 3233 as “a key component of the comprehensive response necessary to ensure community and victim safety.”

House Bill 3233 is scheduled to be signed by Governor Kulongoski on Friday at noon in the Governor’s Ceremonial Office of the State Capitol. Copies of House Bill 3233 can be found at www.leg.state.or.us.

Once initial members of the board are appointed and confirmed, more information on the establishment of the new sex offender treatment regulatory program will be at www.oregon.gov/OHLA/SOTB.

Here are a couple things to consider in all of this:

• Remember these numbers only represent adult sexual offenders and do not include juvenile sexual offenders. Juveniles constitute 20% of all sexual offenses.
• Sexual abuse continues to be one of the most underreported crimes – only 10-20% of all sexual assaults ever get reported to law enforcement in the first place, and only 20-40% of those cases ever end in successful prosecution, which will result in a offender having to register. What happens to the 80% of sexual abusers that never get reported on? How do these registration laws protect us from those undetected offenders?
• Only 5-10% of all newly committed sexual offenses are perpetrated by a registered sex offender. Therefore, 90-95% of all new sexual offenses are committed by citizens without a sexual offense criminal history.
• It is estimated that only 4% of all child sexual abusers have a criminal history.
• It has been estimated that 10-35% of registered sexual offenders information is either falsified or outdated and no longer accurate.
• Remember 85% of all sexual assault victims either were related to or knew the offender.

The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) agrees with the overall purpose of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, P.L. 109-248, to protect the public, particularly children, from violent sex offenders. States have recognized the need to deter sex offenders, provide law enforcement with means for identifying and tracking locations of sex offenders and increase public protection from dangerous offenders with laws that require released sex offenders to register with law enforcement or other state agencies. Each state has sex offender registration laws, and, since inception of these laws many states have expanded requirements to include more categories of offenders, extended the duration of registration for the most serious offenders, added requirements for updating and verifying registry information, and established penalties for non-compliance.

NCSL objects to the Adam Walsh Act’s one-size-fits all approach to classifying, registering and, in some circumstances, sentencing sex offenders. These provisions preempt many state laws and create an unfunded mandate for states because there are no appropriations in the Act or in any appropriations bill. Many of the provisions of the Adam Walsh Act were crafted without state input or consideration of current state practices. The mandates imposed by the Adam Walsh Act are inflexible and, in some instances, not able to be implemented.

NCSL urges Congress, in partnership with the States, to amend the Adam Walsh Act as follows:

1. Delay the implementation date of the Act until three years from the date final registration guidelines have been issued so that states know with what they are to comply.

2. Reinstitute the incentive grant provisions of the Act to permit States to submit application for determination of compliance.

3. Clarify that the Adam Walsh Act is applicable only to currently registered sex offenders or qualifying offenders who are in corrections custody in the states and not to those who, under state law, have fulfilled their registration requirement. This serves to respect state sovereignty for very fundamental aspects of state sex offender registration law.

4. Permit states to classify sex offenders according to their current state laws. The imposition of federally-defined tier classifications are confusing when compared to state crime classes and definitions, and therefore are overly-burdensome for states.

5. Permit states to penalize sex offenders according to their current state laws, including penalties for failure to register as required.

6. Incorporate flexibility in the implementation of the registration and publication requirements so as not to run afoul of any state’s constitution or statutory provisions. Every state has means by which registration information is publicly accessible, in accordance with state law.

7. Remove responsibility placed on states to interpret foreign convictions and place this responsibility with federal law enforcement where it properly belongs.

8. Allow states to define which juvenile offenders meet criteria for sex offender registration. States must preserve authority for which juvenile offenders are treated like adults, under what circumstances and for how long.

9. Recognize that states assuming the responsibility of tribal registries under the act may face increased compliance difficulties. Permit additional compliance time for states in that circumstance.

10. Provide that technological record-keeping requirements be contingent upon appropriations of sufficient funding to states to implement these changes.

11. Incorporate language establishing a stakeholder advisory board of state and local national associations, like NCSL, to provide guidance and counsel to the Office of Justice Programs SMART office that is responsible for regulations and compliance under the Adam Walsh Act.

Facing a 2009 deadline to comply with a controversial federal law intended to crack down on sex offenders, states are nearing a crossroads. They either must fall in line with the statute or ignore it and absorb the penalty a 10-percent cut to their share of funds in a congressional grant program used to fight crime. With most state legislatures reconvening this month, debate is likely to resume soon over the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, which President Bush signed in 2006.

The sweeping law, named after the murdered 6-year-old son of Americas Most Wanted host John Walsh, requires states to adopt, by July next year, strict new standards for registering sex offenders and providing public information about their crimes and whereabouts. It calls on states to publish photos and addresses of sex offenders online and dramatically toughens criminal penalties for those who fail to register, among other provisions.

For months, however, state legislators across the country have criticized the law as a one-size-fits-all approach that does not give states enough time, money or flexibility to make the changes sought by the federal government. Critics point out that the U.S. Justice Department has yet to issue final guidelines for
states to follow, leaving them with roughly half the time originally allotted by Congress to comply with the act.

A Justice Department spokeswoman, Sarah Matz, said the guidelines still are being evaluated internally. Strenuous objections also have been raised by states and advocacy groups over some of the acts provisions. One in particular has raised concern:a requirement that some juveniles as young as 14 be listed on states online sex-offender registries. Most states do not include juveniles on online registries, and juvenile-rights advocates say listing young offenders on the Internet could subject them to harassment or violence. “You’re damaging their lives and not serving any public safety,”said Sarah Bryer, director of the National Juvenile Justice Network. Bryer said juvenile sex offenders can be rehabilitated and are not as likely as adults to repeat their crimes.

Citing those complaints and others, state lawmakers are questioning whether it makes sense to comply with the act by its 2009 deadline, if at all, said Donna Lyons, a criminal justice analyst with the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), an alliance representing the nation=92s state legislators. The organization recently released a policy statement and approved unanimously by more than 7,000 state lawmakers seeking congressional amendments to revise the act.

States are looking at cost-benefit analyses and asking, “Is it worth the 10 percent we’re going to lose?” Lyons said, referring to the penaltystates would face for not complying with the act a 10-percent reduction in criminal justice funding provided by the Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program.

States use Byrne grants to pay for drug task forces, anti-gang units, police overtime and other law enforcement activities. But funding for the grant program itself was slashed by 67 percent from $520 million last fiscal year to $170 million this year in a $555 billion appropriations bill signed by Bush last month. “That deep cut has figured into state lawmakers thinking as they compare the costs of complying with the Adam Walsh Act with the costs of not complying,” said Susan Parnas Frederick, senior committee director of NCSL’s Law and Criminal Justice Committee in Washington. “What’s 10 percent of nothing, anyway? Maybe we’ll just do what were doing, lose the 10 percent and not have to deal with all this garbage,” Frederick said.

At least six states Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada and Ohio last year revised sex-offender laws in an effort to comply with the act. The Justice Department rejected Louisiana’s efforts as not enough, and has yet to rule on the other states laws, many of which went into effect Jan. 1.

States found to substantially comply with the act by July of this year are eligible for extra
federal dollars for sex offender management. Frederick said federal financial incentives may motivate states to comply with the act, despite many lawmakers objections.

Matz, of the U.S. Justice Department, noted that states can apply for a pair of one-year extensions under the act if they fail to comply by next year’s deadline. Extensions must be approved on a case-by-case basis by Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey. “We want to give people enough time. We want to be available for assistance,” Matz said.

In Ohio, legal challenges to the state’s three-week-old law already are mounting. Lawyers have challenged a provision of the law making new registration rules retroactive to old cases another requirement under the Adam Walsh Act. The state recently sent notices to thousands of sex offenders informing them of new registration obligations. Jon Paul Rion, a Dayton criminal defense attorney whose firm is representing more than 35 sex offenders with challenges to the new law, told Stateline.org the provision for retroactivity violates constitutional guarantees by imposing punishments beyond those originally handed down by courts.

But the Ohio attorney general’s office, which helped craft the states version of the Adam Walsh Act, has stood by the law, claiming that registration is not criminal punishment, but a civil regulatory measure that enhances public safety.

The play is about a young film director’s courageous struggle to free himself from his abusive past of childhood sexual abuse. In the midst of despair and self-pity he begins to come to grips with his problems and, with the help of his therapist and the community of actors, we see the beginnings of trust and his movement on the path of healing and recovery. Although this play addresses difficult material, it is also a story of hope and redemption.

Wildish Community Theater in Springfield, January 18th-February 2nd with performances Friday and Saturday evenings at 8 pm and Sunday Matinees at 2 pm. Purchase tickets online at www.tixrus.us or call 606-1125. Visit www.sofartheplay.com for more information.

Diana didn’t talk about her abuse until she became a teenager. The family contacted the foster care administrator to report the abuse. The administrator expressed doubt about Diana’s story stating, “they had known the many for years.” A short while later, Diana’s abuser phoned the family and confirmed that Diana spoke the truth about the abuse. Diana’s adoptive parents did everything they could to help Diana heal from the past. No amount of love or therapy could bring back the self-esteem her abuser stole from her.

Even with her strong will to overcome her childhood trauma, Diana and her family suffered a final tragedy when she ended her own life.

Diana’s abuser, in addition to being the man who stayed all night with the children in the foster group home, was a family man, and a father.

Had this man been screened, Diana and countless other children might have been saved from even knowing the horror of sexual abuse.

In honor of Diana, and those who survived their childhood sexual abuse, Project Impact is pleased to provide The Diana Screen from Abel Screening Inc.. The Diana Screen identifies people who have a high probability of having sexually abused a child in the past.

The Diana Screen is intended to screen people who will be placed in positions of trust with children.

For more information on preventing sexual abuse in our communities, please contact Project Impact

www.endsexualabuse.com

Contemporary cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT), however helps offenders learn to control their behavior. By reorganizing and changing the thoughts that rationalize and justify sexually abusive behavior, sex offenders can become more aware of the harm caused to victims and view their behavior differently. As well, sex offenders learn to identify their patterns of behavior, including the people, places, and things that put them at risk for offending. Through avoidance of certain situations, acquiring new coping skills for stress, and learning to meet their emotional and sexual needs in healthy ways, motivated sex offenders can prevent future offending. Although for some sex offenders who continue to be attracted to children, they can learn strategies to avoid acting on their impulses.

Consider these analogies:

When adults get married, they do not stop being attracted to other people. They do stop acting on that attraction, because they think about the commitment of marriage helps them to control their behavior.

For individuals diagnosed with an eating disorder the goal of treatment is not to have the individual stop eating food all together. Instead the goal of treatment is to reduce the number of times the individual engages in the eating disorder. Support the individual in developing a healthy eating and exercise habits. Explore and deal with the shame and guilt associated with the eating disorder.

Likewise, many chemically addicted persons continue to struggle with urges to use drugs or alcohol. Through treatment and recovery, however, many (not all) choose to change their behavior because they are committed to a new, healthy, and productive lifestyle.

Does sex offender treatment really work?

Early studies, conducted in the 70’s and 80’s, were unable to detect differences in recidivism rates between sex offenders who had undergone treatment and those who had not (Furby, Weinrott, & Blackshaw, 1989). This finding was widely publicized, leading to skepticism about the benefits of treatment, and opening the door to punitive public policies. Actually, although the research is not unequivocal, treatment has been found to decrease sex offense recidivism. Recent, statistically sophisticated studies with extremely large combined samples have found that contemporary cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT) does help reduce rates of sexual offending by as much as 40% (Hanson, Gordon, Harris, Marques, Murphy, Quinsey, & Seto, 2002). However, treatment does not work equally well for all offenders (like any psychological or mental health treatment – or medical interventions, for that matter). Some research indicates that comprehensive programs and length of time in treatment are also important factors in the effectiveness of treatment (Hall, 1995; Lowden, Hetz, Harrison, Patrick, English, & Pasini-Hill, 2003). Treatment failure is associated with higher recidivism rates, and some research indicates that sex offenders who successfully complete a treatment program re-offend less often than those who do not successfully complete treatment (Marques, Miederanders, Day, Nelson, & Van Ommerman, 2005).