Circles UK: Research & Evaluation 7 th July 2011 Dr Kieran McCartan

Contents Introduction to myself and research Public disclosure research  Debates, Issues and concerns around the Public Disclosure of sex offender information: considerations for Northern Ireland (McCartan, 2010 – North/South Irish Criminology conference)  Debates and Issues around Public Disclosure in the UK (McCartan, 2010 – ATSA)  Community & Practitioner attitudes: Northern Ireland & Wales (McCartan, In prep)  The Management of Sexual Offenders in the Community: Austerity, Engagement, Interaction & the ‘Big Society’ (McCartan - presented at British Society of Criminology, 2011)  Public Disclosure ESRC bid (McCartan, Kemshall & Husdon – Submitted to ESRC)

Introduction I am a multi-disciplinary researcher whose research ties criminology, psychology, media studies and social policy together. I am interested in the aetiology of offenders, their offending behaviour, public/stakeholder/media attitudes to crime, how this translates into policy and offender reintegration; particularly in regard to sex offenders. Teaching, CPD & KE areas;  Criminological Research Methods;  Criminal Psychology;  The aetiology, offending behaviour of and responses to Sexual offenders  Social construction of crime and offenders (incl, media, public and practitioner representations) Research areas:  The public disclosure of sex offender information.  Developments in new technology, especially mobile phone technology, and sexual offending.  Emotional congruence, relationship and sexual offenders  Broad societal, stake holder and cultural attitudes to sexual offenders there aetiology, punishment, treatment and reintegration.

Professionals’ understanding of government strategies for the management of child sexual abusers This paper discusses contemporary professional understandings of the UK government’s attitudes to and policies around the management of child sexual abusers. Based upon based upon empirical qualitative research with a range of professionals' working in or around the area of child sexual abuse (practitioners, academics and members of the media) (n=28). The research used semi structured interviews which were interpreted through qualitative (thematic) content analysis. Results indicate that the professionals sampled believe:  the government misperceive child sexual abuse, focusing on risk reduction and public protection rather than treatment and reintegration.  Although there are currently some good policies and intra-agency relationships around child sexual abuse in the UK, these could be built upon.  The majority of the participants were against the public disclosure of sex offender information believing that it is not a realistic approach in reducing the sexual abuse of children and therefore it should be implemented in the UK. These findings suggest that current and future policy on child sexual abuse should be grounded, realistic and not be populist or punitive in nature. Forthcoming, 2011; Probation journal.

Public Disclosure in the UK – early conference papers  Debates, Issues and concerns around the Public Disclosure of sex offender information: considerations for Northern Ireland (Irish society of criminology, 2010)  Debates and Issues around Public Disclosure in the UK (ATSA, 2010)

Community & Practitioner attitudes: Northern Ireland & Wales (In Prep) The research uses a mixed method design; interviews with stakeholder/practitioners and focus groups with the public from different political communities  Northern Ireland (nationalist, republican and mixed community sample)  Wales (rural welsh, urban welsh and urban immigrant). Preliminary results  Concerns over the impact of public disclosure on communities, on offenders, neighbours and family members (public and practitioners)  Believe that sexual offences should be split into two categories; child sexual offenders and other sexual offences, with the former being publically disclosed. (public)  Believe the public have a right to know about child sex offenders in there locales, and that the police should inform them straight away (public)  Believe the current scheme is too complicated, makes the applicant feel like they’ve done something wrong and that it should not be the police that handle the scheme. (public)  Believe the current scheme should not be lead by the police. (public)  Unsure of the rationale of the polices decision making, and if a previous criminal record would bias a participants chances (public)  Believe that the public are being put under pressure and not helped enough to deal with the information disclosed (practitioners)  Not happy to sign a disclosure form, but would do it and then may break it. (public and practitioners)  Fears/concerns that public disclosure could be extended to other crimes (public)  Not sure if applicants would believe a response of not a sexual abuse, being biased by their original perception and a lack of trust in the system (public and practitioners)  Feeling that the CJS is partially shifting the responsibility of monitoring sex offenders to the community (practitioners)

The Management of Sexual Offenders in the Community: Austerity, Engagement, Interaction & the ‘Big Society’ (1) Restrictions on the policing, Regulation and control of offenders brought about by the recent austerity cuts in the UK. Therefore which suggests that the CJS may struggle to control and monitor this group of offenders effectively with less resources and therefore is public disclosure seen as a cost saving mechanism for doing this in line with the conservatives vision of a ‘big society’? Big society aims "to create a climate that empowers local people and communities, building a big society that will 'take power away from politicians and give it to people (Cameron, 2010; Policing in the big society (27 th June 2011: Guardian; Herbert, 2011)  “Big Society we will tackle these root causes of poverty and criminality… In the Big Society … criminals will live in fear of the people – because there is nowhere for them to hide.” (Smith, May, 2010)  “ (policing should) focus on what works rather than having a preconception of what works - to be evidence led, and to encourage partnerships across public services, partnerships with the private and third sector. Perhaps above all, partnerships with the public.” (Herbert, 2011) Therefore “social repair “ though community engagement, opening up the justice process, restorative justice (Herbert, 2011) Community policing/self-protection:  does this mean that communities will ‘police’ can, should and/or will be expected to police themselves and be responsible for co-managing offenders?  Is the limited public disclosure of sex offender information about devolving responsibility for the management of sex offenders and the protection of children to the public? Presented at the British Society of Criminology, 2011

The Management of Sexual Offenders in the Community: Austerity, Engagement, Interaction & the ‘Big Society’ (2) What should the role of charities, NGO’s and community groups be in regard to sex offender management and reintegration?  Assistance for victims, offenders, associated people and communities  Replacing the existing CJS agencies  Partnership working with CJS agencies Hence if communities groups and therefore third sector agencies, are going to play a role in responding to offenders what role(s) can the realistically play:  Public education on the reality of sex offenders, sexual offending, sex offender management and the ‘appropriate’ use of disclosure.  Brokering between sex offenders and their victims/communities (with police/CJU support).  Reinforcing, not replacing, the role of the Criminal Justice System.  Encouraging best practice among those agencies involved in the management of sex offenders and questioning bad practice.  Helping convicted sex offenders reintegrate into society, and the community, through offering advice, support, counseling and life skills.  Offering victim and community support structures. However, what they should not be doing is:  Policing sex offenders themselves.  Confronting sex offenders themselves  Passing on sex offender details to the community, either formally or informally. Presented at the British Society of Criminology, 2011

Public Disclosure ESRC bid (i) The purpose of the knowledge impact grant is to bring together criminal justice policy makers, managers and practitioners with leading UK and international academics to facilitate learning from the recent UK pilots of a Sex Offender Public Disclosure scheme (Kemshall et al, 2010; Chan et al, 2010); focusing on the schemes impact upon sex offender reintegration and management, as well as public awareness. The proposal is to have four national Knowledge Exchange Events comprising a series of lectures, seminars and workshops; plus an interactive website hosting online discussion boards and publications. The target group is personnel from the Ministry of Justice, the National Offender Management Service, NGO's and charities who work in the field, as well as police personnel involved in the delivery of the scheme. Academic personnel will comprise the three academic teams who evaluated the pilots and related attitudes in England & Wales (Kemshall et al 2010); Northern Ireland (McCartan; research ongoing); & Scotland (Chan et al 2010). The aims of the seminar are:  To review the current evidence of best practice from the English and Scottish pilots, the schemes implementation in Wales, as well as the ongoing consultation process in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.  To review issues of access and take-up.  To review the impact and outcome of public disclosure in the UK, and what this means for the consultation process ongoing in both Northern and the Republic of Ireland.  To review the impact on sex offenders.

Public Disclosure ESRC bid (ii) With Professor Hazel Kemshall (DMU) & Dr Kristy Hudson (Cardiff) Partners  Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers;  National Organisation for the Treatment of Abusers (Executive Branch);  National Organisation for the Treatment of Abusers (Northern Ireland Branch);  National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children;  Northern Ireland Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders;  Circles UK;  Stop it Now!;  Public Protection Arrangements Northern Ireland;  Staffordshire and West Midlands Probation Trust;  Risk Management Authority;  Probation Board Northern Ireland;  Welsh Centre for Crime and Social Justice;  Risk Management Authority;  Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (Northern Ireland)). Funding/Resources  received £7,400 from partners  Requested £7,400 from ESRC  4 venues,  an edition of journal of Sexual Aggression  a range of presenters giving up their time to participate Dr Anne-Marie McAlinden (QUB) Professor Shaad Maruna (QUB) Professor Terry Thomas (Leeds Met) Professor Robin Wilson (McMaster) Roxanne Lieb (Washington State Institue for Public policy ) Dr Donald Findlater (Stop it Now!) Vanessa Chan & Lorraine Murray (Ipsos MORI Scotland)

Public Disclosure ESRC bid (iii) Seminar One: Access, impact and value-added (Scotland – with Risk Management Authority) Online discussion 1: Public disclosure and minority groups. This discussion will focus on both minority offending and victim groups, examining the unique issues, concerns and impacts that disclosure has upon these groups. Seminar Two: Localism, community and reintegration (Northern Ireland – with PPANI & NOTA NI) Online discussion 2: Sex offender reintegration. This discussion will focus on the realities of sex offender reintegration and management in the community, in the light of disclosure, austerity and changes to the CJS. Online discussion 3: Public awareness of sex offender aetiology, policy and practice. This discussion will focus on the public’s understanding of issues around sexual offending and whether existing professional educational techniques are working, or are is a change in tactics needed. Seminar Three: Devolution, Context, and Partnership Networks. (Wales - with Welsh Centre for Crime and social justice (WCCSJ) & Cardiff University) Online discussion 4: Transnational policy, practice and information sharing. As sexual offending is intentional what does this mean in terms of our understanding of aetiology, offending, treatment, policy, practice and management. Seminar Four: Public perceptions, media framing, and risk policy formation (England – with Staffordshire & West Midlands probation).

Discussion points and questions ?