A Working Adaptation of the Good Lives Model for use with Young People who Display Harmful Sexual Behaviour - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – A Working Adaptation of the Good Lives Model for use with Young People who Display Harmful Sexual Behaviour PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 6c5f84-ZGQ5Y


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

A Working Adaptation of the Good Lives Model for use with Young People who Display Harmful Sexual Behaviour


Title: A Working Adaptation of the Good Lives Model for use with Young People who Display Harmful Sexual Behaviour Author: laura Last modified by – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:9
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Date added: 27 December 2019
Slides: 42
Provided by: laur1154


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: A Working Adaptation of the Good Lives Model for use with Young People who Display Harmful Sexual Behaviour

G-maps Adaptation of the Good Lives Model for
Use With Young People who Display Harmful Sexual
Behaviour Laura Wylie NOTA
SCOTLAND Stirling, 2014
The G-map Programme
  • Based in Manchester
  • Have worked with 1000 young people since 1988
  • Provide assessment, individual therapeutic
    programmes of work, group work, family work,
    consultancy and training
  • Currently working with young people aged 7-21 yrs
  • Spectrum approach

G-maps Journey
  • NOTA
  • Authors of AIM
  • 2013 The Good Lives Model for Adolescents Who
    Sexually Harm (Edited by Bobbie Print), Safer
    Society Press

What is a Good Life?
The Good Lives Model www. goodlivesmodel.com
The Good Lives Model
  • The GLM is linked to the notions of human dignity
    and rights, and takes a positive psychological
    approach to intervention with harmful sexual
  • Primary Goods aspects of life sought for their
    intrinsic value
  • Secondary Goods (means) - provide concrete ways
    of securing primary goods e.g. a job, a
    friendship, playing sport
  • For a comprehensive overview of the GLM see Ward
    Brown (2004), Ward Gannon (2006), Ward, Mann
    Gannon (2007), Ward Marshall (2004), Ward
    Stewart (2003).

Wards 11 Primary Goods
  • Life (healthy living and functioning)
  • Knowledge (how well informed one feels about
    things of personal importance)
  • Excellence in play (hobbies and recreational
  • Excellence in work (including mastery
  • Excellence in agency (autonomy, power and
  • Inner peace (freedom from emotional turmoil and
  • Relatedness (including intimate, romantic and
    familial relationships)
  • Community (connection to wider social groups)
  • Spirituality (finding meaning and purpose in
  • Pleasure (feeling good in the here and now)

The Development of the GLM-A
  • G-map has undertaken an informed and structured
    adaptation of the GLM to enhance its
    accessibility and resonance with young people -
    Focus group, service user feedback, piloting,
    continued refinement

G-maps Eight Primary Needs
  • Emotional Health (self esteem, emotional safety,
    managing feelings)
  • Physical Health (sleep, diet, hygiene, physical
  • Sexual Health (sexual knowledge, sexuality,
    sexual development)
  • Having Fun (thrill /excitement, play)
  • Achieving (status, knowledge, competence)
  • Being my own person (independence, autonomy, self
    management, control of others / situations)?
  • Having a Purpose Making a Difference
    (spirituality, fulfilment, hope, and generosity)
  • Having People in My Life (attachment, intimate,
    romantic, family, social and community


Language Used in the GLM Language Used in GLM-A
Primary goods My needs
Secondary goods How I meet my needs
Overarching need My most important need
Internal conditions (internal capacity) The strengths and skills I have to help me meet my needs
External conditions (external capacity) How others can help me meet my needs
Internal obstacles The things about me that get in the way of meeting my needs
External obstacles The things around me that get in the way of meeting my needs
Conflict Which of my needs fight against each other?
Scope Which needs do I neglect?
Integrating the GLM
  • From referral
  • to transition
  • and

Does doing Good Lives mean not doing RNR
(Risk, Need, Responsivity principles,
Andrews, Bonta Hoge, 1990)? Does doing Good
Lives mean overlooking risk???!!!
  • We have been so busy thinking about how to
  • sexual crimes that we have overlooked a rather
  • truth recidivism may be further reduced through
  • helping offenders to live better
  • lives, not simply targeting
  • isolated risk factors
  • (Ward et al 2006)

The GLM provides a strong theoretical rationale
and can accommodate the major RNR principles
The GLM conceptualises empirically identified
needs as internal and external obstacles these
constitute dynamic risk factors which become
the target of GL intervention
  • Safer Society Press (2009) 1379 programmes
    surveyed in USA Canada showed little evidence
    that focusing on criminogenic needs alone results
    in reduced re-offending

Dual focus on risks and strengths
  • Growing consensus Rich (2011) treatment and
    rehabilitation built on correcting deficits is
    not likely to be as successful or affirming as
    treatment built on highlighting and reinforcing
  • HSB - Griffin et al (2008) made observation that
    some of the young peoples strengths functioned as
    protective factors - they mitigated the effects
    of risk (e.g. availability and use of emotional
    confidante could reduce the young persons
    propensity to self-soothe via maladaptive
    strategies such as HSB).

  • Qualitative study, G-map practitioners and
    service users (2012).
  • One young person said Ive done things in the
    past that I couldnt talk about . . . because it
    hurt too much . . . when I saw how my behavior
    fitted with the Good Lives Model I felt relieved
    that it was understandable . . . and it was
    easier to talk about it to others who
  • Another young person said that his mothers
    involvement in the Good Lives Support Network
    helped improve their relationship to the extent
    that she supported and encouraged him whereas
    before she had hated, cried, and shouted at me.

  • 2012 - Harkins, Flak, Beech Woodhams compared
    the GLM approach with HSB with standard relapse
    prevention (RP) approach (based on RNR
  • Comparisons examined -
  • Attrition rates
  • Change in targeted areas achievement of a
    post-intervention profile
  • Views of therapists and participants.
  • Attrition rates and achieved change similar
    across the 2 programmes, i.e. equally effective,
    BUT practitioners and participants reported the
    experience of the GLM approach in a much more
    positive, future-focused manner in comparison to
    RP. Leigh Harkins continues to develop this
    multi-national research project.
  • What will the implications for longer-term
    recidivism be??

Just a thought.
  • Does the focus on strengths which permeates the
    GLM help front-line workers to develop and
    maintain those therapeutic qualities associated
    with enhancing treatment effectivenesswarmth,
    reward, encouragement, empathy? (E.g. W. L.
    Marshall G. A. Serran Y. M. Fernandez R.
    Mulloy R. E. Mann D. Thornton, 2003).

The GLM/GLM-A facilitate the engagement of the
young persons family and other key systems in
the process of change A systemic approach with
adolescents has been linked with reducing
recidivism longer-term desistance (e.g.
Borduin et al, 2009) The inclusion of the young
persons family as members of the Good Lives
support network confirms to parents that they
are viewed as important contributors to
intervention planning and ensures that they
understand the young person's needs
  • Individualism and personal identity are
    preserved, including young persons cultural,
    learning and social needs
  • Applicability to broad range of populations.
    G-map use with LD, females, diverse risk

A Framework - not a stand alone model
  • A Good Lives assessment represents one element of
    assessment and problem formulation, we also need
    to draw on existing Pathways Models, use
    psychometric measures and use established and
    effective risk assessment tools
  • The GLM informs intervention planning, but does
    not tell us where to begin, where to end, or what
    to do in the middle! We need to make clinically
    relevant decisions which consider-
  • Effective intervention modalities
  • Responsivity issues
  • Sequencing which is considerate
  • of neurobiological impact factors
  • Resilience/Protective factors

Case Study Ben, aged 14
  • Bens offence was against an adult female who had
    mental health difficulties and took place when he
    was 13 years old. On the day of the offence the
    victim was outside her home in a state of
    confusion and asked Ben to check inside her home
    to make sure there were no intruders. When the
    victim thanked Ben for his help he approached her
    and began to suck her breast, telling her he
    loved her, and asking if he could stay. Ben
    received a 4 year custodial sentence. After a
    successful appeal he received a three year
    supervision order and was placed out of area in a
    specialist residential facility.

(No Transcript)
A Good Lives Assessment
  • Requires gathering information specific to the
    time of the HSB. G-map have developed a
    semi-structured interview for this purpose.
    Kingston, and Ward (2009) also recommend
    semi-structured interview.
  • Encompasses the prioritization of needs, the
    means by which the young people met their needs,
    the appropriateness of them, associated internal
    and external obstacles and resources, conflict,
    and lack of scope
  • Alternative ways of collecting the information-
    photographs/images, drawings, storyboarding, time
    lines, raps

Working towards my New Life
A job
Masked my feelings
Cared for siblings
Girl friend
Good Lives Plan
What do we know about my old life that might be relevant to my harmful sexual behaviour? What do we know about my old life that might be relevant to my harmful sexual behaviour?
About me Around me
What needs did my harmful sexual behaviour meet? What needs did my harmful sexual behaviour meet?
Which of my needs seems most important? (Overarching need) Which of my needs seems most important? (Overarching need)
How do I currently meet the needs that connect to my sexually harmful behaviours? (means) How do I currently meet the needs that connect to my sexually harmful behaviours? (means)
Appropriate Inappropriate
Which of my needs do I neglect now, if any? (scope) Which of my needs fight against each other now, if any? (conflict)
How else can I meet my needs? How else can I meet my needs?
In the short term? In the longer term?

What do I need to change about me to help stop me harming others sexually? (internal obstacles) What do we want to change around me to help stop me harming others sexually? (external obstacles)
What strengths do I have to help myself? (internal resources) What things/people are around to help me? (external resources)
Attending to flaws in Bens GLP
  • Conflict Ben had learned to be strongly
    independent and self-reliant, and this got in the
    way of him investing trust in others as a
    forerunner to forming close relationships,
    resulting in emotional loneliness.

Bens GLP for the next 12 weeks
  • What do I need to keep myself and others safe
  • (Informed by risk assessment, individualised risk
    management plan, and underpinned by multi-agency
  • What I and others need to do before my next
    planning meeting (achievable and measurable
  • Me
  • G-map workers
  • Care staff
  • Education staff
  • Social Worker
  • Family

Good Lives Needs Linked to Bens Harmful Sexual Behavior Outcomes from Psychometric Assessment Outcomes from Risk Assessment (AIM2)
Emotional health Having people in my life (belonging) Age appropriate sexual knowledge Internal locus of control Below average level of self-esteem High degree of emotional loneliness Problems in general family functioning Low Concern/Medium strength Low - Medium level of supervision required Additional risk of other pro-criminal behaviours
Therapeutic Intervention
  • Bens GL needs Emotional Heath, Belonging
  • Focus in therapy included- developing emotional
    safety (e.g. safe place) and emotional regulation
    skills (e.g. guided relaxation, biofeedback
    techniques, mindfulness) compassionate mind
    training Life history and trauma understanding
    and managing HSB attachment and interpersonal

The Good Lives Support Network
  • Care staff Supporting Ben in accessing
    activities which would help him meet his GL
    needs, in particular belonging and emotional
    health needs (e.g. rugby team). Key worker,
    offering consistency and support. Ben also
    participated in an on-site relaxation group,
    learning and practicing relaxation techniques
    with peers
  • SW/YOT regular visits to maintain
    relationships, worked with G-map to undertake
    victim awareness work
  • Education Creative projects which promoted
    self-esteem and encouraged collaboration with
    others, meeting other GL needs e.g. achievement,
  • Family Re-established contact with siblings
    Mother supported to visit Ben (this remained an
    area of difficulty)

Transition Planning for Ben
  • Timely inclusion of a young persons longer-term
    support network so that they have sufficient
    opportunity to understand the individual's needs.
    Specialist Foster Carers identified, matched to
    Ben, trained and supervised by G-map.
  • Graduated ending of therapeutic involvement -
    continued supervision of foster carers for time
    limited period.
  • Ensuring relevant and developmentally appropriate
    community resources available to the young person
    that goals are realistically linked to
    environment in which the young person will
    eventually live Sports team, mainstream school,
    part-time job, mending bikes, family life, USING

Update on Ben now aged 20
  • Living independently but in proximity to foster
    family, regular contact (rumoured to bring his
    washing round!)
  • Part of local community home
  • Positive and secure attachment demonstrated with
    foster family emotional investment and trust
  • Attended college good results apprenticeship
    in car mechanics at local garage wants to have
    his own garage
  • Established circle of friends and better social
    life than me
  • Reports feeling safe, happy and loved
  • No further concerns in relation to HSB
  • In stable and intimate relationship with peer-age
    female, 3 years duration (after initial dilemma
    of not knowing if he wanted to date her or her
    twin sister.)

The GLM/GLM-A - Empirical Support
  • As a framework of offender rehabilitation the GLM
    is growing in influence and usage (McGrath et al
    2010) and when compared with RP approaches the
    GLM has a stronger theoretical basis supporting
    its integration in sex offender treatment
    programmes (Willis et al 2012). However, as a
    relatively new theory, the GLM does not have the
    same empirical evidence base as models such as
    the RNR model .
  • Since the GLM-A has undergone a process of
    development and revision over the past few years
    it has only recently been possible to begin to
    evaluate it.

Preliminary Findings-
  • The GLM-A may increase the likelihood of
    desistance and thus reduce re-offending through
    improving young peoples internal locus of
    control and enhancing their overall personal
    resiliency, including their sense of relatedness
    and mastery (Griffin, 2013).
  • Using a sample of 20 young people aged 14 to 18
    years, the AIM2 assessment (Print, Griffin,
    Beech, Quayle, Bradshaw, Henniker, and Morrison
    2007) was used to assess dynamic risk both prior
    to and following interventions underpinned by the
    GLM-A framework. When compared with
    pre-intervention scores, a significant reduction
    to dynamic risk was found following intervention,
    indicating that undertaking a program of
    therapeutic work that utilized the GLM-A may
    reduce overall risk of future harmful sexual
    behavior (Griffin, 2013).

The GLAT (Good Lives Assessment Tool)
  • GLAT - developed, piloted, and refined by G-map
    for evaluation of the GLM-A. Comprises
  • (1) assessment tool to be completed by
  • (2) questionnaire to be completed by young
  • (3) questionnaire to be completed by
  • Designed for age 12 to 18, although can be
    adapted for other populations.
  • The GLAT is completed in relation to each of the
    identified primary needs and is completed
    offence-stage, pre-intervention, 6 monthly, end
    of intervention, and post-intervention.
  • GLAT revised in 2012, so not yet been possible to
    achieve a sample size large enough to permit
    reliable inferences about intervention change or
    test properties. A small-scale inter-rater
    reliability study 7 practitioners trained to
    complete the GLAT and 9 active cases. Outcome
    suggests the tools appear to be capturing
    intervention change.
  • Sparking interest internationally, plans for
    online version, need contributors in order
    to expand sample size and build evidence base.


Early Indications
  • Needs emerging as associated with the young
    persons harmful sexual behavior are having
    people in my life (93) emotional health (93)
    and sexual health (66). The needs that appear to
    be prioritized by young people and those that are
    related to harmful behaviors can be grounded
    within the wider literature and research, e.g.
    attachment, trauma and sexual health research.

(No Transcript)

G-map Services 1 Roebuck Lane Sale
Cheshire M33 7SY Tel 01619764414 Email
Key Publications
  • Print, B. (2013). The good lives model for
    adolescents who sexually harm. Brandon, VT Safer
    Society Press.
  • Wylie, L. A., and H. L. Griffin. (2013). G-maps
    application of the Good Lives model to adolescent
    males who sexually harm A case study. Journal of
    Sexual Aggression, 19, 345-356.
  • Ward, T Maruna, S. (2007) Rehabilitation
    Beyond the risk paradigm, Routledge.
  • Ward, T. Gannon, T.A. (2005). Rehabilitation,
    etiology, and self-regulation The comprehensive
    good lives model of treatment for sexual
    offenders. Aggression and Violent Behaviour.
  • Ward, T. Mann, R. (2004). Good lives and the
    rehabilitation of offenders A positive approach
    to sex offender treatment. In A. Linley S.
    Joseph (Eds.). Positive psychology in practice.
  • Ward, T. Stewart, C. A. (2003). The treatment
    of sex offenders Risk management and good lives.
    Professional Psychology Research and Practice,
    34, 353-360.

Bobbie Print - The Good Lives Model - University
of Birmingham 2011
About PowerShow.com