As many of you have likely noticed, I often include a plea for articles in my introductory note to our quarterly newsletter. Generally, I find it difficult to cajole people into submitting something. This time around, I am in the pleasurable position of actually having too much copy for one issue. So, I’m getting to hold back on at least one piece. But, before you all rest easy, I am still looking for quality articles for the Spring and Summer editions. Please do not let my current happy disposition lull you into inaction. And, remember: students, students, students…
For Winter 2009, we continue a theme that was introduced in the Fall edition. In that issue, Mark Carich, Gerry Dobkowski, and Nichole Delehanty argued that we should not be too hasty in casting away the Relapse Prevention Model. In response, Pamela Yates and Tony Ward suggest that it is truly time to move on, and point to the Good Lives/Self-Regulation Model as the heir-apparent in the sexual offender treatment world. Of course, Carich and friends offer additional comments, by way of rebuttal.
In a similar vein, familiar ATSA personality Anita Schlank offers her perspective on research and practice. Specifically, she argues that we may often jump too soon on a particular assessment or treatment bandwagon, without necessarily examining all the research evidence supporting such moves. In many respects, Anita’s article is a good companion piece to the collegial debate between Carich et al. and Yates and Ward. Dr. Schlank’s article is actually a chapter from the forthcoming next edition of The Sexual Predator series that she has been editing for the past number of years. Thanks to Civic Research Institute for allowing us early access.
Many of you may remember the listserv post early last year from the Static-99 crew, suggesting that the norms might be out of whack, and asking for data sets. At the fall conference, Leslie Helmus, Karl Hanson, Andrew Harris, and David Thornton held a symposium, in which they released new norms and a very different way of interpreting scores on the Static-99. Given the reliance on this instrument by most of us in the field—especially civil commitment evaluators—it seemed important that we get the lowdown on how to make sense of these new data. Although you will ultimately find greater explanations on the www.static99.org website, Leslie, Karl, and David provide helpful details in their paper in this issue of The Forum. Given that Leslie is one of Karl’s graduate students, and that this paper was coordinated largely by her, I’m going to consider this our “student” submission for the issue.
Rounding out this issue are some committee reports and two organizational housekeeping matters: 1. Keep in mind that submission of abstracts for consideration for this year’s conference must be done by February 27, 2008. This year’s conference—in Dallas, September 30 to October 3—proves to be every bit as exciting as Atlanta was this past fall. Be sure to get your submissions in for consideration. 2. Nominations for Midwest and Southwest Regional Reps on the Board of Directors are due by 4:00 pm PDT on April 14, 2009.
In closing, enjoy this edition of the Forum—your voice in ATSA. And, think on the fact that we are now sharing this quarterly publication with over 2900 members!
Robin J. Wilson, Ph.D., ABPP
[Back to Top]