{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015021459227467811, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.925742574257426, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Offender Rehabilitation: A Normative Framework for Forensic Psychologists

Community protection from offenders is addressed through punishment, deterrence, incapacitation, and/or rehabilitation. The current public policy debate about community protection refers to community rights as opposed to offender rights as if the two are mutually exclusive. However, in this article it will be argued that offender rehabilitation can enhance community protection if it addresses community rights and offender rights. The author proposes a normative framework to guide forensic psychologists in offender rehabilitation. The normative framework considers psychological theory—the risk-need model to address community rights and the good lives model to address offender rights. However, forensic psychologists operate within the context of the criminal justice system and so legal theory will also be considered. Therapeutic jurisprudence can balance community rights and offender rights within a human rights perspective. The proposed normative framework guides forensic psychologists in the assessment of risk, the treatment of need, and the management of readiness in balancing community rights and offender rights. Within a human rights perspective, forensic psychologists have a duty to provide offenders with the opportunity to make autonomous decisions about whether to accept or reject rehabilitation.