Running head: SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

Rehabilitating sexual offenders: Lessons from the Correctional Service of Canada
Capstone Project
Ben McKiernan
Bachelor of Law Enforcement Studies
Justice Institute of British Columbia
March 27, 2017
Florence Daddey
Surita Jhangiani

1

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

2

Abstract
The rehabilitation of sex offenders is a controversial and problematic issue. This study
critically appraises the research that has been conducted regarding this issue and places it in a
Canadian context by examining the programs offered by the Correctional Service of Canada. A
complete review of the literature that exists was conducted and, from this, three themes were
identified as the most problematic areas for the rehabilitation of sex offenders: additional
programs for offenders, release of offenders into the community, and the effectiveness of the
programs. The information gathered was critically appraised to ensure the credibility and
validity of the information. Once verified, the information regarding these themes was compared
to current information from the Correctional Service of Canada. After being compared,
discussion into the differences between the research and the Correctional Service of Canada’s
practices was conducted, and several recommendations were made into what the Correctional
Service of Canada is thought to be doing effectively, and areas in which they may be able to
improve.

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

3

Table of Contents
Background - The Problem………………………………………………………………………4
Project Rationale…………………………………………………………………………………5
Literature Search…………………………………………………………………………………8
Methodology………………………………………………………………… ………….8
Themes……………………………………………………………………………………9
Additional and Supplementary Programs………………………………………………..11
Releasing Offenders into the Public……………………………………………………..12
Recidivism Rates - Effectiveness…………………………………………………………13
Critical Appraisal…………………………………………………………….……………..……14
Additional and Supplementary Programs………………………………………………..14
Releasing Offenders into the Public………………………………………..……………17
Recidivism Rates - Effectiveness…………………………………………………………20
Discussion………………………………………………………………………………………..22
Recommendations………………………………………………………………………………..24
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….26
References………………………………………………………………………………………..27

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

4

Background - The Problem
According to the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC), just over ten percent of federally
incarcerated inmates in Canada are serving sentences for some kind of sexual offences (2015).
Although this number may seem relatively small, there is a tremendous amount of public fear
surrounding sex offenders within the Canadian population. Along with this fear comes scrutiny
around the types of rehabilitation that sex offenders should receive, the degree to which they
should be rehabilitated, and how sex offenders should be released back into our society. In
Canada, the fact of the matter is that almost every offender who is convicted of a crime, and
imprisoned in a Canadian federal institution, will one day be released back into our society
(Wilson, Picheca, & Prinzo, 2007). Even those offenders convicted of first degree murder,
probably the most serious offence under the Canadian Criminal Code, will be eligible for parole
after twenty five years (Department of Justice, 2016). With this in mind, we must be open to the
fact that offenders who are convicted of sexual offences will, at some point, reach the end of
their sentences with the CSC.
If sexual offenders will one day be released from federal prison back into our society, it is
in the public’s and the offenders’ best interests to undergo the best possible rehabilitation while
the offenders serve time in the prison system. With this in mind, the CSC has a number of
rehabilitation programs that are offered within their correctional facilities. Along with numerous
other programs, the CSC offers four distinct programs for sex offenders. Within their prisons the
CSC has a national low intensity sex offender program, a national moderate intensity sex
offender program, a high intensity sex offender program, as well as a maintenance sex offender
program (CSC, 2009). According to the CSC, the moderate and low intensity sex offender

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

5

programs are offered nationally while the high intensity program is regionally based, offered in
Ontario, Quebec, and Prairie and Pacific regions (2009). The maintenance program is a more
generic based program which focuses on a variety of issues that all offenders may experience
(CSC, 2009).
Along with the programs offered by the Correctional Service of Canada, there are also a
number of community based programs that offer rehabilitation for sex offenders. One of the
most successful of these programs is Circles of Support and Accountability which was started by
a Mennonite pastor over concern that a sex offender was being released into the community with
no follow up intervention from the CSC (Wilson et al, 2007). Eventually this program would be
funded by the CSC and similar programs exist across the country.
This paper will focus on the rehabilitation of sex offenders in Canada. As previously
stated, the offenders that we as a public are so cautious of will eventually be released back into
our society (Wilson et al, 2007). This paper will present a critical appraisal of the rehabilitation
programs that are offered for sex offenders in Canada both during incarceration and after an
offenders’ release. Further discussion will be included relating to these programs and their
effectiveness as well as recommendations to the CSC as to the effectiveness of the rehabilitation
of sexual offenders in the Canadian correctional system.
Project Rationale
As stated in the background, this paper will explore the rehabilitation of sexual offenders
in Canada. The general issue which will be explored is the sexual offender rehabilitation
programs that are offered by the CSC. Specifically, this paper will seek to address whether or
not we, as Canadians, can consider the rehabilitation that sex offenders in our prison system

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

6

receive to be effective. From this, this paper wishes to draw conclusions regarding this issue and
make recommendations about improvements that could be implemented in order to increase the
effectiveness of sexual offender rehabilitation in Canada.
As previously stated, there is a specific need within the Canadian Correctional System for
this research. According to Statistics Canada, almost sixty percent of adults sentenced to serve
time in prison received sentences of one month or less (Statistics Canada, 2016). This means
that almost every person who enters a Canadian prison will one day be released back into our
community. The CSC states that they have a “fundamental obligation to contribute to public
safety by actively encouraging and assisting offenders to become law-abiding citizens…” (CSC,
2012, p. 1). It is also stated in the CSC’s mission statement that they must effectively supervise
convicted inmates and intervene while they are back in the community (Correctional Service of
Canada, 2012). If almost all inmates will one day be released, and the CSC’s goal is to facilitate
this in the most efficient and safe manner possible, then rehabilitation of offenders must be in the
forefront of all activities that the CSC conducts. This paper will strive to discover whether or not
the CSC is conducting rehabilitation programs in the most effective manner possible.
The questions that this project wishes to address, creates some supplementary questions.
Firstly, the definition of effectiveness needs to be explored. For the purpose of this project it will
be assumed that a sex offender rehabilitation program can be considered effective related to the
recidivism rates of offenders who have taken part in the program. An offender will be
considered to have participated in the program if they complete the program and all its
requirements from beginning to end.

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

7

A second issue is that of recidivism rates. For the purpose of this project, an offender
will be considered to have reoffended if, after their release, they are convicted of another sexual
offence that requires them to be returned to a CSC institution for any period of time. That is to
say, that reoffending of any offence is not the criteria for recidivism rates.
A third issue is that of comparative effectiveness. The results that this project hopes to
discover may be impressive on a solely domestic level; however, this should not be the only
factor of effectiveness. For this reason, the effectiveness of sex offender rehabilitation programs,
will be judged on a domestic platform as well as being compared to other Western countries with
similar criminal justice systems to Canada.
The scope of this project is fairly narrow. As this is an undergraduate project there is no
funding or additional resources available to conduct testing of any kind or to collect primary
data. The scope of this project includes the following:
- Identify topical and relevant information through a literature review;
- Critically appraise the information collected in relation to the effectiveness of
rehabilitation programs;
- Determine any gaps in the research; and,
- Make conclusions and recommendations based on the research conducted.
These limiting factors will make the project manageable and will also lead to more specific and
real world conclusions and recommendations coming from the project at its conclusion.

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

8

Literature Search
Methodology
In order to start the research on these issues a thorough search and review of the Justice
Institute of British Columbia’s (JIBC) online library resource, as well as various articles and
papers published by the CSC, was conducted. Various different keywords and combinations of
search terms were used to explore the JIBC’s online database. The original search term used
was: ‘sexual offender rehabilitation’. From this initial search, the JIBC’s library system returned
almost three thousand hits for review; therefore, a more narrow and condensed search criteria
needed to be used. The entire library database was limited to a few, more relevant, sub-databases
such as Criminal Justice Abstracts with Full Text, PsycINFO, and SocINDEX with Full Text. The
search criteria were then narrowed further by limiting the results to only peer reviewed scholarly
articles, articles that included full texts, and articles from the year 1990 to the present. These
inclusion criteria helped to narrow the results to articles that were more meaningful to the current
research question. Although these exclusion criteria helped reduce the number of reviewable
articles to around one thousand five hundred, this still left far too many articles to give any
meaningful information relating to rehabilitation programs that are offered to sex offenders by
the CSC. Therefore, the search terms and keywords were also narrowed. The new keywords
used were: ‘sex offender’, ‘Canada’, ‘rehabilitation’, ‘Correctional Service of Canada’, ‘high
risk’, ‘moderate intensity’, ‘low intensity’, ‘community based’ and ‘programs’. After limiting
the search criteria, and focusing the search terms, the JIBC’s library system returned around
thirty results, for each search. This number of results is a much more manageable number

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

9

of articles to be reviewed and will provide more meaningful information when it comes to the
effectiveness of rehabilitation programs in Canada.
Along with these searches, more searches were also conducted to find information to
compare the Canadian information to. These searches were conducted in the same manner as
above, however, the keywords: ‘Australia’, ‘New Zealand’, ‘England’, and ‘United States of
America’ were added. Each of these searches returned approximately one hundred articles.
Although this number may seem high, it is easy to eliminate non-relevant information, and focus
on research that is relevant to this project.
Lastly, various basic internet searches were conducted in order to gather information
directly from the Correctional Service of Canada, and various other government agencies with
pertinent information. The Government of Canada, Corrections Canada, and Statistics Canada
all had various articles, information, and published studies relating to the functioning of the
Canadian correctional system and the rehabilitation programs that the CSC offers. This
information was used to supplement the academic research that has been conducted relating to
the issue of rehabilitating sex offenders.
Themes
After reviewing the existing literature relating to the issue of treatment programs for
sexual offenders in Canada, a number of themes became apparent. Firstly, there has been a fair
amount of research conducted by scholars and academics in this field, however, there has also
been a lot of research conducted by the CSC itself. The CSC’s research examined programs that
can be used to help treat sex offenders within their system. The research conducted by the CSC

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

10

makes it apparent that safely and effectively treating sex offenders is an extremely important
aspect of their mandate.
A second theme that emerged is that of the need for additional and supplementary
treatment programs for sex offenders. Several academics, including Abracen and Looman,
(2011), and Moulden, Chaimowitz, Mamak, and Hawes (2014) have discussed that the issues
that cause sexual offenders to offend can often be related to a variety of other issues, such as
mental health, abuse, and substance abuse. If these issues can be addressed by programs, the
issue of recidivism for sexual offenders may well follow along.
The third theme that presented itself is the difficulty of releasing sex offenders back into
the community. According to Public Safety Canada (2015), a warrant expiry date is the date that
a person’s criminal sentence officially ends. As many sex offenders are held in prison until their
warrant expiry date, once they are released they receive no further supervision, support or help
from the CSC or the Parole Board of Canada. The research showed a need for sex offenders to
be supervised in the community and possibly continue attending treatment programs after their
release.
Finally, the theme of recidivism rates or effectiveness recurs in the literature. According
to both the CSC and academics such as Harris and Hanson (2004), and Schweitzer and Dwyer
(2003), who have studied this field, we can measure the effectiveness of the treatment programs
offered by the CSC through recidivism rates of the offenders who attend these programs and are
subsequently released. The issue that occurs with this method of measuring effectiveness in the
literature is whether we are looking at recidivism rates of sexual offences once sex offenders are
released into the community, or recidivism rates of all criminal offences. As defined previously,

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

11

for the purposes of this project recidivism of a sexual offence will be considered to be
reoffending.
Additional and Supplementary Programs

The research shows that a number of other factors play into recidivism rates for sexual
offenders. That is to say that mental health, substance abuse, and other contributing factors play
a key role in whether or not a sexual offender will reoffend once they have been released back
into the community (Abracen & Looman, 2011). According to Abracen and Looman (2011),
alcohol abuse specifically is extremely high in sex offenders, much higher than in the rest of the
incarcerated population in Canada. The research shows that alcohol and drug abuse are fairly
easy problems for offenders to relapse into, and it is very difficult to completely cure such
ailments (Abracen & Looman, 2011). The research also indicates that alcohol and drug abuse
are causally linked to criminal behaviour. The glaring issue here then, is that sexual offenders
may be reoffending at higher rates because of substance abuse issues. If this is the case, then
clearly some kind of supplementary rehabilitation program for substance abuse issues, along
with a sex offender specific rehabilitation program, would be effective in reducing recidivism
rates in sex offenders.
Secondly, the research shows that mental health may play a large role in sex offenders’
decision making when it comes to committing offences. The literature shows that
disproportionately high numbers of sex offenders are likely to be diagnosed with low level
mental health issues such as mood disorders, anxiety disorders, attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder, and personality disturbances (Moulden, Chaimowitz, Mamak & Hawes, 2014). Not
only are sex offenders more likely to suffer from these types of mental health issues, but they are

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

12

also more likely than the general population to be diagnosed with a major mental illness, such as
bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia. There are multiple questions that arise from this research.
Firstly, this information begs the question of whether or not sexual offender recidivism rates can
be attributed to mental illnesses. If this is the case, then clearly mental health rehabilitation
programs need to be supplementary, or primary, to sex offender rehabilitation programs within
the CSC. Secondly, if major mental health issues are the causing factor of sexual offences, then
perhaps diagnoses and treatment in a medical facility with mental health professionals on staff is
a more appropriate treatment program for certain sex offenders. These questions will be
explored further later in this project.
Releasing Offenders into the Public
The second major theme that emerged from the literature was that of the need for
additional supervision or treatment for sex offenders once they have been released from prison.
As previously stated, almost all offenders convicted of crimes under Canadian law have a
warrant expiry date attached to their sentences. The warrant expiry date is the date which a
criminal sentence officially ends (Public Safety Canada, 2015). According to Public Safety
Canada, once an offender has reached their warrant expiry date they are no longer under the
supervision of the CSC, meaning that no supervision, treatment or programs are available
through the CSC for the offender. The literature shows that the Canadian criminal justice system
does have safeguards in place to deal with dangerous offenders. These systems include
‘dangerous offender’ designations, ‘long-term offender’ designations, and the National Sex
Offender Registry (Public Safety Canada, 2015). Although these systems do exist, they do little
more than keep track of offenders who have been released into the public and ensure they accrue

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

13

suitable punishment if the offender were to reoffend. These systems do little to rehabilitate
offenders or preemptively lessen the likelihood that the offender will reoffend.
The literature shows that reintegrating into society after being incarcerated is a challenge
in itself. According to Gideon & Sung (2011), offenders experience personal, interpersonal, and
structural barriers to successfully reintegrating into society. Gideon and Sung (2011), also state
that inmates who have access to various reentry programs offered by correctional services are
much less likely to reoffend than offenders who do not receive this type of programming. The
question then becomes, should the CSC be doing more when it comes to continuing
rehabilitation for offenders after they have been released. The concept of community-based
volunteer programs for sex offenders will be discussed further in response to this question. If the
public wishes to no longer fear sexual offenders, and the threat they pose, ongoing treatment, and
rehabilitation, appears to be a possible solution.
Recidivism Rates - Effectiveness
The final major theme that emerges from the literature is that of effectiveness, not just
within Canada, but when compared to other Western nations with similar criminal justice
systems to Canada. According to Harris and Hanson (2004), recidivism rates for offenders
committing another sexual offence appear to be quite high. Of all sexual offenders released into
the community, twenty-four percent had reoffended with another sexual offence within fifteen
years (Harris & Hanson, 2004). According to Harris and Hanson’s study (2004), this number
jumped to almost forty percent if the offender had already been convicted of a sexual offence
previously. That is to say, the more sexual offences an offender had been convicted of, the more
likely they were to reoffend.

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

14

The research also shows recidivism rates for sex offenders from various other countries.
According to Learn, Browne, Stringer, and Hoguee (2008), the rate of sex offenders reoffending
with another sexual offence after six years or more in the United Kingdom was just under twenty
percent. The literature also shows that in Australia, sexual recidivism rates are twenty two
percent after ten years of being released (Schweitzer & Dwyer, 2003). In New Zealand, the
research shows that the sexual re-offence rate was twenty five percent for high risk sex offenders
ten years after being released from prison (Skelton & Vess, 2008). Finally, in the United States
of America, research shows that recidivism rates for sex offenders is over fifty percent for those
who have been convicted of multiple sex offences (Nally, Lockwood, Ho, & Knutson, 2014).
The recidivism rate of the United States is made even more shocking, as the study was only a
five year follow up from the offender’s release (Nally et al, 2014). A further comparison and
analysis of this information, and conclusions as to the effectiveness of the CSC’s rehabilitation
programs, will be explored later in this project.
Critical Appraisal
Additional and Supplementary Programs
Discussing the research conducted on how additional rehabilitation programs may benefit
the rehabilitation of sex offenders, there are a number of key factors to consider. The articles put
forward by Abracen and Looman (2011), as well as Moulden et al. (2014), discuss the impacts
that external factors can have on sex offenders and their likelihood of reoffending.
These authors discuss how issues such as substance abuse and mental health have a
lasting effect on offenders and could be considered to be the overwhelming factor as to why
some offenders reoffend rather than only a drive to commit sexually deviant offences. Abracen

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

15

and Looman (2011) discuss the fact that substance abuse is considered as a predictor of future
dangerous behaviour. Abracen and Looman (2011) also discuss that there has been some debate
in the literature around whether drug and/or alcohol abuse causes violent behaviour, however,
they do state that the link between substance abuse and violent offending cannot be argued. The
authors state that the research shows that sexual offenders who commit more offences after
having been released from prison have a higher incidence rate of alcohol abuse than those who
do not (Abracen & Looman, 2011). Abracen and Looman (2011) argue, interestingly, that the
connection between alcohol abuse and sexual offending may not be as clear as it initially
appears. Rather than alcohol abuse causing someone to sexually offend, there may be a pattern
between negative emotionality, such as intimacy deficits, and alcohol abuse (Abracen &
Loomen, 2011). If this is the case, the question raised must be; should sexual offender
rehabilitation focus on background issues such as mental health issues like negative emotionality,
as well as incorporating aspects of rehabilitation for alcohol abuse?
Abracen and Looman (2011) show interesting and valid data and research for the idea
that substance abuse may play an important factor in sex offender recidivism. The authors
conducted their research at a CSC facility with offenders who were part of a high risk sex
offender rehabilitation program (Abracen and Looman, 2011). This makes the results of their
study of particular interest for this project as the sample of offenders used were both Canadian,
and sex offenders with a high risk of reoffending. The authors then conducted three different
questionnaire style tests upon the participants (Abracen & Looman, 2011). These tests were the
Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (MAST), the Drug Abuse Screening Test (DAST), and the
Static-99 test. All three of these tests ask participants questions relating to their alcohol use, their

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

16

use of illicit drugs and, finally, questions which will give an indicator of future sex offence
recidivism (Abracen & Looman, 2011). It can be inferred that the results of these tests will give
the authors reliable information regarding sexual recidivism rates and substance abuse as these
tests are recognized internationally as being reasonable indicators of the issues they are
concerned with (Hanson & Thornton, n.d.).
The authors concluded that sexual offenders consistently showed higher scores on the
MAST alcohol abuse test than other violent, but non-sexual, offenders (Abracen & Looman,
2011). This research study is clearly related to the purposes of this study. The authors of this
study have conducted multiple research studies on the issues related to sex offenders and their
recidivism rates and submit peer reviewed articles to scholarly journals for publication. Their
results, in the context of this paper, show a clear need to incorporate an aspect of substance abuse
rehabilitation, with a focus on alcohol abuse, to sex offender treatment programs in Canada.
The second article that discusses the impact that supplementary treatment programs may
have on the recidivism rates of sexual offenders is that of authors Moulden, Chaimowitz, Mamak
and Hawes, (2014). In this article, the differences between sexual offenders who are involved
with the forensic mental health system were compared to sexual offenders who were involved
with the correctional system in Canada (Moulden et al, 2014). This study is of interest to this
project as it is comparing Canadian offenders between these two settings. Moulden and
colleagues (2014) concluded that there were very few differences between the two groups of sex
offenders when it came to age, gender, education level, early childhood home life, victim
selection, and a variety of other factors (Moulden et al, 2014). What is interesting, and makes
this research study so applicable to the current paper, is that Moulden et al (2014) found

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

17

statistical differences between the recidivism rates of the two groups. Moulden et al. (2014)
discuss that this major gap between recidivism rates may come down to the fact that those
offenders involved with the forensic mental health system may suffer from more severe mental
illnesses, whereas those involved with the correctional system may suffer from lesser mental
illnesses, such as antisocial behaviour, and personality (Moulden, 2014).
This study is once again peer reviewed research and published in a credible journal. The
study conducted by the authors is one that holds a lot of value to this research paper. While sex
offenders may be housed in different styles of incarceration, the results clearly show that mental
health issues have a considerable impact on sexual offenders and their recidivism rates. This
idea will be discussed later in this paper, however, the overwhelming concept that comes from
this research, and plays into this paper, is the fact that mental health programs would appear to be
a useful tool in the successful rehabilitation of sexual offenders in the Canadian correctional
system.
Releasing Offenders into the Public
The second theme put forward above is the idea that more programs are needed for sex
offenders after they are released back into the public. As mentioned previously in this paper,
according to Public Safety Canada (2015), many sex offenders are held in CSC facilities until the
end of their sentences, meaning the CSC has no further jurisdiction over them once they are
released into the community.
One article which discusses the importance of continuing support for offenders is that of
Robin J. Wilson, Janice E. Picheca, and Michelle Prinzo (2007). This article, discusses the
impact that a volunteer based support program for released sex offenders has had on a number of

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

18

stakeholders involved in the project (Wison et al, 2007). This article is of particular interest to
the current project as it lays out how additional support for offenders after their release is a more
effective way to reduce recidivism than long term probation or supervision orders (Wilson et al,
2007). The authors (2007) discuss the Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) program
which was developed by a pastor, after a sex offender was released into his community and
public backlash swelled. According to Wilson et al. (2007), COSA offers humane support to sex
offenders and a realistic accountability framework. The author’s research used a comprehensive
questionnaire to gather reliable data from offenders participating in the program, volunteers
working at the agency, professionals who had contributed in some way to the development of the
program, and members of the public, where COSA is facilitated (Wilson et al, 2007). The results
of this study provide crucial information to this paper as it not only includes offenders and the
people trying to rehabilitate them, but also members of the community where the offenders are
being released. The information gathered from members of the community could be considered
to be a secondary measure of how effective a rehabilitation program is as, usually, the public
remains angry and afraid when these types of offenders are released into their communities
(Wilson et al, 2007).
One aspect of Wilson et al.’s (2007) research becomes especially interesting when
considered in the context of this paper. The authors report that eighty-three percent of the
interviewed members of COSA joined the program because they did not have any other form of
social support, and that they were willing to try anything to help facilitate their reintegration into
the community. (Wilson et al, 2007). This fact will be discussed in another section of this paper,

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

19

however it raises a multitude of questions regarding the CSC’s ability to properly rehabilitate sex
offenders.
A second piece of pertinent research that came from Wilson et al.’s study (2007), was the
statistical information relating to how community members felt about COSA. Wilson et al.
(2007) reported that although one-hundred percent of community members interviewed stated
that they would be upset if a sex offender was released into their community, sixty-eight percent
of the respondents said that they would have a more positive view of the situation if the offender
was a member of COSA (Wilson et al, 2007). Clearly this research shows in an unbiased manner
that the more community support and rehabilitation an offender has access to after their release
from a CSC facility, the more effective their rehabilitation can be.
A second paper, written by Patrick Lussier, Carmen Gress, Nadine Deslauriers-Varin and
Joanna Amirault (2014), discusses the CHROME program in British Columbia, Canada. This
project is of interest to this paper as it is not only a Canadian study with Canadian participants,
but was conducted in the local region of the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. The authors
state that the CHROME program is designed to help sex offenders understand the cycle of their
behaviour and works to help offenders from relapsing into behaviours which could lead to them
reoffending (Lussier et al, 2014). This program once again highlights the importance of
community based programs to help sex offenders once they have been released from the custody
of the CSC. For the purposes of this project, Lussier et al’s paper (2014) provides further
framework that, for the good of all stakeholders involved, more community supervision is
needed for sex offenders who are being released into the community.

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

20

Recidivism Rates - Effectiveness
The final theme to be critically appraised is that of the effectiveness of the CSC’s sex
offender rehabilitation programs, both on a domestic and international scale. As mentioned
above, Canada’s recidivism rate aligns fairly similarly with the countries to which is was
compared. While Canada’s recidivism rate for sexual offenders sits at twenty-four percent
(Harris & Hanson, 2004), the recidivism rate is twenty-two percent in the United Kingdom
(Learn et al, 2008), twenty-two percent in Australia (Schweitzer & Dwyer, 2003), twenty-five
percent in New Zealand (Skelton & Vess, 2008), and fifty percent in the Unites States of America
(Nally et al, 2014). The one outlier within these statistics is clearly the United States.
On a domestic level, the Canadian federal recidivism rates are equaled in the Pacific
region, which sits at just under twenty-five percent, but is much higher than the rates of
recidivism in certain prairie provinces, such as Alberta and Manitoba, which sit at five and ten
percent respectively (Harris & Hanson, 2004). With all of these statistics, it is important in the
context of this project to include that the criteria for recidivism is slightly different across the
board. Some locations use the conviction of another sexual offence as the criteria, while some
geographic regions use the charge and conviction of another sexual offence as the criteria for
recidivism (Harris & Hanson, 2004).
For the purposes of this project, this information can be considered extremely valuable in
trying to compare recidivism rates in Canada to other countries. For the countries of the United
Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand especially, the statistics create a reasonably valid
comparison to Canada. As all of these aforementioned countries are commonwealth countries,
they all derive their criminal justice systems from the English ‘common law’ developed in the

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

21

middle-ages (Harder, 2010). This makes the comparison even more compelling as the systems
used to rehabilitate sex offenders are similar across the different countries.
The comparison of sexual offender recidivism rates to the United States (USA) is
compelling in the context of this research paper based purely on Canada’s geographic proximity
to the USA. The comparison between Canada and the USA is relevant to this project as it
provides statistics that differ significantly from Canada as far as recidivism rates of sexual
offenders are concerned. If no other information can be gleaned from this difference, at the very
least the USA may provide some information as to what not to do when it comes to rehabilitating
sexual offenders. Of course there are some major differences between Canada and the USA,
which may prove to be the causing factors of this statistical difference. The massive population
difference between the two countries, the differences in styles of policing, charging offenders,
and rates of incarceration may also play a factor.
The comparison of Canada’s rates of sex offender recidivism to the United Kingdom,
Australia, New Zealand, and the USA, gives this paper more depth and meaning when it comes
to the conclusions and recommendations as to what the CSC can improve upon in the
rehabilitation programs that it offers to its sex offender population.
The themes presented in this critical appraisal are important to the context of this paper.
The preceding information gives context and relevance to the discussion below. The information
presented is valid, complete and echoes other existing literature on similar topics. The research
conducted is appropriate in both an academic setting and in the context of this research paper.
Furthermore, the information presented can be applied to the question this research seeks to

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

22

answer. That is: how effective is the current CSC models for rehabilitating sexual offenders so
they can be released back into our society in the safest and most productive way possible.
Discussion
As evidenced throughout this paper, there a number of ways in which the rehabilitation of
sex offenders can be considered effective. The following section of this paper will attempt to
discuss these themes in the context of the CSC, and the approaches that the organization
currently takes to rehabilitative its sex offender population.
The CSC has a legal mandate to provide programs and services that are aimed at
offenders’ criminal behaviour (Correctional Service of Canada, 2016). These programs are
designed to reduce offenders’ future reoffending and are based on research that has been proven
to reduce the rates of recidivism among offenders (Correctional Service of Canada, 2016). The
specific programs offered for sex offenders, under the supervision of the CSC, are the National
High Intensity Sex Offender Program, the National Moderate Intensity Sex Offender Program,
and the Sex Offender Maintenance Program (Correctional Service of Canada, 2014). These
programs consist of group sessions, and some individual sessions, which focus on helping
offenders understand their behaviour, the impacts it has, their emotions and thinking related to
sexual violence, and how to manage their harmful behaviour (Correctional Service of Canada,
2014). In addition to these programs, the CSC also offers National Substance Abuse Programs,
which consist of group sessions, and individual sessions, and teach offenders how to avoid
relapse, and what behaviours they may need to change in order to do so (Correctional Service of
Canada, 2014). The National Sex Offender Programs incorporate some mental health treatment,

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

23

however, the CSC also states that certain offenders with mental health issues, may not be able to
participate in regular programming (Correctional Service of Canada, 2014).
The two immediately apparent flaws in these programs, offered by the CSC, is the length
of the programs and the fact that every program offered by the CSC is optional. The National
Sex Offender Program consists of over two hundred hours of sessions while the substance abuse
program offered consists of just under two hundred hours of sessions (Correctional Service of
Canada, 2014). It could be argued that nearly four hundred hours of therapy, while possibly
effective, may not be overly appealing to all offenders who may need these types of programs.
Secondly, as the programs are not mandatory for any offender, the programs may not be attended
by offenders who need them most. Furthermore, offenders may choose to skip sessions as there
are no repercussions for doing so.
The second issue to be discussed is that of releasing offenders into the public, and the
jurisdiction that the CSC has to offer programs to these offenders. The CSC states that only
offenders who are either incarcerated in an institution, or on conditional release in the
community, are eligible to participate in the programs that are offered (Correctional Service of
Canada, 2014). As previously mentioned in this paper, sex offenders are often held in prisons
until the very end of their mandated sentence meaning the CSC has no jurisdiction over their
activities once they leave prison, other than to impose a long term offender order or similar
program, which does little to rehabilitate the offender and may actually have a detrimental effect
on an offender (Public Safety Canada, 2015). The CSC does state that there are various
programs offered to offenders who live in community run provincial facilities, community

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

24

correctional centres or Aboriginal healing centres, however these are often few and far between,
and difficult for offenders to access (Correctional Service of Canada, 2014).
Lastly, the issue of the effectiveness of these programs is to be discussed. An evaluation
of the CSC’s sex offender programs (2009) found that offenders who had participated in the
programs did have a reduced level of recidivism when compared to offenders who had not
participated in the program, however, they also stated that the results were not statistically
significant (Correctional Service of Canada, 2009). Although the CSC’s own evaluation did not
seem to prove the programs they offer were effective, it could be argued that on an international
scale they should be considered effective. As Canada shares very similar recidivism rates for sex
offenders with various other commonwealth countries, it can be argued that the system is
working as well as can be hoped for. When compared to the United States, Canada’s recidivism
rates are almost half, which strongly suggests the programs offered by the CSC are twice as
effective as those offered by the American correctional systems.
Recommendations
After reviewing and evaluating the literature, and comparing this information to the
current standards and practices of the CSC, there are a number of recommendations that can be
made. These recommendations include, but are not limited to:
1) Design sexual offender rehabilitation programs that incorporate substance abuse treatment as
a complete package.
2) Incorporate more mental health treatment into CSC programs, and especially the National
Sex Offender Programs.
3) Mandate that certain programs be taken by offenders, especially high risk offenders.

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

25

4) Design more community-based programs that can be offered to sex offenders once they have
been released into the community.
5) Continue to update and manage sex offender programs to reflect continuing research in the
field of sex offender rehabilitation.
Firstly, as stated previously in this paper, the issues of mental health and substance abuse
have a large role in sex offender recidivism rates and their ability to properly manage themselves
once they have been released (Abracen & Looman, 2011). If the CSC is able to effectively
incorporate treatment for these kinds of issues into their National Sex Offender Programs, there
is the potential that these programs will become more effective. By incorporating this type of
treatment into sex offender rehabilitation programs, the need for offenders to attend two,
distinctly separate programs for potentially linked issues, is eliminated.
Secondly, the research shows that offenders who participate in sex offender rehabilitation
programs, have lower recidivism rates than those who do not. The CSC should be able to
mandate that specific offenders participate in certain programs and impose sanctions if this
mandate is not met. By forcing certain high risk offenders to participate in sex offender
rehabilitation programs, it is probable that recidivism rates for sex offenders will continue to
decrease however, further research is needed to ensure this would be the case.
Thirdly, the CSC needs to create more community based programs for offenders who are
not under their direct supervision. If there were more programs offered to sex offenders who
have been released from prison, it can be concluded that the incidence of sexual recidivism will
drop. Along with the offenders themselves, the research also shows that the population of the

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

26

community where an offender is being released will feel happier, and safer, knowing that the
offender is receiving continued support and treatment from the CSC (Wilson et al, 2007).
Finally, the CSC should continue their practice of developing programs based on ‘what
works’. According to the CSC, their programs “are guided by the most recent evidence in
correctional research, relevant theory and current practices” (Correctional Service of Canada,
2016. p. 1). Through continuing to keep up with the newest research available, the CSC will be
able to continue to offer effective programs, and keep up with other comparable countries in the
area of sex offender rehabilitation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the research shows that the Correctional Service of Canada’s sexual
offender rehabilitation programs are fairly comprehensive and effective. Through designing
programs around the most current research, the CSC is able to offer comprehensive programs in
the area of reducing recidivism for sexual offenders incarcerated in their facilities. Although
there are areas in which the CSC is able to improve, it is obvious that a fair amount of research
and development has gone into ensuring that sex offenders are met with programs which will
encourage them to challenge their emotions, and are directed at resolving underlying issues
which could cause them to reoffend. Through these programs, and continued and additional
support for sex offenders outside of CSC facilities, the Correctional Service of Canada will
continue to ensure that all stakeholders needs are met when it comes to the issue of rehabilitating
sex offenders in Canada.

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

27

References
Abracen, J., Looman, J., Ferguson, M., Harkins, L., & Mailloux, D. (2011). Recidivism among
treated sexual offenders and comparison subjects: Recent outcome data from the
Regional Treatment Centre (Ontario) High-Intensity Sex Offender Treatment
Programme. Journal Of Sexual Aggression, 17(2), 142-152. doi:
10.1080/13552600903511980
Correctional Service of Canada. (2012). Correctional Service of Canada Profile. Retrieved from
http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/publications/005007-8505-eng.shtml
Correctional Service of Canada. (2015). FORUM on corrections research: Everything you
wanted to know about Canadian federal sex offenders and more… Retrieved from http://
www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/forum/e034/e034b-eng.shtml
Correctional Service of Canada. (2014a). Frequently asked questions: National correctional
programs. Retrieved from http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/correctional-process/002001-2022eng.shtml
Correctional Service of Canada. (2014b). National sex offender programs. Retrieved from http://
www.csc-scc.gc.ca/correctional-process/002001-2008-eng.shtml
Correctional Service of Canada. (2016). Offender rehabilitation. Retrieved from http://www.cscscc.gc.ca/correctional-process/002001-2000-eng.shtml
Craig, L. A., Browne, K. D., Stringer, I., & Hoguee, T. E. (2008). Sexual reconviction rates in the
United Kingdom and actuarial risk estimates. Child Abuse & Neglect, 32(1), 121-138.
doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.09.002

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

28

Department of Justice. (2016). How sentences are imposed. Retrieved from http://
www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/victims-victimes/sentencing-peine/imposed-imposees.html
Evaluation Branch - Performance Assurance Sector. (2009). Evaluation report: Correctional
Service Canada’s correctional programs. Retrieved from Correctional Service Canada’s
website http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pa/cop-prog/cop-prog-eng.pdf
Gideon, L., & Sung, H. (Eds.). (2011). Rethinking corrections: Rehabilitation, reentry, and
Reintegration. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. Retrieved from http://
web.ebscohost.com/
Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (n.d.). Static 99. Retrieved from http://www.static99.org
Harder, D. W. (2010). History of common law and statute law in Canada. Retrieved from https://
ece.uwaterloo.ca/~dwharder/PPE/History_of_law/
Harris, A. J. R., & Hanson, R. K. (2003). Sex offender recidivism: A simple question.
Retrieved from Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada website https://
www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/sx-ffndr-rcdvsm/sx-ffndr-rcdvsm-eng.pdf
Looman, J., & Abracen, J. (2011). Substance abuse among high-risk sexual offenders: Do
measures of lifetime history of substance abuse add to the prediction of recidivism over
actuarial risk assessment instruments?. Journal Of Interpersonal Violence, 26(4),
683-700. doi:10.1177/0886260510365871
Lussier, P., Gress, C., Deslauriers-Varin, N., & Amirault, J. (2014). Community risk management
of high-risk sex offenders in Canada: Findings from a quasi-experimental study. JQ:
Justice Quarterly, 31(2), 287-314. Retrieved from http://www.acjs.org/page/JQ

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

29

Moulden, H. M., Chaimowitz, G., Mamak, M., & Hawes, J. (2014). Understanding how sexual
offenders compare across psychiatric and correctional settings: Examination of Canadian
mentally ill sexual offenders. Journal Of Sexual Aggression, 20(2), 172-181. doi:
10.1080/13552600.2013.794903
Nally, J. M., Lockwood, S., Taiping, H., & Knutson, K. (2014). Post-release recidivism and
employment among different types of released offenders: A 5-year follow-up study in the
United States. International Journal Of Criminal Justice Sciences, 9(1), 16-34. Retrieved
from http://www.sascv.org/ijcjs/
Public Safety Canada. (2015a). Frequently asked questions about the release of offenders.
Retrieved from https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cntrng-crm/crrctns/protctn-gnst-hghrsk-ffndrs/faq-eng.aspx
Public Safety Canada. (2015b). Warrant expiry date. Retrieved from https://
www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cntrng-crm/crrctns/protctn-gnst-hgh-rsk-ffndrs/wrrnt-xpr-dten.aspx
Schweitzer, R., & Dwyer, J. (2003). Sex crime recidivism: Evaluation of a sexual offender
treatment program. Journal Of Interpersonal Violence, 18(11), 1292-1310. doi:
10.1177/0886260503256658
Skelton, A., & Vess, J. (2008). Risk of sexual recidivism as a function of age and actuarial risk.
Journal Of Sexual Aggression, 14(3), 199-209. doi:10.1080/13552600802267098
Statistics Canada. (2016). Adult correctional statistics in Canada 2014/2015. (Statistics Canada
Catalogue no 85-002-X). Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/
2016001/article/14318-eng.htm

SEXUAL OFFENDER REHABILITATION

30

Wilson, R. J., Picheca, J. E., & Prinzo, M. (2007). Evaluating the effectiveness of
professionally-facilitated volunteerism in the community-based management of high-risk
sexual offenders: Part one – effects on participants and stakeholders. Howard Journal Of
Criminal Justice, 46(3), 289-302. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2311.2007.00475.x