Diversion programs that offer community-based treatment for low-risk parent sexual offenders can reduce re-offending and heighten protection for young children and their families, a new study has found.

The study, 'Parental sexual offending: managing risk through diversion' published recently by the Australian Institute of Criminology, is by Professor Jane Goodman-Delahunty, a leading researcher at the CSU Australian Graduate School of Policing and Security and the CSU School of Psychology, and doctoral candidate Ms Kate O'Brien at the School of Psychology and Psychiatry at Monash University.

Professor Goodman-Delahunty said, "Parental sexual abuse of children has potentially devastating consequences for individuals and families. Parental offenders who are assessed by existing methods are typically rated very low-risk and if convicted, spend little time in gaol. Their low-risk ratings and the lengthy waiting list for inclusion in gaol sex offender treatment programs mean they are unlikely to be treated if successfully prosecuted.

"One viable alternative is a community-based treatment program for parental sexual offenders and the affected family members, but few programs of this nature have been formally evaluated."

The current study examined static and dynamic risk factors in a sample of 172 Australian male parental offenders who were referred to the Cedar Cottage community-based treatment program.

By comparing re-offence rates of parental offenders who underwent standard court processes, and incarceration if convicted, with those of offenders treated in the community, the benefits of the diversion program were revealed. Offenders who underwent standard criminal prosecution re-offended faster and at a higher rate. Treatment at the Cedar Cottage program reduced low-risk repeat sexual offending rates by 67 per cent.

The study shows that supervision of low-risk parental sex offenders by multidisciplinary teams in a non-custodial setting was more effective than incarceration in reducing repeat offending.

Professor Goodman-Delahunty said, "The consensus among many criminal justice academics and practitioners - including psychologists, social workers, lawyers and judges - is that the recent closure of Cedar Cottage eliminated a well-tested and successful sentencing option for a specific subgroup of intra-familial offenders. This occurred not because of problems with the treatment program, but because of a new government policy that child sex offenders must spend time in prison.

"Closure of the program is out of step with contemporary corrections approaches based on sound research. Sadly, accomplishments of NSW Health in successfully managing difficult cases of intra-familial offending have been set back by 30 years or more."