The personal impact of delivering a one-to-one treatment programme with high-risk sexual offenders: Therapists' experiences

Abstract

Previous research suggests that delivering treatment for sexual offenders can have both positive and negative effects on therapists. We know less about the specific impact of conducting such work in different ways; for example, individually rather than in groups. This study aimed to explore the experiences of sexual offender therapists delivering a one-to-one programme with clients. Eleven therapists delivering an individual intervention with high-risk sexual offenders in English prisons took part in interviews and focus groups about the impact this work has had upon them. One participant also completed a diary charting their experiences while delivering the intervention. Content analysis identified that participants felt they experienced changes in how they viewed themselves, others and the therapeutic relationship, in both positive and negative ways. They also described experiencing intrusive thinking and feeling overly responsible for the outcome of treatment. However, positive effects were also identified. Findings suggest that the provision of structured supervisory support was particularly key in mitigating the impact of treatment delivery.     

当前我省医疗纠纷审理情况的调研报告

本文以医疗纠纷这一民生热点问题为切入点,总结了近年来我省医疗纠纷审理的基本情况,重点分析了医疗纠纷审理中常见的三大突出问题,即：法律适用＂二元化＂、医疗事故鉴定和医疗差错鉴定并存、医疗纠纷应否适用《中华人民共和国消费者权益保护法》（以下简称《消法》）。《报告》从平衡医患双方利益的角度出发,提出了相应的对策和建议。     

北京高院2009年知识产权十大案例解析

北京市高级人民法院知识产权庭日前发布的2009年知识产权十大案例,涉及面广,包括了4件商标侵权及不正当竞争案、3件著作权侵权案、2件专利侵权案和1件计算机软件著作权侵权案。通过对这些个案进行解析,并阐释相关法律问题,对知识产权案件的审判工作起到一定的示范和参考作用,对相关社会公众则具有一定的导向和指引意义。     

量刑规范化试点工作的调查与思考——以北仑法院的实践为例

量刑规范化是人民法院三五改革纲要确定的重要司法改革项目。为了能高效、高质地推动量刑规范化工作的进展,北仑法院成立了专门的课题组,就如何在我国现有的司法体制和诉讼机制框架内进一步推动量刑活动规范化的试点工作进行了关注与跟踪,在充分积累经验及综合分析的基础上形成了如下调研报告。     

应用酶组织化学方法鉴定死亡时间的初步探讨

利用7例颅脑外伤死亡的健康青年尸体,在死后48h,环境温度18～24℃,空气相对湿度83～92％和实验湿度54～64％的条件下,检测肝脏、肾脏酶活性的变化。实验结果表明,肝脏乳酸脱氢酶(LDH)和L-苹果酸脱氢酶(MDH),随着死亡时间的延长,活性逐渐减低,48h近于阴性;而肾脏上述二种酶活性则在死亡后6h和24h出现高峰,36h开始下降;肝脏的酸性磷酸酶(ACP)亦于死后6h和24h出现高峰,36h开始下降。而肾脏此种酶在死后18～24h,有增高趋势。笔者认为上述酶活性的规律性变化有助于死亡时间的推断。应用二种以上酶活性的变化特点,能够较准确地判断死亡时间。     

Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority

England's Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled that parents had the right to prevent a physician at the local health authority from prescribing contraceptives to girls under the age of 16 without parental consent. Since a girl was legally incapable of giving valid consent in other matters before that age, neither could she give valid consent to contraception or abortion. A doctor who provided contraception or abortion treatment to a girl under 16, except in an emergency or with permission of the court, would infringe on the legal rights of the parents. An appeal was taken to the House of Lords.     

Unity Dow v. Attorney-General (Botswana) [June 1991

The plaintiff was a citizen of Botswana, married to a non-citizen, whose children had been denied citizenship under a provision of the Citizenship Act 1984 that conferred citizenship on a child born in Botswana only if "a) his father was a citizen of Botswana; or b) in the case of a person born out-of-wedlock, his mother was a citizen of Botswana." The plaintiff claimed that this provision violated guarantees of the Botswana Constitution. The High Court agreed, holding that the provision infringed the right to liberty, the right not to be expelled from Botswana, the right not to be subjected to degrading treatment, and the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of sex. It concluded that the right to liberty had been infringed because the provision hampered a woman's free choice to marry a non-citizen and, in fact, undermined marriage; that the right not to be expelled from Botswana was infringed because, if the plaintiff's resident permit was not renewed she would be forced to leave Botswana if she desired to stay with her family; and that the right not to be subjected to degrading treatment was infringed because any law discriminating against women constitutes an offense against human dignity. This decision was subsequently upheld by the Botswana Court of Appeal.     

South Glamorgan County Council v. W and B

A Family Division English court held that a minor can be admitted to a psychiatric care facility against her wishes if it is in the best interest of the minor. The affected minor had been previously assessed by various psychiatrists and social workers after she had refused to attend school and begun to lead a reclusive life. Their recommendation had been that she be removed from her present home with her father and be admitted into an adolescent unit where she could receive psychological therapy. Following the divorce of her parents, the minor's temperament and mental health had seriously deteriorated. Although her father opposed these proceedings, her mother and her court appointed guardian both thought that psychiatric care was most appropriate for the minor. The court agreed, stating that the best interests of the child override any other considerations.     

Attorney General v. X

In this case in which a 14-year-old girl said she had become pregnant after being raped by her friend's father, the Attorney General of Ireland had enjoined the girl and her parents from traveling to England for an abortion. A psychologist had testified that in her present state of mind, the girl was suicidal. The Supreme Court of Ireland held that the right to life supersedes all other rights, including the right to travel. However, if there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother which can only be avoided by termination of the pregnancy, then an abortion is permissible. The Court determined that the girl's risk of suicide satisfied this condition, and therefore the girl was allowed to terminate her pregnancy.     

Sanchez v. Fairview Developmental Center: findings of fact and conclusions of law denying preliminary injunction. (No. CV 88-0129 FFF (Tx), 30 Mar 1988)

Jesus Sanchez is a profoundly retarded patient in a semicomatose state in California's Fairview Developmental Center. His parents requested that the Center remove his gastrostomy tube. Fairview refused the request because it contradicted state hospital policies. Claiming that the refusal violated Jesus's right of privacy, his parents sought to have a federal court interpret the Constitution in a manner requiring California to allow for unilateral termination of their son's life. The parents moved for a preliminary injunction compelling Fairview to honor their request. The Court refused to find that the Constitution provided a mandate to terminate life-sustaining treatment. The Court said that Jesus could be moved from Fairview to a private facility that would carry out the request, but declined to issue the injunction because the parents failed to demonstrate a fair chance of success on the merits or that irreparable harm would accrue if the injunction were not ordered.