Rehabilitation Measures for Young Sex Offenders to Prevent Recidivism

Regardless of age, sex offenders in prison or on probation will be assessed on their criminogenic risks and needs and undergo suitable programmes to reduce their risk of re-offending.

The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) runs a psychology-based programme to help sex offenders better manage their interpersonal relationships and emotions, and address their negative sexual attitudes. At the end of the programme, offenders are guided to develop individualised relapse prevention plans. Sex offenders in prison also attend other programmes, such as those to build better relations with their families, which will help their overall rehabilitation and reintegration.

Where the Courts have ordered probation, MSF will work with probationers and their families to develop intervention plans, including treatment programmes. The family and community play a key role in providing support for and monitoring the progress of the probationer. Examples of interventions include the Positive Adolescent Sexuality Treatment Programme and the Positive Psychotherapy Group. They equip the probationers with skills to improve their relationships, emotional coping and sexual regulation. MSF's research has found that for youths, who are at a developmental phase of sensation-seeking and impulsivity, their likelihood of re-offending is low when they receive appropriate treatment.

SPS and MSF will continue to strengthen their programmes based on research and evidence. For example, SPS has applied findings from a needs analysis of local sex offenders to enhance psychological interventions for them.

There are also on-going efforts by the Singapore Police Force (SPF) to engage schools and Universities to prevent sexual offences. SPF conducts crime prevention talks on sexual offences in schools and advises Universities on security measures and conducts joint patrols with campus security. SPF will continue to work with schools and universities to raise awareness of sexual crimes.

Mr Speaker, I have one supplementary question for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. There is public perception that University students tend to get away with their crime easily. For example, a 31-year-old man caught taking an upskirt video of a woman at Woodlands Checkpoint, was jailed four weeks in December 2019, whereas a 25-year-old NUS student was suspended for photographing two female students in the shower – no jail term.

Why is there such a discrepancy? Are we sending the wrong signal? Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary explain?

The position is very clear. Regardless of income levels or backgrounds, we take every crime seriously. The differences in sentencing could be a result of individual cases and there may be specific circumstances in a case that merit a different punishment or treatment. So, I think it is not wise to draw conclusions based on one or two cases. It is important that we send a very strong message that the rich do not get away easily or lightly for any type of crimes, including sexual offences.

Thank you, Sir. The perception is not just the rich who get away. It is, if you are in a University, you got bright future, we do not want ruin your future, so you get away easily. That is the public perception. So, how do we deal with this?

I understand. I think as a society, we need to look at this issue frankly, but my answer still stands. We should not draw certain conclusions based on one or two cases. But it is an important issue that we need to address together – whether you are rich or you are educated, you do not get away easily. The law applies regardless of our background or income levels. And it is important that we continue to dispel such misperceptions. And if there are specific instances or cases that the Member would like answers, perhaps the Member could file a separate Parliamentary Question (PQ) and we could give it the proper treatment.

Thank you, Sir. I would like to go back to the part about rehabilitation. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that during the probation, we do get the family involved in the rehabilitation process. But what about those who are incarcerated? Do we get the family involved in the rehabilitation process while they are in prison, as well? I think that is the important part. So, the question is, whether we have family functional therapy for inmates currently incarcerated for sex offences.

The intervention programmes are based on research. And in certain cases, it involves families but in most, it involves the offender having to address his or her own criminogenic needs or risks. I think the short answer to the Member's question is yes, there are family programmes, but not all interventions would involve the family. There are different modules and different individuals require different types of treatment.