Adult-onset offenders: Is a tailored theory warranted?

Abstract

Purpose To describe official adult-onset offenders, investigate their antisocial histories and test hypotheses about their origins. Methods We defined adult-onset offenders among 931 Dunedin Study members followed to age 38, using criminal-court conviction records. Results Official adult-onset offenders were 14% of men, and 32% of convicted men, but accounted for only 15% of convictions. As anticipated by developmental theories emphasizing early-life influences on crime, adult-onset offenders’ histories of antisocial behavior spanned back to childhood. Relative to juvenile-offenders, during adolescence they had fewer delinquent peers and were more socially inhibited, which may have protected them from conviction. As anticipated by theories emphasizing the importance of situational influences on offending, adult-onset offenders, relative to non-offenders, during adulthood more often had schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and alcohol-dependence, had weaker social bonds, anticipated fewer informal sanctions, and self-reported more offenses. Contrary to some expectations, adult-onset offenders did not have high IQ or high socioeconomic-status families protecting them from juvenile conviction. Conclusions A tailored theory for adult-onset offenders is unwarranted because few people begin crime de novo as adults. Official adult-onset offenders fall on a continuum of crime and its correlates, between official non-offenders and official juvenile-onset offenders. Existing theories can accommodate adult-onset offenders.

Criminal Career Dimensions of Juvenile- and Adult-Onset Offenders

“…The traditional distinction of adolescence-limited and lifecourse-persistent offenders does not allow for a delayed onset, i.e., after the age of 18 [41]. Also, more recently, it was argued by Beckley et al [2] that the amount of adultonset offending is unremarkable and that, if existing at all, it can be explained in the same way early-onset offending is explained.…”

“…In 16 out of 28 studies, more than one third of the sample consists of adult-onset offenders. The wide range of proportions is most likely due to methodological heterogeneity in the sampling procedures of the different studies (see also [2]). Samples used in these studies range from 93 to 40,523 offenders, vary widely in the proportions of males and females included (63 to 100% is male), use different definitions of offending, and differ in follow-up from age 21 to age 72.…”

“…Not all criminal behavior is detected, not all detected crime is prosecuted, and not all prosecuted criminals are convicted. Therefore, it is likely that at least some official adultonset offenders have an unofficial history of criminal behavior [2,38]. As a result of detection effects in register data, onset age-and the amount of adult-onset offendingto a certain extent is overestimated.…”

“…Harris [25] defines adult-onset offenders as those with a first conviction at or after age 17, slightly overestimating the proportion of adult-onset offenders by the definition in the current study. Nilsson and colleagues [45] and Beckley et al [2] respectively use a cutoff age of 19 and 20, both slightly underestimating the proportion of adult-onset offenders to follow their behavioral pattern over time and proportions of adult-onset offenders are likely to rise as individuals are followed for longer periods. Boys or men are generally found to engage in delinquent behavior at earlier ages than women [50].…”

“…Boys or men are generally found to engage in delinquent behavior at earlier ages than women [50]. It is therefore not surprising that adult-onset offending is most often found to be more prevalent in women than men [2,4,11,25,28,34,45,57,59]. As can be seen in Table 1, proportions of adult-onset offenders among male offenders are between 9 and 72% (M = 38%), proportions are between 7 and 90% for females (M = 48%).…”