Joseph J. Peters Institute Intervention Programs for Adult Sexual Offenders
The Joseph J. Peters Institute (JJPI) is a Philadelphia-based nonprofit, licensed, outpatient psychiatric clinic that provides clinical services to victims of sexual abuse and to perpetrators of sexual abuse. The program at JJPI was started in 1955 by Dr. Joseph J. Peters, a psychiatrist at Philadelphia General Hospital. Dr. Peters initially began by treating only offenders, and in 1965, expanded his practice to include the treatment of victims. At the time of his death in 1975, at the age of 52, Dr. Peters had established a national reputation through his clinical practice, his grant-funded research, and his many publications. Indeed, Dr. Peters was the first recipient, in 1966, of a research grant from the National Institute of Mental Health to conduct an experimental treatment outcome study on sexual offenders. After Dr. Peters died, his staff, under the guidance of Dr. Linda Meyer Williams, continued his work, and in 1977, the agency was incorporated.
KeywordsSexual Violence Sexual Offender Sexual Offense Sexual Aggression Probation Officer
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Gordon, R., & Verdun-Jones, S. N. (1983). Ethics and ethical dilemmas in the treatment of sex offenders. In S. N. Verdun-Jones & A. A. Keltner (Eds.), Sexual aggression and the law (pp. 75–96). Burnaby, British Columbia: Criminology Research Centre, Simon Fraser University.Google Scholar
- Grubin, D., & Prentky, R. A. (1993) Sexual psychopathy laws. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 3, 381–392.Google Scholar
- Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.Google Scholar
- Prentky, R. A. (1995). A rationale for the treatment of sex offenders: Pro Bono Publico. In J. McGuire (Ed.), What works: Reducing reoffending guidelines from research and practice (pp. 153–170). Sussex, England: John Wiley.Google Scholar
- Weiner, B. A. (1985) Legal issues raised in treating sex offenders. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 3, 325–340.Google Scholar