Adolescent Sexual Offenders Grown Up

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the recidivism rates of juvenile sexual offenders with those of other juvenile offenders once they became young adults. The authors found that the juveniles adjudicated for a sexual offense had a significantly higher rate of recidivism for sexual offenses as adults than did the comparison group, but rearrest rates for sexual offenses were low in both groups. The juvenile nonsexual offenders had higher rates of adult recidivism for all other types of offenses.

Juvenile sexual delinquents: contrasting child abusers with peer abusers

“…The distinction, however, was clinically based, and has little systematic research substantiation. Sipe et al (1998) proposed categorizing sex offenders on the basis of the type of offence. Becker et al (1993) differentiated into 'hands-off offences' (such as voyeurism, exhibitionism and obscene phone calls), 'hands-on offences' (sexual assault and rape) and paedophile offences in which the victim is four years or more younger than the offender.…”

The generality of criminal behavior: A confirmatory factor analysis of the criminal activity of sex offenders in adulthood

“…For rapists, previous charges for sexual crimes against adult females were shown to be related to both sexual and violent recidivism (Hall, 1988;Rice, Harris, & Quinsey, 1990). Previous charges for violent crimes were related to sexual recidivism in rapists (Hall, 1988;Rice et al, 1990), but not in child molesters (Firestone et al, 1999;Hanson et al, 1995;Proulx et al, 1997;Sipe et al, 1998;however, see Rice et al, 1991). In short, recidivism studies suggested that sexual crimes were more typical of the criminal activity of child molesters than of rapists.…”

“…Whereas a sex offender's past and future criminal behavior was indicative of the generality of offending behavior, the relationship between past and future behavior told a different story. A meta-analysis showed previous sexual charges to be a key predictor of sexual recidivism (Hanson & Bussière, 1998), especially for child molesters (Firestone et al, 1999;Hanson, Scott, & Steffy, 1995;Hanson, Steffy, & Gauthier, 1993;Proulx et al, 1997;Rice, Quinsey, & Harris, 1991;Sipe, Jensen, & Everett, 1998). For rapists, previous charges for sexual crimes against adult females were shown to be related to both sexual and violent recidivism (Hall, 1988;Rice, Harris, & Quinsey, 1990).…”

Risk Factors for Adolescent Sex Offender Recidivism: Evaluation of Predictive Factors and Comparison of Three Groups Based Upon Victim Type

“…Ten studies of juvenile sex offender recidivism were identified that also found significant predictive factors (see Table 2). Comparisons among studies have been problematic due to inconsistent operational definitions of recidivism, variation Borduin et al (1990) 16 14.0 44.0 37.5 Arrest 49 Boyd (1994) 73 15.6 11.0 36.0 Conviction 54 Brannon and Troyer (1995) 36 -3.0 14.0 Adult incarceration 48 Bremer (1992) 193 -6.0 -Conviction 102 Gretton et al (2001) 220 -15.0 51.0 Charge 106 Hagan et al (2001) 100 -18.0 72.0 Adult conviction 120 Hecker et al (2002) 54 16.0 11.0 37.0 Conviction 144 Kahn and Chambers (1991) 221 14.7 7.5 50.0 Juvenile conviction 20 Kahn and Lafond (1988) 350 14.5 9.0 8.0 -72 Lab, Shields, and Schondel (1993) Prentky et al (2000) 75 14.2 4.0 6.7 Juvenile charge 12 Rasmussen (1999) 170 14.0 14.1 54.1 Juvenile conviction 60 Rubenstein et al (1993) 19 15.0 37.0 89.0 Adult arrest 96 Sipe, Jensen, and Everett (1998) Worling and Curwen (2000) 139 15.5 12.8 35.0 Charge 120 in the types of offenses represented among samples, and different lengths of follow-up for the measurement of recidivism. Studies have also used different combinations of risk factors as predictive variables, with only 6 identified studies using a structured instrument (Auslander, 1998;Gretton, McBride, Hare, O'Shaughnessy, & Kumka, 2001;Hecker, Scoular, Righthand, & Nangle, 2002;Prentky et al, 2000;Waite et al, 2005;Worling & Curwen, 2000).…”

“…Despite several studies evaluating the predictive accuracy of risk factors for juvenile sex offender recidivism, empirical support for a valid risk assessment remains Hecker et al (2002) JSOAP Sexual Drive/Preoccupation scale Kahn and Chambers (1991) Blaming the victim Rigid attitudes toward sexuality Verbal threats toward victim Younger offender age Langstrom (2002) Prior sexual offending Stranger victim Two or more victims Langstrom and Grann (2000) Male victim Prior sexual offending Social skills deficits Two or more victims Nisbet et al (2004) Older age at assessment Prior nonsexual offending Number of sexual offenses Rasmussen (1999) History of childhood sexual abuse Multiple female victims Total number of victims Sipe et al (1998) No prior history of sexual offending Smith and Monastersky (1986) Stranger victim Worling and Curwen (2000) Lower occurrence of nonsexual delinquency MSI-J-R Child Molest scale inconclusive, primarily due to low base rates of recidivism (Caldwell, 2002;Prentky et al, 2000). While victim age has been used as a variable to compare groups using objective personality assessment (Carpenter et al, 1995;Smith et al, 1987;Worling, 2001), there have been no apparent attempts to compare these groups using an experimental risk assessment instrument for adolescent sex offenders.…”