| The majority of the residents at the MSOP have said that they believe the program to be punitive (78%). They are reprimanded for such things as forgetting to turn in their timecard or forgetting to put tools back in their proper place before leaving industry; they lose days of work if they over sleep or are late for another reason; told that they are lying even when they are telling the truth; are accused of having child pornography when they don’t (such as the movie “Superman”); are Opt Teamed for taking double doses of medication that the nursing staff gave to them; staff charting that they have acted inappropriately during visitation, etc. Many residents were being put in Protective Isolation for a minimum of 90 days for minor afflictions, such as a minor scuffle between two residents. Many staff members have charted false information in patient clinical charts, which when the resident appears before the three-judge panel, would make it seem as though they have not made any progress in treatment, and have been acting out in inappropriate manners. These are only a few examples of the punitive nature and abusive attitudes by administration and staff within the MSOP. The Minnesota Sex Offender Program, which was established in 1992, was termed to be a 3-5 year program. Since its inception, not one person has been released. Twenty-nine percent of the residents believe the treatment program should not last more than 2 years (16% - 3 years; 11% - 1 year; 5% - 5 years; 4% - 1.5 years; and 3% - 4 years). An effective treatment program should not have to take more than 2-3 years to complete. If a treatment program continues longer than this, it becomes mundane and ineffective, and is also a waste of taxpayers’ monies. The majority of the residents do not expect to complete or ever be released from the MSOP (45% of those who responded to the final question in the survey). Reasons being that they believe the program to be nothing more than preventive detention meant for punishment even though they paid for their crimes in prison. One resident stated “No one has completed the program as it stands…I saw someone grow old and die here, so what’s the point? We really have nothing to look forward to. Though I do desire to get out, my chances are low. There is usually supposed to be some kind of trust in a treatment setting, so a patient feels safe to open up and disclose [information], but here it seems you get consequences or some kind of snickering behind your back, actions are done against you, or it gets charted. [It’s as though] you’re this horrible person instead of someone who is opening up for positive [feedback] and growth.” In conclusion, the overall morale of the residents of the Minnesota Sex Offender Program is very low. They constantly live in fear of retaliation by staff members, have no hope for release, and are truly frustrated by what was once deemed to be an effective “treatment” program, but has been found to be nothing more than a means to lock them up and throw away the key. In other words, preventive detention at its worst. This waste of taxpayers’ monies must come to an end, and a rehabilitative process must begin to bring healing to those who are in need. Note: See attached documentation on the MSOP Treatment Overview and Modules. Also note in this information how the Minnesota Statute 253B.02, subd. 18b has been altered by MSOP administration. A copy of the original statute is also attached. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION In researching recidivism rates among sex offenders across the country, I have found that once-caught sex offenders rarely ever commit another sex crime. In fact, in a study done in Arizona in 2001, of 3,205 sex offenders who were released from the Arizona prison system (over a 15-year period from 1984 to 1998), only 10% returned to prison with a “new” felony conviction for a crime against persons (violent or sexual), and 5.5% with a new felony conviction for a sex crime. Rates of return with a new felony conviction for a sex crime varied as: 11.3% for miscellaneous sex offenses, 9.3% for sexual indecency/exposure, 5.9% for sexual assault/rape, 5% for child molestation, 5% for sexual abuse, and 3.5% for sexual conduct with a minor. Among the 1,649 sex offenders released from the Arizona prison system to the supervision of state parole officers, only 1.5% were returned to prison for a new sex crime while under supervision. Furthermore, for released sex offenders who could be followed for the following lengths of time, .5% returned with a new felony conviction for a sex crime within one year of release, 2% within two years, 3.4% within three years, 4.6% within four years, 5.1% within five years, 6% within six years, 6.7% within seven years, 7.1% within eight years, 7.2% within nine years, 7.8% within 10 years, 7.9% within 11 years, and 8.7% within 12 years. The NCIA produced a study in 1995 in which was stated that only 13% of once-caught sex offenders ever re-offend. That means that 87% do not go on to commit another sex crime. The Minnesota Department of Corrections in its Policy and Management Board Study conducted in December 2000, also states that only 12-13% of once-caught sex offenders ever recidivate. This gives clear evidence that the majority of once-caught sex offenders do not go on to pose a threat to society by committing additional sex crimes once they are released from prison. This makes one wonder why so many people across this country, who have already paid for their sex crimes in prison, have been civilly committed to what is deemed to be regional treatment facilities for rehabilitative treatment that is not being given. There is much evidence on outpatient and community-based treatment programs that have been scientifically proven to work in teaching tools to those who have committed sex crimes of various proportions, so that these individuals can go on to live normal, happy, productive lives. These types of programs also include family members, friends and other support persons, who have proven to be beneficial in helping these individuals to sustain from committing another sex crime. (See attached information on “Institute for Psychological Therapies” and “An Innovative Treatment Approach for Incestuous Fathers” [males]. Also attached is an article titled “Sex Offenders: Does Treatment Work”?) |
| RESEARCH OF THE MSOP TREATMENT PROGRAM |
 |
 |
|