Drug (hormone) treatment for offenders

?

Biological treatments for offenders

Anti- androngenic pharmcotherapy is the use of medication to lower testosterone levels, which leads to a decrease of devient and non- devient sexual urges. This medication does not require surgical invasion and its effects are capable of being reveresed, although this comes with a drug withdrawel process.

CA has an ant- androngenic effect, it quickly reduces sexual drives and deivant fantacies. Though it is not available in the USA, just in canada.

There are side effects to this such as liver dsyfunction. 

It is as effective as castration in reducing recidivism rates.

1 of 5

Evaluation of hormone treatments

D- Anger management can be used as an alternative treatment. This involves sessions in which they aim to change behavioural patterns and the causes of their agressive outbursts. This treatment may be deemed more effective as it looks at the root causes of agression, rather than just masking the symptoms as hormone treatments do, creating a 'chemcial straightjacket'

E- The treatment of criminality through hormones can be argued as a very high form of social control. The criminals do not have any say in what drug they take , the practicioner decides all of this for them, so they are not taking any active stance in their treatment 

S- support from maletsky (see next card)

Side effects- there can be some serious side effects, such as liver dsyfunction

Expence - Hormone therapy is available on the NHS. This means that it should be avaiable and acessable to all, but maletskys study showed that this was not the case. 

R- Hormone treatment only masks the symptoms of agression, rather than trying to get to the root cause

T- not very time consuming, but they may have to take the drugs every day (multiply)

2 of 5

Maletzky (2006)

Aim - The aim of the study was to evaluate the offenders who had been assesed for appropriateness of those on MPA on or before release. The study followed up the people who had been judged and the one who including those who did not take up the programm even if it was judged appropriate.

The aim was to see the outcome of being on MPA compared to not being on the treatment

This study was a reterospective review because it looked back on 275 inmates after their relasese to look at recidivism rates and compare it between those on MPA and those who were not.

The dose of MPA was given by injection, once every 2 weeks.

Questionairres were used to collect the outcome data, this included whether a new offence had been committed since release, whether their had been a violation of parole, etc.

3 of 5

Maletzky (2006) Results

Out of the 275 original offenders, 134 (48.7%) were reccomended to recieve MPA and 141 (51.3%) were not recommended

The crime itself was looked at against whether or not they were recommended MPA, and it was found that alot of reccomendations were for the most shocking crimes.

It was also noted that 70% of homosexual peadophiles were recommended, whereas only 46% of heterosexual peadophiles were reccomended treatment. 

About 31% of the reccomendations but not recieving treatment went on to commit a further crime and 60% of these criimes were sexual ones. 

Therefore, anti- androgens versus no treatment led to lower rates of sexual recidivism and decreased sexual arousal to stimuli that may have previouly caused arousal

4 of 5

Maletzky (2006) Evaluation

R- Highly reliable. Maletzky's research is backed up by many other research studies including Emory et. al. (1992) who found similar results. Therefore there is consistancy in findings which strengthans conclusions drawn

A- An application of this study can be to use this treatment on peadophiles to try and reduce their seuxal urges during the rehabilitation process

V- Validity was established. A variety of different mesaures were taken when looking at the outcome data, including their employment rates and specific crime. This means that the outcomes focused on more than just recidivism and provided rich and valid data into the use of MPA

Low validity- The supervisors were asked to make a judgement on whether they thought that the P was 'doing well' this is a very subjective question which may lead to interpration and bias in the answer

Ethics - Ethics for this study were fine, as it was a reterosepctive study, and this is what the criminals would have been doing anyway regardless of if the study was taking place or not

5 of 5

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Drug treatments resources »