Search

Research in Western countries has indicated that the cognitive distortions of sexual offenders play an etiological and maintenance role in offending. The present study examines whether the cognitive distortions hypothesized by previous Western studies can be found in Japanese sexual offenders against women. This study used the questionnaire administered by probation officers in the special cognitive-behavioral treatment programs for sexual offenders, which have been implemented since 2006 in Japan. Participants in the offender group were 80 Japanese male probationers and parolees (more than 19 years old, M age = 34.6, SD = 8.8) convicted of rape (n = 39) or indecent assault (n = 41). All of them attended special treatment programs at probation offices. The non-offender comparison group consisted of 95 Japanese male probation officers and police officers (M age = 35.5, SD = 11.4). A factor analysis of the questionnaire responses extracted three factors: Blaming the Victim, Minimization, and Avoidance of Responsibility. The data analyses showed that sexual offenders scored significantly higher than non-offender participants on the three subscales. No significant differences were found among four sexual offender groups classified as rapists or indecent assaulters and with or without previous convictions for sexual offenses. In conclusion, the results of this study indicate that rapists and indecent assaulters placed on probation or parole in Japan hold cognitive distortions concerning sexual assaults against women than the control group of probation and police officers. The findings of this study also suggest that cognitive distortions exhibited by sexual offenders against women transcend cultural divides. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To clarify the role of psychiatric/psychological evaluation of juvenile delinquents. Design: Case study. Materials and Methods: The cases in which the authors participated as psychiatric/psychological evaluators were studied. Two cases were presented and discussed in terms of family situation and life history, cause and circumstance of the offence, necessity of protective measures and possibility of rehabilitation. Results: These two cases form a striking contrast to each other due to the conflict that arises between the effectiveness of protective measures and society's allowance of application of them. Conclusion: Psychiatric/psychological evaluations in determining mitigating factors are important to be considered by lay judges as they make their determinations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]