Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/16728
Record ID: 37cef9ae-cd84-452a-8ac9-f18a1ed780dd
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorOgloff, James R Pen
dc.contributor.authorMercado, Cynthia Calkinsen
dc.date.accessioned2022-06-30T23:27:56Z-
dc.date.available2022-06-30T23:27:56Z-
dc.date.issued2007en
dc.identifier.citationNo 1 Vol.: 30en
dc.identifier.issn0160-2527en
dc.identifier.urihttps://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/16728-
dc.formatPages 49-59en
dc.languageenen
dc.titleRisk and the preventive detention of sex offenders in Australia and the United Statesen
dc.title.alternativeInternational Journal of Law and Psychiatryen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.catalogid12083en
dc.subject.keywordnew_recorden
dc.description.notesThe development of recent statutory schemes, in both the United States and Australia, aim to keep the most dangerous sex offenders detained beyond the expiration of their prison sentence. In Kansas v. Hendricks (1997), the United States Supreme Court found constitutional Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) legislation that allows for the post-sentence, indefinite civil commitment of a subclass of dangerous offenders. More recently, the Australian High Court in Attorney-General (Qld) v. Fardon (2004) similarly upheld the constitutionality of Queensland's Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act (2003), which allows for the post-sentence preventive detention of sex offenders deemed to be at high risk of serious sexual recidivism. Because an evaluation of a sex offender's likelihood of re-offending is fundamental to these schemes, this article provides an overview of recent advances in the risk assessment literature, discussing base rates of sexual recidivism, the identification of empirically validated risk factors, and the utility of structured risk assessment tools. Although it is recommended that risk assessment measures be utilized to assist the courts in making sound decisions about commitment, the limits of current research knowledge and areas of future research need are discussed.en
dc.identifier.sourceInternational Journal of Law and Psychiatryen
dc.date.entered2014-07-21en
dc.description.physicaldescriptionPages 49-59en
Appears in Collections:Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing