Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

After Hendricks: defining constitutional treatment for Washington State's Civil commitment program.

Roxanne Lieb1

  • 1Director, Washington State Institute for Public Policy, Olympia, Washington 98504-0999, USA. liebr@wsipp.wa.gov

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
|July 4, 2003
PubMed
Summary

Washington State

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Post-release controls for sex offenders in the U.S. and UK.

International journal of law and psychiatry·2011
Same author

Good science and progress in sex offender treatment are intertwined: a response to marshall and marshall (2007).

Sexual abuse : a journal of research and treatment·2008
Same author

Developing policies for 'psychopaths': can governments learn from experience?

Criminal behaviour and mental health : CBMH·2006
See all related articles

Area of Science:

  • Forensic Psychology
  • Legal Psychology
  • Public Policy

Background:

  • Washington State enacted its sexually violent predator law in 1990.
  • Fourteen other states have since adopted similar civil commitment laws for dangerous sexual offenders.
  • Legal challenges have focused on the adequacy of treatment programs for committed individuals.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review court orders and special master reports concerning Washington's civil commitment treatment program.
  • To detail the requirements established by the federal court for an adequate treatment program.
  • To document the program's deficiencies and successes in meeting court mandates.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of 19 special master reports submitted to the federal district court over an eight-year period.
  • Review of federal court orders related to the treatment program's deficiencies and injunctions.
  • Examination of the oversight process by a court-appointed special master.

Main Results:

  • The federal court placed Washington's program under injunction in 1994 due to deficiencies.
  • A special master was appointed to oversee program improvements and reported on progress and shortcomings.
  • As of 2003, the court continued to oversee the program, with significant fines threatened for non-compliance.

Conclusions:

  • The court's intervention highlights ongoing challenges in providing adequate treatment for sexually violent predators.
  • The special master's reports provide a detailed account of the legal and programmatic requirements for such treatment.
  • Continued judicial oversight underscores the critical importance of effective treatment in civil commitment cases.

Related Experiment Videos