Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) to prevent sexual offender recidivism
A comparison of their development in France and Canada
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijrr.v2i2.3901Keywords:
Circle of support and accountability, sexual offenders, relapse, desistance, prevention, cercles de soutien et de responsabilité, agresseurs sexuels, récidive, désistance, préventionAbstract
There is growing interest worldwide in Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA), which were created 24 years ago in Hamilton (Canada) in response to public concern about the reintegration of sex offenders into society after their release from incarceration. These circles support the ex-offender in the social rehabilitation process. They already exist in a number of countries, but their introduction in France is slow. The aim of this article is to explain the barriers to setting up CoSAs in France, taking into account the difficulties encountered in previous and current French experiences, and in relation to cultural differences between France and Canada.
References
1. Wilson RJ, McWhinnie AJ, Picheca Janice E, Prinzo M, Cortoni F. Circles of support and accountability: engaging community volunteers in the management of high‐risk sexual offenders. Howard J Crim Justice 2007;46(1):1-15.
2. Wilson RJ, McWhinnie AJ. Circles of support & accountability: the role of the community in effective sexual offender risk management. In: Phenix A, Hoberman HM (eds). Sexual offending: predisposing antecedents, assessments and management. New York, NY: Springer New York; 2016. p. 745-54.
3. Wilson RJ, Cortoni F, McWhinnie AJ. Circles of support & accountability: a Canadian national replication of outcome findings. Sex Abuse 2009;21(4):412-30.
4. Wilson RJ, Picheca Janice E, Prinzo M. Evaluating the effectiveness of professionally‐facilitated volunteerism in the community‐based management of high‐risk sexual offenders: part one – effects on participants and stakeholders. Howard J Crim Justice 2007;46(3):289-302.
5. Bates A, Williams D, Wilson C, Wilson RJ. Circles south east: the first 10 years 2002-2012. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 2013;58(7):861-85.
6. Wilson RJ, Picheca Janice E, Prinzo M. Evaluating the effectiveness of professionally‐facilitated volunteerism in the community‐based management of high‐risk sexual offenders: Part two – a comparison of recidivism rates. Howard J Crim Justice 2007;46(4):327-37.
7. Duwe G. Can circles of support and accountability (CoSA) work in the United States? preliminary results from a randomized experiment in Minnesota. Sex Abuse 2012;25(2):143-65.
8. Maruna S. Making good: how ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington, DC American Psychological Association; 2001.
9. Hanvey S, Philpot T, Wilson C. A community-based approach to the reduction of sexual reoffending: circles of support and accountability. London, United Kingdom: Jessica Kingsley Publishers; 2011.
10. McCartan K, Kemshall H, Westwood S, Solle J, MacKenzie G, Cattel J, et al. Circles of support and accountability (CoSA): a case file review of two pilots. London, United-Kingdom: The University of West England, De Montfort University and the Ministry of Justice; 2014.
11. Höing MA, Vogelvang B, Bogaerts S. Sex offenders’ process of desistance in CoSA. In: Höing M (ed). Empowering circles: circles of support and accountability. Oosterhout, NE: OCC De Hoog B.V.; 2015. p. 57-82.
12. Höing MA, Bogaerts S, Vogelvang B. Helping sex offenders to desist offending: the gains and drains for cosa volunteers – a review of the literature. Sex Abuse 2014;28(5):364-402.
13. Ward T, Maruna S. Rehabilitation. Ney Work, NY: Taylor & Francis; 2007.
14. Willis GM, Levenson JS, Ward T. Desistance and attitudes towards sex offenders: facilitation or hindrance? J Fam Violence 2010;25(6):545-56.
15. Höing MA. Empowering circles: circles of support and accountability. Oosterhout, NE: Tilburg University; 2015.
16. Elliott IA, Beech AR. A UK cost-benefit analysis of circles of support and accountability interventions. Sex Abuse 2012;25(3):211-29.
17. Directive 2012/29/UE du Parlement Européen et du Conseil du 25 octobre 2012 établissant des normes minimales concernant les droits, le soutien et la protection des victimes de la criminalité́ et remplaçant la décision-cadre 2001/220/JAI du Conseil. JO Union Européenne L.315/57. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019)
18. Höing MA, Bates A, Caspers J, Goei K, Hanvey S, Pasmans V, et al. European handbook, COSA, circle of support and accountability. Hertogenbosch, Netherland: Avans University of Applied Sciences; 2011. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019; traduction par Chollier M., Cochez F.)
19. Loi n° 2014-896 du 15 août 2014 relative à l'individualisation des peines et renforçant l'efficacité des sanctions pénales. JORF n°0189 du 17 août 2014 p. 13647. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019)
20. Circulaire du 15 mars 2017 relative à la mise en œuvre de la justice restaurative applicable immédiatement suite aux articles 10-1, 10-2 et 707 du code de procédure pénale, issus des articles 18 et 24 de la loi n° 2014-896 du 15 août 2014. BOMJ n°2017-03 du 31 mars 2017. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019)
21. Cochez F, Delage A. Etude de faisabilité, étude d’adaptation et plan d’adoption pour l’implantation de CSR en France Projet Circles4EU (Daphné III, 2013-2015). 2015. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019)
22. Baste Morand L. La réparation pénale. Un embryon français de justice restaurative. Cah Dyn 2014;59(1):61-7.
23. Schnapper D. La République face aux communautarismes. Etudes 2004;400(2):177-88.
24. Thomasset A. L'Eglise et le communautarisme. Etudes 2005;403(9):183-92.
25. Prouteau L, Wolff F-C. Donner son temps : les bénévoles dans la vie associative. Econ Stat 2004;372:3-39.
26. Archambault É. Le bénévolat en France et en Europe. Pensée plur 2005;9(1):11-34.
27. Benbouriche M, Ventéjoux A, Lebougault M, Hirschelmann A. L’évaluation du risque de récidive en France: expérience et attitudes des conseillers pénitentiaires d’insertion et de probation. Rev Int Criminol Police Tech Sci 2012;65(3):305-18.
28. Jonas C, Senon J-L, Voyer M, Delbreil A. Méthodologie de l'expertise en psychiatrie. Paris, France: Dunod; 2013.
29. Benbouriche M, Vanderstukken O, Guay J-P. Les principes d’une prévention de la récidive efficace : le modèle Risque-Besoins-Réceptivité. Pratiques Psychol 2015;21(3):219-34.
30. Guay J-P. L’évaluation du risque et des besoins criminogènes à la lumière des données probantes : Une étude de validation de la version française de l’inventaire de niveau de service et de gestion des cas – LS/CMI. Eur Rev Appl Psychol 2016;66(4):199-210.
31. Wilson RJ, McWhinnie AJ, Wilson C. Circles of Support and Accountability: an international partnership in reducing sexual offender recidivism. Prison Serv J 2008;138(178):26-36.
32. Courtois R, Humeau H, Bertsch I, Mozas ECL, Baudin G, Potard C. Élaboration d’une échelle des représentations sociales négatives concernant les auteurs de violences sexuelles. Ann Med Psychol 2019, in press
2. Wilson RJ, McWhinnie AJ. Circles of support & accountability: the role of the community in effective sexual offender risk management. In: Phenix A, Hoberman HM (eds). Sexual offending: predisposing antecedents, assessments and management. New York, NY: Springer New York; 2016. p. 745-54.
3. Wilson RJ, Cortoni F, McWhinnie AJ. Circles of support & accountability: a Canadian national replication of outcome findings. Sex Abuse 2009;21(4):412-30.
4. Wilson RJ, Picheca Janice E, Prinzo M. Evaluating the effectiveness of professionally‐facilitated volunteerism in the community‐based management of high‐risk sexual offenders: part one – effects on participants and stakeholders. Howard J Crim Justice 2007;46(3):289-302.
5. Bates A, Williams D, Wilson C, Wilson RJ. Circles south east: the first 10 years 2002-2012. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 2013;58(7):861-85.
6. Wilson RJ, Picheca Janice E, Prinzo M. Evaluating the effectiveness of professionally‐facilitated volunteerism in the community‐based management of high‐risk sexual offenders: Part two – a comparison of recidivism rates. Howard J Crim Justice 2007;46(4):327-37.
7. Duwe G. Can circles of support and accountability (CoSA) work in the United States? preliminary results from a randomized experiment in Minnesota. Sex Abuse 2012;25(2):143-65.
8. Maruna S. Making good: how ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington, DC American Psychological Association; 2001.
9. Hanvey S, Philpot T, Wilson C. A community-based approach to the reduction of sexual reoffending: circles of support and accountability. London, United Kingdom: Jessica Kingsley Publishers; 2011.
10. McCartan K, Kemshall H, Westwood S, Solle J, MacKenzie G, Cattel J, et al. Circles of support and accountability (CoSA): a case file review of two pilots. London, United-Kingdom: The University of West England, De Montfort University and the Ministry of Justice; 2014.
11. Höing MA, Vogelvang B, Bogaerts S. Sex offenders’ process of desistance in CoSA. In: Höing M (ed). Empowering circles: circles of support and accountability. Oosterhout, NE: OCC De Hoog B.V.; 2015. p. 57-82.
12. Höing MA, Bogaerts S, Vogelvang B. Helping sex offenders to desist offending: the gains and drains for cosa volunteers – a review of the literature. Sex Abuse 2014;28(5):364-402.
13. Ward T, Maruna S. Rehabilitation. Ney Work, NY: Taylor & Francis; 2007.
14. Willis GM, Levenson JS, Ward T. Desistance and attitudes towards sex offenders: facilitation or hindrance? J Fam Violence 2010;25(6):545-56.
15. Höing MA. Empowering circles: circles of support and accountability. Oosterhout, NE: Tilburg University; 2015.
16. Elliott IA, Beech AR. A UK cost-benefit analysis of circles of support and accountability interventions. Sex Abuse 2012;25(3):211-29.
17. Directive 2012/29/UE du Parlement Européen et du Conseil du 25 octobre 2012 établissant des normes minimales concernant les droits, le soutien et la protection des victimes de la criminalité́ et remplaçant la décision-cadre 2001/220/JAI du Conseil. JO Union Européenne L.315/57. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019)
18. Höing MA, Bates A, Caspers J, Goei K, Hanvey S, Pasmans V, et al. European handbook, COSA, circle of support and accountability. Hertogenbosch, Netherland: Avans University of Applied Sciences; 2011. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019; traduction par Chollier M., Cochez F.)
19. Loi n° 2014-896 du 15 août 2014 relative à l'individualisation des peines et renforçant l'efficacité des sanctions pénales. JORF n°0189 du 17 août 2014 p. 13647. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019)
20. Circulaire du 15 mars 2017 relative à la mise en œuvre de la justice restaurative applicable immédiatement suite aux articles 10-1, 10-2 et 707 du code de procédure pénale, issus des articles 18 et 24 de la loi n° 2014-896 du 15 août 2014. BOMJ n°2017-03 du 31 mars 2017. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019)
21. Cochez F, Delage A. Etude de faisabilité, étude d’adaptation et plan d’adoption pour l’implantation de CSR en France Projet Circles4EU (Daphné III, 2013-2015). 2015. (consulté le 03 octobre 2019)
22. Baste Morand L. La réparation pénale. Un embryon français de justice restaurative. Cah Dyn 2014;59(1):61-7.
23. Schnapper D. La République face aux communautarismes. Etudes 2004;400(2):177-88.
24. Thomasset A. L'Eglise et le communautarisme. Etudes 2005;403(9):183-92.
25. Prouteau L, Wolff F-C. Donner son temps : les bénévoles dans la vie associative. Econ Stat 2004;372:3-39.
26. Archambault É. Le bénévolat en France et en Europe. Pensée plur 2005;9(1):11-34.
27. Benbouriche M, Ventéjoux A, Lebougault M, Hirschelmann A. L’évaluation du risque de récidive en France: expérience et attitudes des conseillers pénitentiaires d’insertion et de probation. Rev Int Criminol Police Tech Sci 2012;65(3):305-18.
28. Jonas C, Senon J-L, Voyer M, Delbreil A. Méthodologie de l'expertise en psychiatrie. Paris, France: Dunod; 2013.
29. Benbouriche M, Vanderstukken O, Guay J-P. Les principes d’une prévention de la récidive efficace : le modèle Risque-Besoins-Réceptivité. Pratiques Psychol 2015;21(3):219-34.
30. Guay J-P. L’évaluation du risque et des besoins criminogènes à la lumière des données probantes : Une étude de validation de la version française de l’inventaire de niveau de service et de gestion des cas – LS/CMI. Eur Rev Appl Psychol 2016;66(4):199-210.
31. Wilson RJ, McWhinnie AJ, Wilson C. Circles of Support and Accountability: an international partnership in reducing sexual offender recidivism. Prison Serv J 2008;138(178):26-36.
32. Courtois R, Humeau H, Bertsch I, Mozas ECL, Baudin G, Potard C. Élaboration d’une échelle des représentations sociales négatives concernant les auteurs de violences sexuelles. Ann Med Psychol 2019, in press
Downloads
Published
2019-12-18
How to Cite
Bertsch, I., Cochez, F., Moulden, H. M., Prat, S. S., Lambert, H., Lassagne, G., Lamballais, C., Defache, L., Pelletier, M., & Courtois, R. (2019). Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) to prevent sexual offender recidivism: A comparison of their development in France and Canada. International Journal of Risk and Recovery, 2(2), 28–35. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijrr.v2i2.3901
Issue
Section
Original Article
License
Copyright Notice
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the International Journal of Risk and Recovery the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License. This allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book) with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their websites) before and during the submission process as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. (See The Effect of Open Access.)