Research your Louisiana government website to locate information on a recently adopted sex crime statue in this area.Write a 550- to 700-word paper in which you do the following:Provide a brief summar

1 Sexual Offenses and Offenders

There are few groups of individuals who are more reviled than sexual offenders. Though this has been true for more than a century, the past two decades have brought forth intense scrutiny from the public, politicians, and policymakers. Several emotionally-charged cases of child sexual abuse were highly publicized in the 1980s and 1990s, reigniting public intolerance for sexual offenders. And although the incidence of sexual offenses has been decreasing, sanctions for sex offenders have been constantly increasing over the last two decades. Unfortunately, empirical research does not show that such sanctions significantly deter offenders or reduce recidivism, and yet this legislation creates significant financial strain for local jurisdictions and states that must implement the policies (Zgoba et al., 2008). Despite the questionable efficacy of these laws, there is no sign of reducing the sanctions for this group.

   This is not the first time historically that society has exhibited a “moral panic” about the dangers of sexual abuse. This panic has waned and ebbed throughout the last century. Jenkins (1998, p. 4) explains that the perception of sex offenders is the effect of “socially constructed realities” influenced by existing social and political ideologies. The public desire to incapacitate sex offenders today is similar to social attitudes in the 1930s, when sexual psychopathy laws emerged to incapacitate those considered to be “unfortunate but dangerous wretches” (Robson, 1999, p. 2). So although empirical research has consistently shown that sex offenders constitute a heterogeneous population of individuals for whom a one-size-fits-all policy will not be effective, such policies regarding the supervision, monitoring, and incapacitation of sexual offenders have gone full circle since the beginning of the century.

   The purpose of this text is to provide the reader with a general understanding of sex offenders and the societal responses to them. Historically, sex offender research has focused on why sex offenders commit such offenses, and the characteristics of different types of offenders. Sex offender research today is centered around three general topic areas: (1) the factors associated with sexual offending, including personal characteristics as well as situational variables; (2) sex offenders' risk of recidivism; and (3) the efficacy of policies and programs for sex offenders. Before addressing the issue of why people commit sexual offenses and how best to prevent them, however, it is necessary to understand the nature and scope of sex crimes in the United States today.

WHAT IS A SEXUAL OFFENSE?

More than 100 years ago, Richard von Krafft-Ebing (1886/1965, p. 241) made the following observation about sexual behavior:

• Nothing is so prone to contaminate—under certain circumstances, even to exhaust—the source of all noble and ideal sentiments, which arise from a normally developed sexual instinct, as the practice of masturbation in one's early years. It despoils the unfolding bud of perfume and beauty, and leaves behind only the coarse, animal desire for sexual satisfaction. If an individual, thus depraved, reaches the age of maturity, there is lacking in him that aesthetic, ideal, pure and free impulse that draws the opposite sexes together. The glow of sensual sensibility wanes, and attraction toward the opposite sex is weakened. This defect in the morals, character, fantasy and instinct of the youthful masturbator, male or female, in an unfavorable manner, even causing, under certain circumstances, desire for the opposite sex to become entirely absent; thus masturbation becomes preferable to the natural mode of sexual satisfaction.

At that time, masturbation, homosexuality, and other sexual practices regarded as common today were not only condemned, but were also considered pathological and loathsome. Attitudes toward sexual behavior are structured through social and political ideologies, and they have changed drastically throughout the centuries. Some harmful sexual acts are—and should continue to be—illegal in nearly every community. One such example is rape, which constitutes a violation of the person and can cause irreparable harm both physically and psychologically. In describing rape, the Policy Advisory Committee on Sexual Offences in England stated that

• rape involves a severe degree of emotional and psychological trauma; it may be described as a violation which in effect obliterates the personality of the victim.… Rape is also unpleasant because it involves such intimate proximity between the offender and the victim. (Criminal Law Revision Committee, 1984)

The legally and socially accepted boundaries of other sexual behaviors, however, are not as clear, and sexual violence is not unique to any one culture or historical period (Stermac, Segal, & Gillis, 1990). Sexual behaviors other than those for the purposes of procreation (for example, homosexuality, incest, adultery, masturbation, bestiality, and sexual activity with children) have vacillated among social acceptance, stigmatization, and illegality.

   Sexual offenses vary across time and cultures, and even across various jurisdictions in the United States. The types of sexual acts that may be criminalized can be broadly categorized in four ways, though these are not necessarily mutually exclusive:

• 1. Sexual acts with contact. Most sexual offenses are within this category, where there is touching of the intimate part(s) of the body or penetration either without the consent of the victim or when one person is incapable of consenting under the law (for example, a person who has not yet reached the age of consent, a person who is not conscious, or a person who is dead). This category involves all contact acts, from touching over the clothes to forced sexual intercourse.

• 2. Noncontact sexual behavior. This involves acts that are for the purpose of sexual gratification, but no contact is made between the perpetrator and the victim (for example, exposure of the genitals, voyeurism (peeping), and telling children to perform sexual acts).

• 3. Viewing, possessing, or producing child pornography. This third category includes any act involving the viewing or producing of any visual material of a child that is for the purpose of sexually gratifying an adult. This may include sexual contact with children or the sexual exploitation of children in photos and films. Recent examples include “sexting,” or texting sexual pictures of oneself to another person (discussed further in Chapter 7).

• 4. Sexual solicitation or trafficking. Acts included in this category are based upon sexual services exchanged for financial or other types of compensation. Sexual solicitation may involve prostitution in a traditional sense (solicitation of sexual services through face-to-face meetings). Alternatively, adults may seek sexual relationships with adolescents, usually online, which may or may not result in a face-to-face meeting. Trafficked victims may be adults or minors, domestic or international, and are generally lured into performing sexual services for promises of money and/or a better life.

There are some offenses common across all jurisdictions in the United States, though the terminology differs depending on the jurisdiction. For example, although most states use the term rape to define offenses involving nonconsensual oral, anal, and/or vaginal penetration, this is called sexual imposition or gross sexual imposition in North Dakota and is called sexual assault in Colorado. Additionally, the specific definitions of this crime differ in terms of who can be a victim or an offender (male and/or female), the class of felony or misdemeanor, and the age of the victim (some define the different degrees by age ranges, with acts committed against younger victims being more serious offenses).

   Many states also label some consensual sexual acts as offenses. Thirteen states listed consensual sodomy as a criminal act as recently as 2003, when sodomy laws were invalidated and declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court (Lawrence v. Texas, 2003). Other consensual acts that continue to be illegal in some states include incest (intergenerational and between siblings), adultery, bigamy, female genital mutilation, fornication, masturbation for hire, indecent dancing, prostitution, and public indecency (Leiter, 1999). In addition to these offenses, other crimes that are not necessarily sexual in nature are registerable offenses, such as kidnapping.

   For most sexual offenses, there must be a lack of consent on the part of the victim and some level of intent on the part of the offender. The laws in most states stipulate that consent is lacking from a sexual act when:

• ▪ The act is the result of force, threat, or duress;

• ▪ A reasonable person would understand that the victim did not consent due to a clear or implied statement that he or she would not want to engage in the sexual act; or

• ▪ The victim is incapable of consenting because he or she is below the age of consent (this ranges from age 16 to age 18 in various states), is mentally disabled, is mentally incapacitated, is physically helpless, is under the custody of correctional services, or is placed within the care of children and family services (or any other organization in charge of monitoring and caring for those in care of the state).

Offenses vary by type, degree of severity, class of offense, and length of sanction. In some states, these are defined simply by class of felony or misdemeanor. In other states, they are divided into first, second, and third degree offenses, with first degree offenses being the most severe. For example, Table 1.1 shows how New York classifies rape into three degrees. The sanctions associated with the degree of the offense increase as the severity of the offense increases.

TABLE 1.1 New York Penal Code Definition of Rape

VIGNETTE

SEXTING: The Emergence of New Sexual “Offenses” in the 21st Century

Accepted sexual behaviors change over time and by place, and are regulated by social and cultural norms. Over the last few decades, there has been an emergence of new behaviors, often related to developing technology, that are being considered sexual offenses. One such phenomenon is “sexting,” in which people text nude or semi-nude photos of themselves to others. Though this has become a widespread practice generally, it is particularly common among adolescents. A survey of 1300 teens conducted by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen & Unplanned Pregnancy and CosmoGirl.com found that one in five teens had sexted, even though the majority knew it was a crime.

   Several sexting cases have made media headlines, since sexting can have serious legal consequences for those who partake in this activity. One such example was of Phillip Albert, a teenager in Orlando, Florida. After an argument with his 16-year-old girlfriend, Phillip, then 18, sent a picture of his naked girlfriend that she had texted him to her family and friends. Phillip was charged with sending child pornography, convicted, and sentenced to five years of probation. Additionally, he is required to register as a sex offender until age 43. Phillip's attorney is appealing the conviction, noting that “sexting is treated as child pornography in almost every state and it catches teens completely off-guard because this is a fairly natural and normal thing for them to do. It is surprising to us as parents, but for teens it's part of their culture” (Feyerick & Steffen, 2009).

   Another high-profile sexting case occurred in Pennsylvania. Marissa Miller was 12 years old when she and a friend took pictures of themselves wearing training bras while at a slumber party. The picture soon surfaced on another classmate's cell phone. The district attorney for the county told Miller and her friend that they could take probation and re-education classes or be charged with sexual abuse of a minor. Miller's mother, along with another family, refused to take the deal; instead, they contacted the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) and with its help is suing the district attorney to stop him from filing charges.

   Phillip Albert's attorney noted that “Some judges have the good sense and reasonableness to treat this as a social problem and others are more zealous in their efforts to put everybody away and I think it's time as a society that we step back a little bit and avoid this temptation to lock up our children” (Feyerick & Steffen, 2009).

Questions

• 1. What should be the consequences for teens who “sext”?

• 2. What are the potential harms that can result from “sexting”?

• 3. Explain the similarities and differences between sexting and transmitting or possessing child pornography.

© Cengage Learning

PREVALENCE OF SEXUAL OFFENDING AND VICTIMIZATION

It is impossible to accurately assess the extent of sexual offending and the characteristics of offenders. Most data on sex offenders relate to those who are either arrested or convicted, a group that represents a small portion of all sexual offenders. From 1992 to 2000, only 31 percent of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to the police (Hart & Rennison, 2003). Of those that are reported, not all end in arrest, and not all of those go on to indictment or conviction. This “funnel” system means that the further researchers are from the point at which the crime was committed, the further they are from knowing the true nature and scope of the problem of sexual offending. Furthermore, nearly all data on sex offenders relate to the male population of offenders. As such, the female sex offender population constitutes an even higher rate of the underreported and underresearched proportion of the total sex offender population (Righthand & Welch, 2001; Travin, Cullen, & Protter, 1990).

   What is certain about sexual abuse, particularly child sexual victimization, is that it is widespread, and it remains so despite the precipitous decline in abuse cases in the 1990s (see Child Maltreatment Report, 2001; Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004; Jones & Finkelhor, 2004). One meta-analysis summarizing prevalence studies found that overall rates of sexual victimization were approximately 30 percent for girls and 13 percent for boys in one's lifetime (Bolen & M. Scannapieco, 1999). According to Finkelhor (2008), children who experience sexual abuse often experience multiple types of abuse. Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, and Hamby (2005) found that in 2002–2003, nearly half (49 percent) of the youth sampled in their study had experienced more than one form of direct (assault, maltreatment, sexual victimization) or indirect (witnessed) victimization. The concept of “multiple victimization” is consistent with findings from longitudinal studies by Cathy Widom and her colleagues (see Horwitz, Widom, McLaughlin & White (2001); Widom, Czaja, & Dutton, 2008).

   The high rate of sexual victimization is not simply a criminal justice problem, but is also a public health problem (Abel et al., 1994). Those who are victimized as youths show higher levels of mental health problems as adults (Horwitz et al., 2001). Confounding this issue is the low rate of reporting of victimization, or when it is reported, the delay in disclosure. The literature shows that several factors are commonly associated with the delay in disclosure (see Terry & Tallon, 2004), including the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (Arata, 1998; Hanson et al., 1999; Smith et al., 2000; Wyatt & Newcomb, 1990); the severity of abuse (Gries et al., 1996; Kogan, 2005; DiPietro et al., 1997); the likely consequences of the disclosure (Berliner & Conte, 1995; Hershkowitz et al., 2007; Lamb & Edgar-Smith, 1994; Roesler & Weisssmann-Wind, 1994; Sorenson & Snow, 1991); age, developmental, and cognitive variables (Campis et al., 1993; Keary & Fitzpatrick, 1994; Lamb & Edgar-Smith, 1994); and “grooming” behavior that offenders use to entice children to participate in the sexually abusive behavior (Pryor, 1996).

   Most studies indicate that when compared with their male counterparts, females are more likely to have been sexually abused during childhood. Furthermore, females are more likely than males to disclose information regarding sexual abuse, and male victimization seems to be acutely underreported (Brochman, 1991; Devoe & Coulborn-Faller, 1999; Finkelhor, 2008; Gries et al., 1996; Lamb & Edgar-Smith, 1994; McMullen, 1992; Tewksbury, 2007; Walrath, Ybarra, & Holden, 2003). That being said, reports are beginning to emerge about high rates of sexual abuse of boys in particular institutions and organizations. The lack of knowledge about male sexual victimization is striking; because so few males report, most information about their victimization is anecdotal or derived from studies with small sample sizes. As such, little statistical knowledge is available about males' long-term physical, psychological, and emotional effects, or about abuse events themselves.

   Knowledge of sex offenders and rates of victimization are based upon two primary sources: official data (including criminal justice reports, victimization surveys, and social service data) and empirical studies. Table 1.2 shows the strengths and weaknesses of the different data sources.

TABLE 1.2 Comparison of Data Sources

© Cengage Learning

Official Data on Sexual Victimization

Official statistics on sexual offending are derived from several sources. The primary criminal justice data sources include arrest and conviction rates. Since it is difficult to gather this on a local level, the most common sources used to understand prevalence rates are federal reports, including the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), and National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). Victimization surveys, namely the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), provide data about the amount of victimization that is underreported in official statistics. Social service data sources provide more detailed information about the extent and nature of child sexual abuse allegations, and the key sources for this information include the National Incidence Study (NIS) and the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS). Though not evaluated in this text, key resources for crime data internationally include the European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics (2006) and the International Crime Victimization Survey (Van Dijk, Van Kesteren, & Smit, 2008).

Criminal Justice Data Sources   In the 1920s, the government began to measure and track crime trends on a federal level for the first time through the UCR. The UCR is compiled annually by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and contains information provided by nearly 17,000 local police departments (Grant & Terry, 2011). The local police agencies or state agencies give their arrest data to the FBI on a voluntary basis, and the FBI then tabulates the data on a national level. Despite its voluntary nature, there is a 97 percent compliance rate among police agencies.

   The UCR consists of two sections: Part I and Part II offenses. Part I offenses, which are also called index offenses, are divided into categories of violent and property offenses, of which there are four each. The four violent offenses are murder (and nonnegligent manslaughter), forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, and the four property offenses are burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Part II offenses consist of all other offenses, including simple assaults, other sexual offenses, forgery, fraud, vandalism, embezzlement, vice crimes such as gambling and prostitution, weapons violations, alcohol and drug violations, and curfew violations.

   The UCR is used to determine the crime rate in the United States and in local jurisdictions. In order to compute the crime rate, you take the number of total reported crimes, divide by the total population of the reporting area, and multiply by 100,000. The most significant strength of the UCR is its reliability; it measures crimes using the same definitions every year and across all jurisdictions. Therefore, it allows jurisdictions to understand how their crime rates change each year and how they compare to crime rates in other jurisdictions, even those with different populations (for example, rural and urban areas).

   Unfortunately, the UCR has several weaknesses. Most significantly, crime is underreported, and this measures only the number of crimes that are reported and cleared by arrest or exceptional means. Since sexual offenses are the least-reported crimes, the UCR is not necessarily a valid measure of sexual offense statistics. A second weakness with the UCR is that it follows the “hierarchy rule,” meaning that it compiles data only on the most serious offenses if multiple offenses are committed at one time. In other words, if a person breaks into a house, rapes the occupant, murders her, and steals her car, only the murder will be counted in the UCR. A third weakness of the UCR is that it uses one definition for each crime, yet the definitions of crimes vary by jurisdiction. This is particularly troublesome for sexual offenses, as the UCR defines forcible rape as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Attempts or assaults to commit rape by force or threat of force are also included; however, statutory rape (without force) and other sex offenses are excluded” (Uniform Crime Report, 2009). Thus, the UCR is beneficial in giving us a comparison of statistics on the forcible rape of women by men, but not other sexual offenses. These are complied into the broad category of “sexual offenses” in Part II crimes, defined as “Statutory rape and offenses against chastity, common decency, morals, and the like. Attempts are included” (Uniform Crime Report, 2009).

   Despite its weaknesses, the UCR remains the best source of official statistics for crimes. According to the Uniform Crime Report (2009), the rate of forcible rape was estimated at 56.6 rapes per 100,000 people, a 3.4 percent decrease from 2008. Rapes by force accounted for 93 percent of the reported rapes in 2009, whereas attempts or assaults to commit rape accounted for 7 percent. The forcible rape rate decreased 10.4 percent from 2000.

   In an effort to improve the compilation and reporting of crime data, the FBI devised the NIBRS database in 1989. NIBRS is an incident-based reporting system, and as such allows for the calculation of multiple offenses, multiple victims, multiple offenders, and multiple arrests within a single incident. It still has flaws, however. Currently, police departments representing only 17 percent of the population submit data to NIBRS. Also, like the UCR, the NIBRS relies on reported offenses. However, it does eliminate the hierarchy rule by counting all offenses in each incident. It is also beneficial in that it collects detailed data on the offenders, victims, locations, properties, and arrests on each single crime incident, thus offering insight into offenses not currently available with the UCR.

Victimization Surveys   Victimization surveys provide valuable information on the extent of sexual abuse. The NCVS, in particular, is the largest and most significant national survey in the United States and is central to our understanding of the “dark figure” of crime, or the extent to which crimes are underreported.

   In order to better understand the magnitude of the underreporting of crime and the reasons why it is underreported, the Bureau of Justice Statistics began conducting an annual survey of approximately 49,000 households in 1972. The survey collects self-report data on all crimes against the household and individuals in the household who are over the age of 12. The NCVS finds that crime is severely underreported, with only about 37 percent of all crimes reported to the police. It has found that crime is underreported for numerous reasons, including that the offenses were personal (particularly domestic violence and sexual offenses), the victim believes that the police will not be able to do much about catching the offender, the victim does not trust the police, the victim fears that his or her own criminal behavior (for example, drug use) would be exposed, the victim fears that his or her reputation would be damaged, and the victim thinks the perpetrator will retaliate.

   Like all sources of official statistical data, however, there are some drawbacks to victimization surveys. In particular, the reliability of self-reported data is questionable, and the NCVS does not provide a way to gather victimization information from young children who may be victims of abuse. Nonetheless, victimization surveys tell us the following in regard to race and ethnicity, age, and victim-offender relationship for victims aged 12 and older (Rennison, 2001; Rennison & Rand, 2003):

• ▪ Race and Ethnicity Though there are differences in victimization rates, there is no significant distinction between victims of sexual offenses on the basis of race and ethnicity. Whites are victims of sexual offenses at a rate of .8 per 1000 in the population, Blacks are victimized at a rate of 2.5, and those of other races are victimized at a rate of 1.2. Additionally, Hispanics were victimized at a rate of .7 per 1000. The rate of victimization for Blacks increased from 2000, when the rate was 1.2 per 1000. At the same time, the rate of victimization for Whites decreased, from 1.1 per 1000.

• ▪ Age The highest rate of victimization for a sexual offense is with victims aged 16–19, whose rate of victimization in 2000 was 4.3 per 1000 and rose to 5.5 in 2002. In 2002, those at the next highest level of risk were aged 20–24 (at a rate of 2.9) and aged 12–15 (at a rate of 2.1). The NCVS does not collect data on victims under the age of 12, which would likely be a large percentage of the victim population based on arrest and conviction statistics.

• ▪ Victim-Offender Relationship It was more common for both male and female victims to be abused or assaulted by a nonstranger than a stranger. With male victims, 52 percent were abused by nonstrangers, all of whom were friends or acquaintances (this was based on a small sample size, so the results may not be generalizable). Female victims know the perpetrator in 69 percent of the cases, with the highest percentage of abusers (57 percent of all cases) being friends or acquaintances.

Another victimization survey on sexual abuse is the Minnesota Student Survey. This self-report survey was administered to 6th, 9th, and 12th grade students in Minnesota in 1989, 1992, 1995, 1998, and 2001, and more than 90 percent of students in these grades in Minnesota participated in the surveys each year. The survey contains two questions about sexual abuse, the results of which show a slight rise in abuse between 1989 and 1992, followed by a 22 percent drop from 1992 to 2001.

Social Service Data   There are two primary sources of social service data through which the incidence of child sexual abuse is estimated: The NIS and the NCANDS. The NIS is a congressionally-mandated effort from the Department of Health and Human Services to assess the overall incidence of child maltreatment in the United States (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2010). Data were collected in 1979 and 1980 for the NIS-1, followed by the NIS-2 in 1986 and 1987, and the NIS-3 in 1993 and 1995. The Fourth NIS (NIS-4) provides estimates of the incidence of child abuse and neglect in the United States 2005–2009 based on substantiated and unsubstantiated cases. These studies provide child, perpetrator, and family characteristics, and demographical information about the nature and severity of the maltreatment, as well as the extent of changes in the incidence over time.

   In order to measure the scope of child abuse and neglect, the NIS includes not only children who were investigated by Child Protective Services (CPS) agencies, but also children who were not reported or who were screened out by CPS agencies. The study expanded its data by utilizing a sentinel methodology, which required community professionals to look for victims or possible victims of child abuse and neglect. The “sentinels,” as they are called, are staff members who have contact with children and families in various social service contexts (such as law enforcement agencies, medical services, educational institutions, and other social services). This methodology is designed to look beyond official abuse reports and include children who come to the attention of community professionals.

   The NIS-4 includes a nationally representative sample of data collected from 126 CPS agencies in 122 different counties. The 126 CPS agencies provided demographic data on all children who were reported and accepted for investigation between September 4 and December 3, 2005 and between February 4 and May 3, 2006. Data for the NIS-4 were also collected from 10,791 community professionals in 1094 sentinel agencies. A total of 6208 forms were collected from the sentinels and 10,667 forms were completed on cases at participating CPS agencies.

   Children were evaluated according to standard definitions of abuse and neglect as previously used in the NIS-2 (1986) and NIS-3 (1993). In order to be classified as abuse or neglect, the Harm Standard requires that an act or omission result in demonstrable harm. The Endangerment Standard includes all children who meet the Harm Standard, but also includes children deemed by the sentinels and their professional opinion as endangered or if the child's maltreatment was substantiated in a CPS investigation. Only children who fit these standards of abuse (physical, sexual, and emotional) and neglect (physical, emotional, and educational) were used to generate national estimates.

   According to the Harm Standard from the NIS-4, one child in every 58 in the United States experienced maltreatment. The number of children who experienced physical, sexual, and/or emotional abuse under the Harm Standard decreased 26 percent from the NIS-3 to theNIS-4. The estimated number of sexually abused children decreased 38 percent from the NIS-3 along with a 44 percent decrease in the rate of sexual abuse. The estimated number of physically abused children decreased 15 percent from the NIS-3 along with a 23 percent decrease in the rate of physical abuse. The estimated number of emotionally abused children decreased 27 percent from the NIS-3 along with a 33 percent decrease in the rate of emotional abuse. There were no significant changes in neglect since the NIS-3. Results showed a 57 percent decrease in the number of children for whom injury could be inferred due to the nature of the maltreatment. Overall, the NIS-4 shows a 19 percent decrease in the total number of maltreated children in the United States since the NIS-3 in 1993. This decline in incidence is significant compared to the 56 percent increase between the NIS-2 in the mid-1980s and the NIS-3 in the mid-1990s.

   According to the Endangerment Standard, one child out of every 25 in the United States has been maltreated. Results, however, did not show any reliable change since the NIS-3. Of those who were maltreated, 29 percent of children were abused and 77 percent were neglected. Of the 29 percent who were abused, 22 percent were sexually abused. In all of the NIS reports, girls were more likely to be sexually abused than boys.

   The other well-known source of information for child abuse statistics is NCANDS, a national data collection and analysis system created for the purpose of documenting the scope and nature of child maltreatment reporting (Family Life Development Center, n.d.). The NCANDS Child File consists of case-specific data of all investigated reports of maltreatment to state child protective service agencies. NCANDS defines maltreatment as an “act or failure to act by a parent, caretaker, or other person as defined under State law which results in physical abuse, neglect, medical neglect, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm to a child” (Family Life Development Center, n.d.). Child File data are collected annually through the voluntary participation of states and include the demographics of children and their perpetrators, types of maltreatment, investigation dispositions, risk factors, and services provided.

   Reports of child maltreatment are collected by social services across the United States; however, states are not required to submit data to NCANDS. The reporting agency investigates and decides whether the case of abuse is substantiated by evidence or not. Reports may contain information about multiple children, abuse types, and perpetrators. Information is not collected about the perpetrator(s) for unsubstantiated cases. Data on substantiated cases, however, include the perpetrator's gender, race, and relationship to the child. Additionally, the Child File also contains information about the support services provided to the family and any problems identified for the child, caretaker, or family.

   Annual datasets for calendar years from 1990 through 2002 are available from NCANDS. In 2003, the data collection period changed to fiscal years. The 2004 dataset included a total of 3,134,026 records from 44 states and Washington, DC, whereas the 2003 dataset included 1,216,626 total records from 22 states and Washington, DC. The most recent available data are for federal fiscal year 2004.

   The state-level rates of child sexual abuse in 1992 range from a minimum of 87 per 100,000 children in New Jersey to a maximum of 688 per 100,000 children in Alaska. The average for 48 states and the District of Columbia is 246 children per 100,000. Table 1.3 shows the state-by-state comparison of child sexual abuse statistics in 1992 and 2000, and how there was a significant decrease in nearly every state during that decade.

TABLE 1.3 Child Sexual Abuse Statistics (1992 and 2001)

© Cengage Learning

Research Estimates

In the 1980s, there was a rise in the number of reports involving sexual offenses by acquaintances, whether in regard to child sexual abuse or rape. These allegations shattered the stereotyped images of sex offenders at the time, leading to further research of this population. Studies found that there was an increase in cases of date rape, rape in marriage, and intrafamilial abuse—cases that would have largely gone unreported prior to that time for reasons of stigma, self-blame, fear of not being believed, or a desire to protect the friend or family member who committed the offense (Scully, 1990). Even today, those who are most likely to serve prison sentences for sexual offenses are those who have raped strangers, used weapons, had multiple minor victims, physically injured their victims, and/or committed other crimes in addition to the sexual offense (Grant & Terry, 2001). As of 2008, an estimated 235,000 individuals convicted of sex offenses were under the supervision of the criminal justice system. Approximately 60 percent of these were supervised within the community (Demichele, Payne, & Button, 2008).

   Studies have found that sexual offending does not discriminate on the basis of age, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, educational level, or any other stable characteristics for either offenders or victims. Sex offenders, particularly those who abuse children, do not necessarily “age out” of their deviant behavior, as do many property offenders, and sex crimes are generally considered to be psychologically motivated offenses. Sexual offenders are often diagnosed with personality or mental disorders, particularly paraphilias (discussed in Chapter 5) (Abel, Becker, & Cunningham-Rathner, 1984), and this makes them a unique population. Despite the heterogeneity in offenders and the etiology of their offending behavior, there are many similarities in the population as a whole. They tend to have poor social and relationship skills, most have had poor relationships with their parents, many abuse alcohol or drugs, and many were either physically and/or sexually abused as children.

   It is difficult for researchers to ascertain a true assessment of the prevalence and incidence of sexual abuse, which refer, respectively, to the total number of cases in a given population at a specific time and the rate of occurrence over a period of time. Individuals who are sexually abused by family members or acquaintances are least likely to report the sexual abuse to the criminal justice system. Thus, most individuals who were sexually abused as children or were sexually abused as an adult by someone known to them do not report the abuse to criminal justice authorities.

   Studies on the incidence of sexual abuse, which concentrate on estimating the number of new cases occurring over a particular period of time, gained greater urgency in the 1980s, indicating that the scope of sexual victimization is extensive.

   Studies often show varying levels of prevalence of sexual abuse. As an example, study statistics show that:

• ▪ One in six women has been raped (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006), and one in three girls is likely to be abused by an adult (Russell, 1984).

• ▪ Seventeen to twenty-two percent of women and 2 to 8 percent of men have been victims of sexual assault (Levenson & D'Amora, 2007).

• ▪ 12.8 percent of females and 4.3 percent of males reported a history of sexual abuse during childhood (MacMillan et al., 1997).

• ▪ Nearly a quarter of all children will be sexually assaulted before their 18th birthday; 74 percent of those assaulted as children are girls (Spinazzola, Ford, & Zucker, 2005).

• ▪ Twenty-seven percent of females and 16 percent of males disclosed a history of childhood sexual abuse; 42 percent of the males were likely to never have disclosed the experience to anyone, whereas 33 percent of the females never disclosed (Finkelhor, Hotaling, Lewis, & Smith, 1990).

• ▪ The lifetime prevalence of sexual assault among 12–17-year-olds is 1 in 12 (Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, & Hamby, 2005), and 74 percent of child victims know the abuser well (Snyder, 2000).

• ▪ The overall prevalence of sexual abuse of male children is 13 percent and female children is between 30 and 40 percent (Bolen & Scannapieco, 1999).

Official statistics indicate that rates of sexual abuse have declined in the past decade. Research findings corroborate this, and indicate that there has been a simultaneous reduction in related factors such as domestic violence incidents among intimate adults, and pregnancies and births among teenagers. It is not clear what has caused this reduction in sexual abuse or related factors, though it coincides with a reduction in various types of violent and property crime. It also coincides with increased sanctions for sexual offenders, including an increased likelihood of incarceration and civil sanctions such as registration, notification, civil commitment, and residency restrictions (to be discussed in Part III).

REPORTING SEXUAL ABUSE

Crime is underreported. Sexual crimes are the most underreported offenses, though more individuals reported their victimization to the police in 2000 than in any year of the previous decade (Hart & Rennison, 2003). In order to understand how accurate statistics are on sexual offending, it is important to understand who reports, why, after how long, and with what accuracy.

   The NCVS shows the following about individuals over the age of 12 who reported their sexual assaults to the police from 1992 to 2000 (Hart & Rennison, 2003, p. 5):

• ▪ Gender Victims were more likely to report sexual offenses to the police if the offender was male (32 percent) than female (13 percent).

• ▪ Race Victims were more likely to report sexual offenses if the offender was Black (39 percent) than White (29 percent).

• ▪ Age Victims reported sexual offenses to the police 40 percent of the time when the perpetrator was 12–14 years of age, the highest percentage of reporting in any age category.

• ▪ Number of Perpetrators Victims were more likely to report the sexual abuse to police if there were two perpetrators (44 percent) rather than one perpetrator (33 percent).

• ▪ Victim-Offender Relationship Victims were more likely to report sexual offenses committed by strangers (41 percent) than nonstrangers (27 percent).

• ▪ Use of Weapons Victims were more likely to report a sexual offense if the perpetrator had a weapon present during the offense (49 percent), particularly a firearm (62 percent), than if no weapon was present (28 percent).

• ▪ Reasons for Reporting The most common reason for victims to report sexual offenses to the police was to prevent future violence. The most common reason for victims not to report sexual offenses to the police was because of privacy issues.

Empirical research supports the findings in the NCVS, though the benefit of such studies is that they can also include victims under the age of 12. Child sexual abuse is the least reported of sexual offenses. Studies that analyze reporting trends of child sexual abuse all indicate that a high percentage of victims who report their abuse to authorities do so many years after the abuse occurred, and many do not ever disclose. The most common studies conducted to analyze reporting trends on child sexual abuse are adult retrospective studies. Like the NCVS, these studies found that the process of disclosing childhood sexual abuse depends on numerous variables. Of note:

• ▪ Only one-third of the victims reported the abuse to authorities before age 18, and the average age of disclosure was 25.9 (Roesler & Weissmann-Wind, 1994, in a study of 228 adult female victims of child sexual abuse by adult—primarily male—family members).

• ▪ The average age of child sexual abuse victims was just over 8, and approximately 41 percent of victims disclosed the abuse at the time it occurred (Arata, 1998, in a study of 204 female victims of child sexual abuse).

• ▪ The average age at the time of the child sexual abuse was 10, and 64 percent of the victims disclosed the abuse as adults (Lamb & Edgar-Smith, 1994, in a study of 45 adult female and 12 adult male child sexual abuse victims).

• ▪ The majority of victims waited more than eight years to report their childhood sexual abuse (Smith, Letourneau, & Saunders, 2000, in a study assessing disclosure rates of females raped when they were children).

• ▪ Disclosure of child sexual abuse by minors may be spontaneous or prompted, and many children and adolescents need assistance with disclosure (DeVoe & Coulborn-Faller, 1999).

• ▪ Disclosure of childhood sexual abuse may be purposeful or accidental, with accidental disclosure more common in preschool-aged children and purposeful disclosure more common in adolescents (Sorenson & Snow, 1991).

A significant factor in whether a child reports sexual abuse and the manner in which the abuse is reported is the potential for the person to whom the child is disclosing to believe his or her report on the abuse, especially law enforcement (Campbell, 2005). Approximately half of the children who recant their reports of childhood sexual abuse do so under pressure from their guardians (Bradley & Wood, 1996). The Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome, a model of reporting outlined by Summit (1983) that consists of five components, suggests reasons why child sexual abuse victims delay disclosure. First, the abuse is usually carried out in privacy, and the abuser encourages secrecy. Second, because children are obedient to adults, they are helpless and maintain the secrecy that the adult encourages. Third, the child becomes entrenched in the abusive situation, begins to feel guilt and responsibility for the abuse, and continues to accommodate the perpetrator. Fourth, the victim delays disclosure because of the promise of secrecy and feelings of guilt and shame. Finally, after delayed disclosure, the victim often retracts the report due to disbelief about the abuse by those trusted by the victim.

   In addition to a general delay in disclosure of child sexual abuse, many victims report the abuse in stages. Sorenson and Snow (1991) identified four stages of disclosure in their study of 630 victims of child sexual abuse: denial (experienced by 72 percent of the victims in their sample), disclosure (78 percent of the victims progressed from tentative to active disclosure), recantation (experienced by 22 percent of the victims), and reaffirmation (93 percent of those who recanted later confirmed their original reports).

   Adult retroactive studies not only help us to understand the process of disclosure, but also explain the reasons that victims disclose. The most significant variables that seem to hinder disclosure of abuse are the age of the victim at the time the abuse occurred, the victim-perpetrator relationship, the gender and cognitive or developmental abilities of the victim, the type of sexual abuse that occurred, and the chance of negative consequences related to disclosure.

   The gender of the victim has an impact on the disclosure of sexual abuse, as females are more likely both as children and as adults to report sexual abuse than are males (DeVoe & Coulborn-Faller, 1999; Gries, Goh, & Cavanaugh, 1996; Lamb & Edgar-Smith, 1994; Walrath, Ybarra, & Holden, 2003). Paine and Hansen (2002) do show, however, that although gender is an important factor in the decision to report abuse, victim-perpetrator relationship is the most important factor in determining whether a victim of child sexual abuse will eventually disclose.

   Several studies indicate that a victim is less likely to report or delay the report of child sexual abuse if the perpetrator is well known to the child (Arata, 1998; Hanson, Saunders, Saunders, Kilpatrick, & Best, 1999; Smith et al., 2000; Wyatt & Newcomb, 1990). This relationship is most significant if the perpetrator is a relative or stepparent. Arata (1998) showed that 73 percent of victims did not disclose the abuse in such a situation; when the perpetrator was an acquaintance 70 percent of the victims did not report. The desire not to report familial sexual abuse is compounded if the victim feels responsible for the abuse, and in such cases the victim often waits longer to disclose the abuse (Goodman-Brown, Edelstein et al., 2003; Roesler & Weissmann-Wind, 1994).

   The gender of the perpetrator also seems to be an important factor in reporting, as offenses by female offenders are reported less often than those by male offenders (Righthand & Welch, 2001). There are several reasons why victims may not report sexual abuse by females. Many female-perpetrated offenses are within the family and, as indicated earlier, intrafamilial acts of abuse are the least-reported sexual offenses. Also, women are traditionally seen as caregivers, nonviolent nurturers who are either not willing or not capable of harming children. Many adult and adolescent males are also reluctant to report abuse because of the shame of being a victim. Alternatively, they may not view the actions against them as abuse (Elliot & Briere, 1994). Kasl (1990) states that underreporting is the result of a social taboo, and that the stigma caused by female sexual abuse must be abolished.

   In order to report the abuse in a timely manner, it appears that children need to feel as though they will be supported by the person to whom they disclose the abuse. Children who believe that they will not be supported when they disclose abuse will wait longer to report, often until adulthood when they can choose a person they trust to support them (Lamb & Edgar-Smith, 1994). Shame and guilt also appear to play a role in the decision about disclosure. Older children who are able to understand and anticipate social consequences of sexual abuse are less likely to report the abuse than are younger children (Campis, Hebden-Curtis, & DeMaso, 1993; Keary & Fitzpatrick, 1994).

   Some researchers have found that children are less likely to report sexual abuse if the abuse is severe (Arata, 1998; DiPietro et al., 1997; Gries, Goh, & Cavanaugh, 1996) or they fear further harm as a result of their disclosure (Berliner & Conte, 1995; Roesler & Weissmann-Wind, 1994; Sorenson & Snow, 1991). Sorenson and Snow (1991) found that victims who fear further reprisals will not report the abuse if the perpetrator is present or the disclosure could lead to further abuse, and Roesler and Weissmann-Wind (1994) found that one-third of the victims they spoke to delayed reporting until adulthood because they feared for their safety. Hanson et al. (1999), on the other hand, found the inverse relationship true of severity of abuse and disclosure. They discovered that in a sample of women who were raped when they were children, the more severe the sexual abuse the more likely the victims were to report the abuse sooner.

Telescoping

When victims report their crimes or complete victimization surveys long after the crime occurred, they often remember the crime as occurring earlier or later than it actually happened (Sudman & Bradburn, 1973, as cited in Schneider & Sumi, 1981). This phenomenon is called telescoping, and it occurs in two forms: forward telescoping, or recalling an event that occurred prior to the reporting period in question, and backward telescoping, which is recalling an event that occurred after the reporting period. Telescoping is not unique to crime victims. All individuals “telescope” events that they recall long after the events happened. However, telescoping events of victimization creates challenges for researchers trying to understand criminal statistics (Schneider & Sumi, 1981). Accurate crime statistics are deemed essential by government agencies, and as such controlling for temporal telescoping is imperative to attain analyzable, accurate data.

   In the 1970s, many researchers began conducting studies on telescoping to better understand its effect on crime statistics. Not surprisingly, researchers found that memory disorientations, including telescoping, occur more often in older respondents, particularly those over age 55 (Sudman & Bradburn, 1974, as cited in Gottfredson & Hindelang, 1977). Researchers also found that forward telescoping is more common than backward telescoping (Schneider & Sumi, 1981) and that the more prominent the event, the more likely the person is to forward telescope (Neter & Waksberg, 1964, as cited in Gottfredson & Hindelang, 1977). The problem with this, in terms of crime statistics, is that individuals are going to report crime as occurring more recently than it did. Another issue is that victims of nonreported events tend to telescope more than victims who report events of victimization to the police (Schneider & Sumi, 1981), thus creating a potential flaw with chronological information included in victimization surveys.

   Researchers are also interested in the prevalence of telescoping, and have conducted many surveys to determine the scope of the problem. Skogan (1975, as cited in Levine, 1976) found in a Washington, DC, pilot survey that 17 percent of victimizations reported by respondents actually occurred prior to the six-month period specified. Another study revealed that 22 percent of larcenies reported by respondents occurred prior to the reference period mandated by the survey (Schneider & Sumi, 1981). Murphy and Cowan (1976, as cited in Schneider & Sumi, 1981) claim that crime victimization interviews have shown that victimization can be overstated by 40 to 60 percent in some surveys.

   One factor that influences the accuracy of interviews is whether the survey is bounded or unbounded. Studies have demonstrated that bounded interviews, or interviews conducted after a previous visit with the respondent has occurred, show a much higher accuracy level in data gathered. Those in unbounded interviews, or those where there was no previous visit with the respondent, tend to report nearly twice as much crime as respondents of bounded interviews in the same time period (Turner, 1972, as cited in Skogan, 1975, p. 25).

CHAPTER SUMMARY

• ▪ Sexual offenses vary by type, degree of severity, class of offense, and length of sanction. They can be broadly categorized as contact offenses (where touching occurs), noncontact offenses (where only viewing or talking occurs), sexual solicitation (where sexual acts are traded for compensation) and pornographic offenses (where movies or pictures are involved).

• ▪ Statistics on the prevalence of sexual offending are derived from three types of data: arrest and conviction rates, victimization surveys, and empirical studies. It is difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain the true prevalence of offending in the population. Many researchers and research organizations have calculated rates of victimization.

• ▪ Rates of victimization have decreased in the past decade. The best estimates of victimization rates are that one in four women and one in seven men are sexually abused in their lifetimes.

• ▪ Victims of child sexual abuse often wait many years to report the abusive behavior. The length of delay depends on many factors, including victim-offender relationship, severity of the abuse, cognitive and developmental variables, fear of negative consequences, and gender of the victim.

• ▪ After a delay in reporting, many victims suffer from “telescoping,” and do not report the time of the abuse correctly.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

• 1. What are the best sources of statistical information on sexual offenses and offenders? How do these sources of information differ?

• 2. What are the most significant problems in determining the true prevalence of sexual abuse?

• 3. How accurate are reports of sexual offending many years after the abuse occurred? What factors influence the accuracy?

• 4. What should be done to increase reporting of sexual abuse?

DID YOU KNOW…?

• ▪ Did you know that most sexual offenses are committed by family members or acquaintances? Many reports about sexual offenders in the media relate to sexual assaults by strangers, but in fact most perpetrators know their victims.

• ▪ Did you know that recidivism rates for sex offenders are low—substantially lower than recidivism rates for most other crimes? Sexual offenses are greatly underreported, so the true rate of sexual offending is not clear. However, official statistics show that most sexual offenders are not convicted of multiple sexual offenses.

• ▪ Did you know that not all victims of sexual abuse go on to abuse others? Many sex offenders were sexually abused themselves; however, most people who were sexually abused do not go on to become abusers.

© Cengage Learning

2 Historical Perspectives on Sexual Behavior

As explained in Chapter 1, the concept of “normal” sexual behavior is a socially constructed reality that is continually adapting (Jenkins, 1998). Actions that are defined as sexual offenses vary across religions, cultures, nations, and even states. Additionally, these definitions change over time, adapting to the prevailing social norms and cultures. There are few objective standards for acceptable sexual behavior, and tolerance of various sexual acts depends largely upon the political and social ideologies of the day. An evaluation of sexual behavior over centuries and in various cultures shows the evolution of attitudes toward sexual acts that have intermittently been considered taboo, including homosexuality, bestiality, sadomasochism, adultery, masturbation, and pederasty.

HISTORICAL, RELIGIOUS, AND CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR

The sexual activity of Greek and Mediterranean cultures has been extensively detailed in art, literature, poetry, mythology, and theater (Dover, 1978). Though there was no word equivalent to homosexualityuntil 1869, same-sex conduct was displayed in visual arts as early as the sixth century B.C. One of the most prominent philosophical depictions of homosexual relationships occurs in Plato's Symposium, which contemplates the nature of a relationship between Socrates and a young, attractive male. Artistic depictions of transgenerational homosexuality were not uncommon, and many vases and murals show scenes of older males touching the genitals of nude young males (Dover, 1978). Men also wrote love poems about younger boys, particularly those in late adolescence, and sexual activity between older men and younger boys was acceptable and considered beautiful (Breiner, 1990).

   Though same-sex relationships occurred regularly in Greece, the men were not considered homosexual in the sense of the word today. It was acceptable for men to have relationships with both men and women, and same-sex relationships were common to supplement the sexual relationship with a wife. Women were not highly respected and were typically viewed as “mad, hysterical, and possibly dangerous and destructive to men” (Breiner, 1990, p. 41). Marriage was considered a necessity for procreation, though sexuality was not linked to marriage and sexual pleasure could thus be received outside the marriage (Mondimore, 1996). The ideal relationship was that of an active older male and a passive younger male (Breiner, 1990; Mondimore, 1996), evident even in Greek mythology, which depicts Zeus as attracted to a young boy of legendary beauty (Dover, 1978).

   Homosexuality was institutionalized into the Greek culture, and this was apparent by the arts and practices of the people. Plays, particularly comedies, were very sexual in nature and often included overt sexual acts on stage. There were also orgies to the gods that included repeated sexual acts and often the sacrifice of a child (Breiner, 1990). It was common for young boys to be sold into slavery, and socially prominent men would have slaves for their own sexual use. Though the majority of sexual behavior revolved around males, there were also women who were involved in homosexual practices. The most famous of these is Sappho, resident of Lesbos (from which the word lesbian is derived), who wrote love poems to women.

   The Greek culture was not the only one to promote homosexuality, pederasty, and the importance of the male figure in society. Boy brothels were also found in Rome, and the Romans believed that sexual relationships with young boys would aid their mental development (Breiner, 1990). Although the Greeks viewed man-boy relationships as beautiful, Romans often subjected boys (particularly slave boys) to violence and abuse. Sadistic activities were enjoyed for entertainment, and this included watching women and children being raped and having sex with animals.

   The Egyptians were similar to the Greeks and Romans in their admiration of the male figure and their acceptance of homosexuality. Other sexual behaviors common to the Egyptians included polygamy, incest, sexual play among children, and sexual touching of children by adults (Breiner, 1990). Children participated in sexual play at an early age, and it was expected that this would teach them about sexual behavior. By A.D. 200, brother-sister marriages were common, especially among those in the middle class. Though intercourse between adults and children was considered taboo, adults commonly sucked the penises of boys in order to prepare them for sexual activity later. Sexual activity among adults was very open in Egypt, and the pharaoh in particular was expected to partake in extensive sexual activity with his wives and other women while traveling (Breiner, 1990).

   Open sexual activity continued in such a fashion until the early Middle Ages, at which time homosexuality became a crime in Europe. This shift in moral thinking about sexuality was influenced by the church, and all sexual acts that were for enjoyment rather than procreation were considered to be sinful (Holmes, 1991; Mondimore, 1996). Sodomy was the catchall category of all “unnatural” sexual acts, including masturbation, bestiality, anal intercourse, fellatio, and heterosexual intercourse in anything other than the missionary position. By the 14th century, sodomy was illegal throughout Europe, and perpetrators could potentially be sentenced to death. Homosexual acts were particularly discouraged, and in 1326 King Edward II of England was brutally killed because of his relationship with another male (Mondimore, 1996, p. 25). Though the church continued to have an influence on sexual mores for several hundred years, transgenerational sexual acts became socially acceptable in 16th- and 17th-century Europe. It was common for adults to touch and fondle the genitals of their prepubescent children, though the touching stopped when the children developed into adolescence (Breiner, 1990; Jenkins, 1998).

   In the 18th century, many children were sent to workhouses and brothels and were victims of murder, assault, or rape. With this exception, there was little danger from adult offenders outside the home. The main focus on sexual behavior continued to be within the home, and separate courts were developed for criminal and moral offenses. Although acts such as incest had been accepted in ancient cultures, the church declared incest an ecclesiastical offense, and incestuous marriages were invalidated (Thomas, 2000). Moral offenses, such as masturbation, were brought before the church courts throughout the beginning of the 20th century. Other types of behavior that were considered more serious offenses—including homosexuality, bestiality, and sexual intercourse with prepubescent children—were brought before the criminal courts and were punishable by sentences as severe as death.

   Though the Catholic Church dominated regulation of sexual behavior in Europe, other religions and cultures differed in their sexual mores. Polygamy was (and in some cultures, still is) regularly practiced by Muslims, Mormons, and Hebrews. Hebrew families had strict puritan regulations on sexual behavior, and, like the Catholic Church, considered homosexuality an abhorrence (Breiner, 1990). Masturbation was prohibited; for young men this was equivalent to premarital sex, and a married man who masturbated was guilty of adultery. Men were even discouraged from touching their genitals while urinating, as this was thought to encourage masturbation (Breiner, 1990).

   In opposition to the puritan sexual mores of various religious sects, Native American and African cultures often practiced sexual activities similar to those of the ancient Greeks. There was evidence of homosexuality in both North and South American tribes, where sexual play among children was also tolerated. Many tribes believed that sexual activity between children and adults was a necessary aspect of sexual development, and that a boy would have to be sexually intimate with an older man in order to develop masculine qualities (Mondimore, 1996). African tribes had similar rituals, and female circumcision was (and is still) common to many African cultures. That such acts are regularly practiced in other cultures but are condemned in Western societies shows the influence of social ideologies on accepted sexual behavior. There is no objective standard for the types of sexual behavior that should be prohibited, and sexual mores have changed drastically even throughout the previous century.

CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF DEVIANT SEXUAL BEHAVIOR: THE 20TH CENTURY

The beginning of the 20th century witnessed a new philosophy of sexual morality. It was at that time, during the Progressive Era, that concerns began to emerge about a number of issues, including the sexual behavior of women and the abuse of children. With the Industrial Revolution causing vast urban growth, adolescent women began entering the workplace in large numbers for the first time. Subsequently, they began participating in social activities outside of their local neighborhoods, experiencing unprecedented freedom from their families (Odem, 1995). It was this change in social structure that instigated the modification of “age of consent” laws for sexual behavior, and it was at this time that the courts began to regularly monitor sexual behavior.

   Researchers during the Progressive Era began focusing on serious sexual offenders, classifying their behavior as a medical problem. Many sexual deviants were labeled pathological or insane and were sent to mental hospitals, where they were treated until they regained their sanity. Shortly thereafter, researchers began to study the possible correlation between hormones and sexually deviant behavior, hypothesizing that organic treatments were necessary in order to control such behavior. Research in the 1950s began to show that sexually deviant behavior might not be simply the result of hormones or psychopathology; the underlying problems might be behavioral in nature. There continued to be a lack of understanding about the complexities of sexually deviant behavior, however, and it was only in the 1970s that researchers began to link sexually deviant behavior to social problems. Researchers at this time began to take into consideration the effects of cognitive processes on the behavior of sexual deviants, and research continues in this area today.

   Whether researchers looked at those who committed deviant sexual acts as having medical, psychological, or moral problems, most looked at the population of sexual deviants as unique. Because the motivation of their behavior was not—and is still not—clearly understood, reactions to their behavior have been erratic. Despite the various therapies and legislative acts that have been imposed upon those who commit sexual offenses, the reactions to this population are distinctly cyclical. Figure 2.1 outlines the cycle of legislative proposals, showing how policies regarding sexual offenders are implemented after waves of emotionally-charged, notorious sex crimes occur.

   Though new information about sexual offenders was continually attained throughout the century, societal reaction to sexually deviant behavior has shown a repetitive pattern. At three distinct points in the 20th century, there were public outcries to control sexual “fiends,” “psychopaths,” and “predators.” It was the highly publicized cases of sexual abuse, or, more specifically, cases involving the sexual murder of children by strangers, that largely influenced such public reactions (Jenkins, 1998). In between these peaks of interest in stranger attacks, little public attention was paid to sexual abuse. Most considered it to be a problem within the family that was not shared with the public or the courts. Figure 2.2 shows the public perception of sexual abuse and abusers throughout the century.

FIGURE 2.1 Cycle of moral panic and reactions to sex offenders

   In order to understand legislative reactions to sex offenders today, it is essential to observe the influence of research, political ideologies, and societal reactions to deviant sexual behavior throughout the 20th century.

1885–1935: The First Wave of Panic

Prior to the 1880s, little was known about those who committed “deviant” sexual acts. It was Richard von Krafft-Ebing (1886/1965) who, in his groundbreaking book Psychopathia Sexualis, first claimed that deviant sexual acts were the result of psychopathological problems in the individual. He attributed various sexual disorders to psychological abnormalities, stating that the sexual disorders were a permanent part of a person's character and could not be changed. His book contains case studies of individuals—both male and female—who experienced various sexual disorders and paraphilias, though a significant portion of the book focuses on homosexual activity. Krafft-Ebing said that homosexuality could be blamed on hereditary factors, or it could be acquired from the practice of masturbation. He concluded that sexual deviants, particularly homosexuals, were mentally ill, pathological, loathsome, and a threat to social hygiene.

FIGURE 2.2 Changing concepts of deviant sexual behavior in the 20th century, showing periodic increases in concern about the “stranger danger.”

He published 12 editions of Psychopathia Sexualis, and his work opened floodgates of research on sexual behavior.

   Two other influential researchers at the time were Havelock Ellis and Sigmund Freud. Ellis (1899/1942) wrote a two-volume, multipart book on the psychology of sex, in which he discussed issues ranging from menstruation to marriage to sexual morality. He recognized that a changing social environment defines sexual morality, and that standards of morality are continually changing. His opinion differed from Krafft-Ebing's on the issues of homosexuality and masturbation, as he did not consider sexual deviates to be mentally ill or pathological. Though Ellis did not consider homosexuals to be “normal,” he did not think there was reason to try to cure them. He did not believe that homosexuals who went through treatment for their deviation could be cured, and with this Freud agreed. Like Krafft-Ebing, Freud believed that deviant sexual behavior was rooted in psychopathology, and he attributed sexual deviation to character disorders in a 1905 essay on neuroses (Freud, 1953). He explained that “neurotic symptoms represent the patient's sexual activity,” with more complex symptoms representing the patient's fantasies (Freud, 1959, p. 281). Much of Freud's research focused on the sexual activity among family members; he stated that incest was a common occurrence and was consequently the root of problems for many girls.

   While researchers were focusing on the causes of sexually deviant behavior, in the 1880s the public began receiving information about sexual immorality from social groups. The Women's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU)—a group primarily consisting of white, middle-class women—began lobbying vigorously in 1889 for the modification of age of consent laws in the United States (Odem, 1995, p. 8). They wanted to raise the age of consent from 10 (in most states) to 18,1 claiming that “male vice and exploitation were responsible for the moral ruin of young women and girls” (Odem, 1995, p. 16). Although it was true that many men were taking advantage of young working-class girls, some of the young women themselves were acting promiscuously. The number of women working in factories and other industrial centers nearly tripled from the 1880s to 1910, and working-class women began participating in new social activities outside the home and local neighborhoods. The purity reformers of the WCTU acknowledged the need to protect the sexual autonomy of these women, saving them from “male seducers” who would lead them into vices such as prostitution (Odem, 1995, p. 18). Their campaign literature highlighted the increasing frequency of sexual attacks upon women and young girls, and they called for legislative changes in the punishment for these crimes (Odem, 1995, p. 9).

   The legislative changes they were seeking did materialize, and by 1920 the age of consent was 16 or 18 in nearly every state.2 It was not just the religious moral reformers who were concerned about sexual activity during this era, however. While they were waging a campaign against “white slavery,” a general panic was rising about sex “fiends” and “perverts” who were preying on children. It was becoming apparent in the larger cities, particularly New York, that child prostitution was rampant among both boys and girls. The number of brothels that would prostitute effeminate boys increased, and they were frequented by some of the more respectable men in the cities. The moral vicissitude was brought about in part by the spreading of venereal diseases, syphilis and gonorrhea in particular, by homosexuals and pedophiles, whose behavior was under scrutiny at this time (Jenkins, 1998, p. 27).

   It was between 1910 and 1915 that the United States reached its first retributive climax against sexual offenders. This was largely the result of a rise during this time period in sex-related child homicides, many of which were attributed to serial killers. There were sexual murders in New York City, Colorado, North Dakota, Alabama, Washington, and Atlanta (Jenkins, 1998, p. 36). The media and the police managed to create a panic in the public by defining the “Jack the Rippers” as intelligent, manipulative criminals who were easily able to elude detection. In an effort to reduce serious sex crimes, police intervention increased for all sexual offenders who committed offenses in public—namely, homosexuals and other public “nuisances”—whereas there was a dearth of intervention for intrafamilial offenders.

   During this five-year period, a number of factors influenced legislation and research on sexual offenders. Indeterminate sentences were introduced for serious offenders in most states, and these nearly always affected sex offenders. There was a move toward positivism—the belief that people are social beings who want to conform, but are compelled to commit offences for reasons beyond their control—that came simultaneously with increasing research from European academics and increasing media coverage on the problem of deviant behavior. Because the focus of criminological research at this time was primarily biological and physiological, such as with the newly translated research of Cesare Lombroso (the Italian “father of scientific criminology” who studied biological and physiological theories of crime in the 19th century), remedies for deviant sexual behavior were also physiological. The concept of eugenics, which supposed that some people were genetically unfit and should therefore not procreate, was a popular one. Among criminals fitting this description were sex offenders, and the practice of sterilization was common. In addition to sterilization, surgical castration was a method used to reduce the sexual drive of, and therefore the number of offenses committed by, sexual criminals. At the time, the concept of eugenics was unquestioned, and the sterilization of habitual criminals was allowed until 1942, when it was declared unconstitutional in the case of Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942). It was only at this time that the science of hereditary criminality was seriously questioned.

   Most of the early research on child sexual abusers focused on serious offenders, often men with psychiatric problems. Even though the researchers studied serious offenders who had been convicted or otherwise incapacitated, the sex offenders in these early studies presented a unique typology in terms of characteristics and likelihood of recidivism. For example, Frosch and Bromber (1939) conducted a psychological study of 709 sex offenders passing through a psychiatric court clinic in New York City. Among their findings were that sex offenders had a low rate of recidivism (a finding that has consistently been replicated in contemporary studies); many were men over age 40 who reported having a strong religious affiliation; alcoholism and mental deficiency were only minor factors in their offending; many of the men in this sample had a maladjusted sex life; and, “pedophiles” had a higher rate of psychopathic personalities and neurotics. In their study of 250 male nonpsychotic pedophiles and exhibitionists at Bellevue Hospital, Apfelberg et al. (1944) found that more than a quarter of the offenders were married and living with their wives at the time of their offenses; 32 percent had been previously charged with sex offenses; and, 38 percent had been charged with other types of offenses.

   The panic over sexual killers subsided in the 1920s. The reasons for this were numerous. First, the focus began to turn away from stranger assaults and toward child molestation and incest. The high amount of venereal disease among children was still questioned, though it was attributed largely to child abuse by relatives or to prostitution rather than to rape. Second, by 1917 the WCTU had essentially completed its campaign to save women and children for a life of social purity. They had, by this time, achieved their main goals: women's suffrage and an increased age of consent. Third, by the 1930s issues other than sexual offenses became more topical in the media; namely, organized crime and Prohibition. Fourth, the focus of criminologists and sociologists was shifting, and research focused largely on issues in policing (corruption, brutality), organized crime, and juvenile delinquency (Jenkins, 1998, p. 46). The trend of medicalizing criminal acts did not diminish in the 1920s, however. Research on incarcerated offenders to determine the levels of psychopathy in criminals increased. It was this trend that led to the hospitalization of sexual offenders in the 1930s.

1936–1976: The Rise of the Sexual Psychopath

As had happened at the beginning of the century, an awareness of stranger sex crimes during the 1930s led to new legislation for sexual offenders. Child murderers such as Albert Fish permeated the media coverage in the mid-1930s. He committed numerous offenses against children, including rape, murder, and cannibalism. Though his offenses were indeed horrific, recidivist offenders such as Fish were—and are—atypical. The number of arrests for sexual offenders increased dramatically in the late 1930s, but this was due not as much to an increase in sexual offenses as it was to a change in law enforcement policies (Karpman, 1954). The police in most large cities began to crack down on minor sexual offenses, such as homosexuality and frotteurism (the sexual urge to touch or rub another person) (Tappan, 1950). Though the media fueled the idea that the nation was overrun by sex crimes, this was based more on hysteria than fact. For instance, New York City was noted as having a particularly large population of sexual criminals, yet the majority of arrests were for either consensual acts or misdemeanors. Arrests for sodomy more than doubled there from 1932 to 1938, because officers were required to pick up all those known to commit sexually deviant acts, and the high level of homosexual activity in the subway became known as a “queer threat” (Jenkins, 1998). Despite the high number of minor offenses, the focus of political and media attention was on the relatively rare habitual sex offender. This, combined with the emerging physiological theories of criminology, created a new label for sex offenders in 1937: “sexual psychopaths.”

   Criminal sanctions alone were not considered sufficient to incapacitate recidivist offenders. Thus, in an effort to skirt the criminal justice system, sexual psychopathy legislation was initiated to civilly commit habitual sexual criminals, or Mentally Disordered Sex Offenders. Michigan was the first state to pass a psychopathy law in 1937, and 28 other states followed suit over the next 50 years (Schwartz, 1999, pp. 3–4). Michigan's law, like those that followed, allowed for the commitment of sexual “degenerates” or perverts if they had mental disorders and posed a threat to the public. Statutes were passed on the principle that sexual psychopathy was a disorder that could be diagnosed and treated, and violent sexual predators would remain civilly committed in mental institutions until they were “cured” (Alexander, 1993). The premise of the legislation was ostensibly therapeutic, yet the result was primarily retributive. The commitment process itself was grossly subjective, and those who were committed remained hospitalized for many years.

   There was no consensus for the definition of sexual psychopathy, and it differed from state to state (Tappan, 1950). In California, the offender would have had an “utter lack of power to control his impulses,” yet an offender in Iowa had only to have the “criminal propensities towards the commission of sex offences” (Grubin & Prentky, 1993, p. 383). The standard necessary to commit sexual psychopaths was twofold: there had to be proof that the individuals suffered from a mental illness and that they were a danger to themselves or others. Dangerousness was a subjective standard, and because it could not be predicted with any sense of accuracy, commitment standards were questionable (Sutherland, 1950). Civil commitment replaced criminal incarceration, and the critical factor in commitment was that it was not punishment but rather treatment. Therefore, individuals who remained dangerous but not mentally ill were no longer supposed to be civilly confined.

   That all sex offenders were a public threat was a concept promoted at this time by various persons with public influence. The media promoted the image of the serious sex fiend through newspaper articles and magazines. The police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) were concerned with the inability of the criminal justice system to retain these sex fiends in the prison system, focusing specifically on two factors: the escalation of offending behavior and the use of parole. Offenses such as exhibitionism did not warrant severe sentences, yet this was seen as a gateway action into more serious deviant acts. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover publicized his opinions during the 1930s and 1940s by describing “degenerate sex offenders” as one of the most severe problems facing children, despite the relatively low crime rate at that time (Jenkins, 1998). The FBI warned families of a looming “stranger danger”; these warnings continued through the 1960s. Parole was considered one source of recidivism, as many of the child sexual killers were repeat offenders who had been released from prison early, on parole. Politicians, too, were using the public's fears about sex crimes to promote their own campaigns. In Minnesota, for example, a young girl went missing in 1938 and was allegedly kidnapped, molested, and killed by a “sexual pervert,” though her body was never found. One gubernatorial candidate claimed that he would protect the community from such “unfortunate but dangerous wretches” should he be elected, and, upon his election, sexual psychopathy laws were passed unanimously in 1939 (Robson, 1999, p. 2).

   The use of civil commitment under sexual psychopathy laws increased throughout the 1940s and early 1950s. It was not just sex offenders who were subject to adverse public reactions at this time, however. Mental hospitals had lax commitment standards for all those perceived as a social threat. The population of state hospitals increased drastically, largely with those civilly committed due to feeblemindedness or mental illnesses that deemed them a danger to society. States were vague about the types of sexual offenses that could result in the label of sexual psychopath, and some statutes included behaviors such as peeping, lewdness, and impairing morals. Both felonies and misdemeanors could result in commitment, as well as both forced and statutory offenses (for example, statutory rape, which is an offense only because of the age of the victim).

   At the height of the panic over sexual psychopaths, some researchers were divided on the issue of civil commitment. For instance, Karpman (1954, p. 38) stated that sexual offenders were not a particularly vicious group of individuals and there was little truth to the supposition that minor offenses escalate to more serious deviant behavior. Yet he also supported indefinite commitment for sexual psychopaths to hospitals for study and treatment until such a time that they were no longer a risk to the community (Karpman, 1954, p. 225). Homosexual activity was still a socially unacceptable sexual alternative, and some researchers linked homosexuals and pedophiles in terms of their “perverse” sexual interests. There was said to be an inevitable connection between an attraction to one's own gender and children, both showing an “arrested psychosexual development” (Jenkins, 1998, p. 62). But by the late 1940s, many researchers began to resist the “stranger danger” belief, citing exaggerated claims of sexually related homicides (Sutherland, 1950). Most researchers opposed the idea of civil commitment for sexual psychopaths, believing—correctly—that such laws would result in the overcommitment of minor offenders.

   One researcher published a report on the problems of sexual psychopathy statutes, challenging the validity of the statutes due to, at the most basic level, the erroneous views about sex offenders that led to the legislation (Tappan, 1950). He pointed out 10 primary fallacies concerning the sex offender (pp. 13–16), strikingly applicable to the myths prevalent today:

• 1. Sex offenders are not usually homicidal sex fiends, and most are minor offenders. Citing Sutherland (1950), he stated that there is more danger of murder by an acquaintance or relative than by an unknown sex fiend, and that a truly dangerous sex fiend is rare.

• 2. Sex offenders have a low rate of recidivism, and they repeat their offenses less frequently than any other property or violent offenders except those convicted of homicide.

• 3. There is rarely an escalation of behavior in sex offenders. Though escalation does occur in some serious offenders, most find a sexual act that gives them satisfaction (for example, exhibitionism) and persist in that behavior.

• 4. It is not possible to predict dangerousness in this population, a point supported by many prominent psychiatrists. He stressed the importance of this point, because sex offenders are indefinitely committed to institutions based on their perceived risks.

• 5. “Sex psychopathy” is not a clinical entity, and there is much disagreement on what this term means. The offenders who are committed exhibit a variety of psychological problems, and there is no clear definition as to what does or should constitute a sexual psychopath.

• 6. Sexual offenders are not oversexed individuals, but tend to be undersexed. Organic treatments such as castration are not effective remedies for deviant sexual behavior, because sexual urges are not the driving force of the offender.

• 7. There is no treatment that can “cure” sex offenders, and commitment to a mental hospital does not mean that a sexual offender will be treated. Sex offenders are often confined indefinitely and offered no treatment (a problem with sexual predator legislation that is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 12).

• 8. Though sexual psychopathy legislation was passed in order to incapacitate the serious sexual fiend, the individuals who are most often committed are minor offenders.

• 9. Due process rights of the accused are disregarded because the commitment procedure is of a civil nature. Tappan asserts that there is a violation of human rights and due process in the commitment procedure, stating that “regardless of the type of court employed to attain this result, it is in effect a serious punishment in which liberty and due process are vitally involved. Reasoning to the contrary is founded in a technical legalism of the most vicious sort” (Tappan, 1950, p. 16).

• 10. The “sex problem” will not go away merely because a law was passed. The only purpose of the statute is to satisfy the public, and that experience with these laws “reveals the futility of ineffectual legislation” (Tappan, 1950, p. 16).

   At the time the report was published, 14 states had passed sexual psychopathy legislation. The most important point of the report is the discord between psychiatrists and lawmakers. Tappan stated that “sixty-five out of sixty-six psychiatrists … expressed the belief that there was insufficient accord in the field to justify legislation specifically for the sexual psychopath” (1950, p. 37). Additionally, he outlined the dangerous precedents set by sexual psychopathy legislation, including civil adjudication of individuals without due process; indefinite commitment to hospitals for offenders who are neither insane nor seriously psychologically impaired; and that sex offenders can be indefinitely committed into hospital until “cured,” though they are not necessarily being treated and the cost of commitment to taxpayers is extraordinary (p. 16). Despite Tappan's assertions, the number of states with sexual psychopathy legislation doubled over the next two decades.

   At the height of the sexual psychopathy discussions in mid-century, publications about sex offenders continued to focus on the pathology of offending behavior. In his book The Sexual Criminal, based on case studies of extreme offenders, De River (1949) described anecdotal examples of sex “degenerates” and “perverts.” He claimed that “pedophiles” were psychosexually immature, had a predilection for young children, had mental or physical handicaps, and were often shy or uneasy around adults. It was publications like this that helped develop the popular image of the sexual “pervert” at the time, even though the stereotypes were not based upon empirical analyses.

   Empirical research was also ongoing at this time, though the samples of offenders generally consisted of the most serious, incarcerated offenders. In addition to studying skewed samples, most researchers in mid-century were also studying offenders from a psychodynamic perspective. As a result, though the studies provided information about sexual offenders and their histories, demographics, and attitudes, the study findings were often highly skewed since they only focused on the most serious offenders and from a single perspective. For example, in a study of 102 sexual offenders at Sing Sing, Abrahamsen (1950) found that all of the men in his sample expressed the same characteristics, including hostility toward authority, mental disorders, the prominence of alcohol in many offenses, prior commission of sex crimes (one-third of the sample had previously committed sex crimes), and the developmental delay of conscience in most offenders. Hammer and Glueck (1957) studied approximately 200 sex offenders over a five-year period at Sing Sing prison, and they also found consistent psychological patterns. They noted that all offenders exhibited five key characteristics: a reaction to massive Oedipal entanglements; castration fear or feelings and fear of approaching mature females psychosexually; interpersonal inhibitions of schizoid to schizophrenic proportions; weak ego-strength and lack of adequate control of impulses; and, concrete orientation and minimal capacity for sublimation.

   Scholarly articles focusing only on child sexual abusers also had the same limitations. Toobert, Bartelme, and Jones (1959) published an article arguing that pedophiles are not always aggressive, but rather their behavior stemmed from a sense of weakness, inadequacy, or low self-regard, and that such behavior correlated with some type of family disruption during childhood. Gigeroff, Mohr, and Turner (1968) analyzed three distinct groups of pedophiles: the adolescent pedophile, who is often still in puberty; the middle-aged pedophile (aged 35 to 39), who is usually married, shows severe marital and social maladjustment, and exhibits abusive behavior; and the senescent pedophile (aged mid-50s to 60s), who is characterized by loneliness and social isolation and whose abusive behavior evolves “out of a situation in which a particular child is the only one the man can emotionally relate to.” They noted that recidivism rates are low for most sexual offenders—between 6 and 8 percent—however, those with a previous sexual offense conviction had recidivism rates of 30 percent and those with sexual and nonsexual offenses had recidivism rates of 50 percent.

   As researchers were studying sex offenders in prison or committed to institutional treatment centers in mid-century, other sex researchers were studying “normal” sexual behavior. In two controversial reports, Alfred Kinsey (1948) and Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, and Gebhard (1953) analyzed the prevalence of sexual acts that were considered by most to be deviant at the time, such as masturbation and homosexual behavior. He discovered that a high percentage of individuals had, in fact, participated in these behaviors, therefore creating questions about the use of the term deviant to describe them. Other studies of normal sexual behavior were carried out in the next two decades, which focused on determining the prevalence of certain sexual practices, such as masturbation, and on understanding how various sexual acts could add pleasure to traditional relationships (see Hite, 1976, 1982; Laumann et al., 1994; Masters & Johnson, 1966). Despite the controversy associated with the methodological flaws of the Kinsey reports and with sex research in general, this body of work was highly influential at the time and demonstrated that normal sexual behavior could be documented using empirical analyses.

   Sex researchers also began to study issues of gender identity in the 1950s and 1960s. Notable for his work was John Money, who studied sexual behavior for over 50 years. In 1955, he coined the term gender role, later expanded to “gender-identity/role,” and in 1966 helped establish the Gender Identity Clinic at Johns Hopkins. The clinic performed sex-reassignment surgeries, and in 1972 Money published the controversial book, Man and Woman, Boy and Girl (Money & Ehrhardt, 1972). In this work, he expressed the view that gender is malleable and can be altered through external factors such as prescribed hormones and behavior therapy. Though some of this work was ethically questionable, his impact on study of gender identity was substantial.

   The 1960s and early 1970s brought about a social and sexual revolution, and as the Liberal Era emerged there was a dissipation of punitive reaction to sexual psychopaths. Sexual psychopathy statutes fell into disuse in many states, and the main focus on sexual behavior was the changing societal attitudes toward acts that were previously considered to be socially stigmatizing. There was a sexual liberation in the 1960s, and sexual behavior among young people was becoming openly pronounced. Additionally, homosexuality became a more socially acceptable sexual alternative as a result of the gay liberation movement, initiated in 1969 after the Stonewall Riots in New York City. The 1970s brought forth an era of social change for women, with the legalization of abortion in Roe v. Wade (1973).While the social and political ideologies were changing, so, too, were theories on sexual offending.

   Research on child sexual abuse began progressing in the 1960s. In a methodologically sophisticated research project, Gebhard and Gagnon (1964) studied sexual offenders who abused young children (and notably did not label all of the offenders pedophiles). The authors stated that the regression to sexually abusing children is a function of a breakdown in control over sexual behavior that results from a current environmental stressor and the disposition for this behavior was based on disordered childhood relationships. They did state, however, that they were not able to determine exactly what would constitute the childhood precursors of acts of sexual abuse of children.

   Several mid-century studies compared groups of offenders who committed abuse against children of the same sex to those who abused children of the opposite sex. Fitch (1962) found no significant differences between the “homosexual” and “heterosexual” offenders with respect to age at time of offense, age at first conviction for sexual offense, and intelligence. However, the study found major differences in employment level, marital status, sentence decreed, and pattern of previous and subsequent convictions. This study showed that sexual recidivists were predominantly single, homosexual offenders who had a history of previous convictions for sexual offenses.

   Notable research on rape in the late 1960s came from feminist researchers. It was becoming evident at this time that male and female constructions of social reality differed (Scully, 1990, p. 2), and the women's movement against sexual violence arose as an attempt to combat the prevailing negative views of female victims. Police practices, courtroom procedures, and even academic research condemned the victims of sexual abuse as partially or primarily responsible for their victimization. Amir (1971), for example, studied forcible rapes in Philadelphia and claimed that 19 percent were victim precipitated and that in many cases the victim initiated the interaction. It wasn't until the 1980s that the women's movement succeeded in changing the public perception of victims of sexual violence, and it was at this time that allegations of child sexual abuse within the family became more frequent. But by the end of the 1980s, a new panic emerged about the sexual homicide of children by strangers. This panic still exists today and is the source of the backlash against sexual offenders.

DID YOU KNOW…?

Sexual Behavior and Changing Social Norms: Homosexuality

Perceptions of “normal” sexual behavior change over time and differ by culture. One of the best examples of these changing views of sexuality and sexual behavior can be seen in the changing views of homosexuality.

   The terms homosexual and heterosexual were first used in personal written communications in 1868 between a writer and a sex reformer (Katz, 1997). Homosexual appeared in public in 1869, and by 1900, was being used as a negative classification within the medical field. Heterosexual was also being used by the medical community in reference to those men and women who practiced nonprocreative intercourse. In the United States, the terms appeared in print in a medical journal in 1892 defining “two kinds of sexual perversion, judged according to a procreative standard … ‘to abnormal methods of gratification’” (Katz, 1997, p. 177). For the next 50 years, homosexuality continued to be considered a socially unacceptable behavior, and some researchers linked homosexuals and pedophiles through their “perverse” sexual interests (Jenkins, 1998).

   By the end of the 1950s, views of homosexuality slowly began changing. For example, the Wolfendon Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution in England, which convened and released a report in 1957, was charged with reviewing whether same-sex behavior and prostitution should be considered offenses and, if so, what the sanctions for those offenses should be. The Committee decided that the sanctions for prostitution should increase, while the homosexual behavior between consenting adults in private should not be a criminal offense. This recommendation for the decriminalization of homosexual behavior was well ahead of its time, as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) still considered homosexuality to be a mental disorder. Despite the fierce debates about the Wolfendon report, however (see Ronan, 1957), the report's recommendations ultimately led to the passage of the Sexual Offences Act of 1967, which did make legal sexual behavior between consenting adults (over the age of 21) of the same gender in private.

   Homosexuality was starting to be viewed as a socially acceptable sexual alternative at about the same time in the United State largely as a result of the gay liberation movement, exemplified in 1969 by the Stonewall Riots in New York City. By 1973, homosexuality was removed from the DSM-II (though it was replaced with a category of disorder called sexual orientation disturbance). Laws continued to change throughout the next 30 years, but many states continued to have laws banning this behavior until the U.S. Supreme Court stated that sodomy laws were unconstitutional in Lawrence v. Texas (2003).

Questions

• 1. Are there any sexual behaviors that are now considered “deviant” that may become accepted sexual practices in the future?

• 2. Are there cultures where homosexual behaviors are still considered deviant?

• 3. How is the controversy over same-sex marriage linked to the controversy over homosexual behavior generally?

© Cengage Learning

1976-Present: The Emergence of a Sexually Violent Predator

Toward the end of the 1970s, a number of issues were emerging that were not previously in the public forum. Problems with mental health such as depression and eating disorders were being discussed for the first time as common problems of normal people, and individuals were seeking therapy at rapid rates for cures to their ills. Childhood sexual abuse was also being discussed in open forums, particularly the courts. This new discourse was beneficial in many respects: it allowed for more information about the issues to be publicized, and it modified the stereotype that the victims of abuse were to blame rather than the perpetrators. Before long, however, a new problem evolved.

   In the 1980s, the courts witnessed an influx of lawsuits from adults claiming they had been sexually abused as children. These adults claimed that they had repressed the memories for years, and only after several therapy sessions was the abuse recalled. The courts were initially hesitant to accept such claims (for example, Tyson v. Tyson, Wash. 1986), though they gradually altered their views and began awarding damages to the plaintiffs (for example, Hammer v. Hammer, Wis. Ct. App. 1987). The statutes of limitation were extended in many American states, because the alleged abuse was often recalled decades after it occurred. Repressed memories were generally retrieved during therapeutic sessions when individuals—the majority of whom were women—sought psychological therapy for problems other than the alleged abuse. Therapists suggested that the patients read self-help books (Bass & Davis, 1988; Blume, 1990; Fredrickson, 1992), many of which indicated that individuals experiencing psychological problems were likely to have been sexually abused as children. Some of these books described lists of symptoms attributable to repressed abuse; these lists included characteristics as common as eating disorders, fear of being alone in the dark, and drug or alcohol abuse (Blume, 1990).

   During therapeutic sessions, various retrieval processes were used to induce recall of repressed memories, the most common being hypnosis and Amytal (Green, 1994). Hypnosis, a sleeplike condition achieved through relaxation and concentration on a particular topic, lacks scientific elucidation because it is not well-understood what happens in the mind to reproduce memories. Accurate information has emerged under hypnosis by individuals who witnessed an event, as details can be recollected immediately after the event through sensory recall and mental exercise with some accuracy. Individuals attempting to recall entire events from the past, however, consistently recall information that is incorrect more often than information that is correct. This is particularly true with hypnotic age regression, where the recalled events occurred before the age of five, a time represented by “childhood amnesia” (Loftus, 1994). Amytal, the other common method used to retrieve memories, is a barbiturate that induces a hypnotic drowsiness in individuals. Although said to function as a truth serum, it has been asserted that “Amytal has no legitimate use in recovered memory cases.… It is worse than useless, as it [encourages] patients' beliefs in completely mythical events” (Piper, 1993, pp. 447, 465). Amytal is similar to hypnosis in that it increases confidence in a subject's recollections and the quantity of such recollections; however, there is no increase in the accuracy of such memories, and without independent corroboration there is no distinction between verifiable and fantasized memories (Watkins, 1993).

   The validity of repressed memories eventually surfaced as a critical issue, because many of those who were accused denied the allegations, claiming that ideas of abuse were being inadvertently planted by therapists through various memory-retrieval techniques. There was a contention that during therapeutic sessions, therapists were unintentionally planting false memories through leading questions and through associations of sexual abuse to other psychological problems. As therapists probed for traumatic past experiences, they suggested on the basis of a particular symptom that sexual abuse had occurred to the patient during childhood. With the idea of such abuse planted, many of the vulnerable patients accepted the explanations as the basis of their current problems. For example, Laura Stratford consulted with a therapist to find the source of scars across her body. Though she “remembered” being abused, evidence eventually led to the conclusion that all of her physical scars were self-inflicted (Jenkins & Maier-Katkin, 1991). In another case, George Franklin was convicted of murder based solely on his daughter's retrieved memories. Eventually, it came out that not only had she revised her account of the offense to fit the facts of the case, but the facts she retrieved were originally reported in local newspapers (Loftus, 1993).

   Many of the repressed memory cases included claims of childhood sexual abuse in conjunction with ritualistic satanic abuse. The first publicized account of this abuse was in Michelle Remembers (Smith & Pazder, 1980), and Michelle Smith's story is similar to many subsequent cases. After experiencing problems of sexual dysfunction, low self-esteem, eating disorders, and a miscarriage, she underwent therapy for a year and concluded that 22 years earlier she had been the subject of childhood satanic abuse. Extraordinary stories involving many reputable individuals surfaced about rituals of chanting, baby breeding, human and animal sacrifices, starvation, and torture. Smith's story is remarkable but not unique; almost every claim of satanic abuse concerns similar stories, implying an international satanic conspiracy if the accusations were to be confirmed (Green, 1994). However, despite the existence of a “satanic panic,” evidence has yet to be found to corroborate any of these extraordinary satanic abuse claims.

   Those who believe in the existence of satanic practices claim that within the past 30 years the remnants of physical evidence have deteriorated or been exhumed so as to avoid detection.While this claim cannot be discounted, it is highly unlikely that satanic rituals have been taking place for at least three decades and yet no evidence has been found regarding these rituals anywhere in the world. Therapeutic transcripts for these cases show how some psychologists ask leading questions about satanic rituals until the patients agree to the elaborate stories. In the McMartin preschool case, children were asked questions such as “Did you ever see people walking around in dark robes?” and “Did anyone touch you here(indicating private areas)?” (Hicks, 1991). The questions were asked repeatedly until the children answered affirmatively regarding the existence of satanic rituals in conjunction with sexual abuse. Despite children's statements, charges were dropped in all cases claiming satanic abuse due to lack of physical evidence to support the given claims.

   As cases of repressed memories became more frequent, some defendants began to file countersuits against the therapists who were responsible for retrieving false memories (see, for example, Ramona v. Isabella, 1994). Few cases of repressed memories are brought up in the courts today, and none result in convictions without corroborating evidence. There are, however, thousands of cases brought before the courts on a daily basis involving child sexual abuse within the family. Despite the prevalence of this type of sexual abuse—which accounts for the majority of cases—another “stranger danger” panic erupted in the late 1980s. It was this panic, based upon a few highly publicized cases of child rape and murder, that initiated the current trend toward sex offenders: the emergence of the sexually violent predator.

   In the late 1980s, two child molesters committed horrific acts in the state of Washington. Both offenders had a long history of sexual offending, and there was a common belief that the criminal justice system was ineffective at keeping recidivist sex offenders incapacitated. Wesley Alan Dodd sexually molested, tortured, and murdered three young boys, saying that if he were released he would do it again—and enjoy it. Earl Shriner had a long history of child molestation charges and a homicide charge from when he was a juvenile. In and out of institutions since the age of 15, he had just been released after a decade in prison when he kidnapped and tortured a seven-year-old boy. In prison, he confided in a journal and to other inmates that he fantasized about killing again, and explained in great detail about how, when released, he would buy a van in which he would kidnap boys and take them into the woods to torture them. There was nothing the state could do to keep him in prison. Dodd was executed, but it was the case of Earl Shriner that prompted the implementation of a legislative act for “sexually violent predators” (SVPs) who had the potential to be released from prison one day.

   Washington was the first state to enact SVP legislation, though several states implemented legislation in the 1990s and 2000s. An SVP is defined as any person who has been convicted of or charged with a sexually violent offense and who suffers from a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes the person likely to engage in predatory acts of sexual violence. A mental abnormality was defined as “a congenital or acquired condition affecting the emotional or volitional capacity which predisposes the person to commit sexually violent offenses in a degree constituting such person a menace to the health and safety of others” (Dorsett, 1998, p. 125). This legislation was essentially a modification of the sexual psychopathy laws, though there were a few significant variations. Most important, civil commitment was not intended to replace incarceration, but instead to supplement it. Upon completion of a criminal sentence, sexual offenders who have a mental disorder and are deemed dangerous can be committed to some type of secure mental hospital until they are “rehabilitated.”

   In Washington, The Community Protection Act also established a system of notification to the community when offenders are convicted or released from prison. It was only with the implementation of Megan's Law in 1996 that registration became a federal regulation. Megan's Law, the registration and notification scheme that originated in New Jersey, is named after seven-year-old Megan Kanka, who was sexually abused and killed by a convicted child molester living in her neighborhood. Her parents claimed that if a convicted sex offender is living in the area, the community has a right to know so that the parents can protect their children. Though registration has broader consequences (discussed in Chapter 10), this legislation focuses primarily on sexual attacks by strangers, not abuse within the home. The death of Megan Kanka was an emotionally charged sex crime against a child by a recidivist offender, and politicians had little choice but to implement laws protecting the community against the “stranger danger.”

   Though the cases of kidnapping and child murder are horrific, these are not the norm. SVP legislation, like that of sexual psychopathy laws from the 1930s, was passed to incapacitate a small portion of the population. However, the number of offenders referred for civil commitment is growing, and there are now similar problems with the SVP population that were prevalent with those convicted as sexual psychopaths. All of the problems with the psychopathy population presented by Tappan (1950) are relevant in regard to the SVP population, and it is likely that the statutes will eventually fall into disuse in a similar manner.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

• ▪ Accepted sexual behavior has changed significantly throughout history, and from the time of first writings of the ancient Greeks, “normal” sexual acts have depended on accepted social and political ideologies.

• ▪ Sexual assaults by strangers have had a significant influence on legislation throughout the 20th century. Yet, the majority of sexual offenses are committed by an acquaintance or relative of the victim, and the legislation also engulfs these individuals.

• ▪ There were three distinct cycles of moral panic regarding sex offenders in the 20th century. Each cycle is characterized by legislative policies based on emotionally charged, notorious sex crimes.

• ▪ Research on sexual offending has developed greatly over the last century. Studies in the early mid-twentieth century were often methodologically flawed and based on samples of serious sexual offenders who were in prison or incapacitated in mental institutions.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

• 1. Why is it important to understand the historical context of the social perception of sexual behavior?

• 2. What is the primary cause of the “moral panic” over child sexual abuse throughout the 20th century?

• 3. What are the key similarities between sexual psychopathy and sexually violent predator legislation?

• 4. What problems may result from implementing legislation that is primarily based on “stranger” sexual abuse of children?

• 5. What roles did researchers, the media, and politicians play concerning public attitudes toward sexual offenders throughout the 20th century?

VIGNETTE

SEXUAL FIENDS AND MONSTERS: The Fear of the Extreme

Sexual offenses cause a level of fear in the public that is unique from other crimes. Despite the fact that sexual assaults by strangers are rare—even more so for sexual assaults against children—the public fears the sexual fiends, monsters, and predators that they hear about in the media. The media tends to report on the most heinous, frightening cases of sexual assault, kidnapping, and murder. As a result, public opinion strongly favors severe legislative sanctions against sex offenders with the understanding that such policies will keep them safe. What follows are examples of cases that led, at least indirectly, to sex offender legislation.

• Albert Fish Albert Fish raped and murdered children in the early 20th century. Though no one has definitely proven how many victims he had, Fish claimed to have offended against more than 100 children in every state and admitted to cannibalism in some of those cases. Additionally, he was a sexual deviant with a penchant for masochism (discussed in Chapter 3). He practiced infibulation, which involves fastening by ring, clasp, or stitches the foreskin in boys (or the labia majora in girls) in order to prevent sexual intercourse, and upon his execution it was realized that he had more than two dozen piercings in his genital area (Holmes, 1991, p. 61). At the time he was executed in 1936, the United States had just begun to experience the rising fear of the sexual psychopath.

• Earl Shriner From the 1960s to 1980s, Earl Shriner had a history of serious sexual offenses against children and adolescents in the state of Washington. His final victim was seven-year-old Ryan Alan Hade, whom he kidnapped, raped, cut off his penis, stabbed, and left for dead. Ryan survived, and Shriner was convicted and sentenced to 131 years in prison. While incarcerated for a previous sexual offense, Shriner had disclosed his fantasies about the rape and torture of children, but the state had no way to keep him confined. As a result of the community outrage about him, the state of Washington passed the Community Protection Act of 1990, the first modern-day legislation that encompassed both registration and civil commitment clauses.

Questions

• 1. What role does the media have in informing public opinion about sexual offending?

• 2. What are the positive and negative effects of media attention on serious sexual offenders?

• 3. Should legislation be implemented based upon the small but serious cases of sexual offending, like those of Albert Fish and Earl Shriner?

© Cengage Learning

1. The age of consent was 7 in Delaware and 12 in Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Nevada, Virginia, Washington, and West Virginia.

2. In Georgia, the age of consent was 14.

3 Etiology of Sexually Deviant Behavior

There are many possible explanations as to why individuals commit sexual offenses. The literature on sexual offending provides biological, psychological, and sociological bases of the origins of deviant behavior. However, no one factor is responsible for causing someone to commit a sexual offense, and no single theory is capable of explaining the etiology of deviant sexual behavior for such a heterogeneous group of individuals (Robertiello & Terry, 2007).

   Notwithstanding the complexity of the task, researchers since the beginning of the century have produced models and hypotheses to explain such behavior through biological or psychological abnormalities. By mid-century, the understanding of sexual disorders (paraphilias) was beginning to develop, and this development continues to the present day. By the end of the 1960s, the theoretical approach to understanding sexual offenders began transforming. Few explanations were based on abnormalities beyond the control of the individual; rather, the theoretical frameworks incorporated behavioral and cognitive-behavioral approaches. Concurrently, feminist and sociocultural theorists emerged with a competing school of thought, choosing to define sexually aggressive behavior through societal explanations. They voiced a global critique of men and society rather than focusing on individual causes of deviant behavior.

   One deficiency that unites these traditional explanations of sexual offending is their lack of empirical support. By contrast, current theories are rooted in empirical research, emphasizing developmental, interpersonal, personality, epidemiological, sociological, and situational variables, all of which have helped to develop data-driven models of offending behavior (Lanyon, 1991, p. 36). Though still developing, these integrated theories provide a more thorough framework for understanding why men, women, and juveniles commit sexual offenses. This chapter outlines the various explanations of the etiology of sexual offending.

PARAPHILIAS AND OTHER SEXUAL DISORDERS

Some sexual offenders are diagnosed with paraphilias or other sexual disorders, as identified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).1 The features of all paraphilias are recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies or urges involving either nonhuman objects, suffering or humiliation of oneself or one's partner, children or other nonconsenting persons (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). For some paraphiliacs, these fantasies or stimuli are necessary in order to achieve erotic arousal, whereas for others they are episodic and the individual can be stimulated otherwise. The behavior, urges, and fantasies cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other areas of functioning. Many paraphiliacs suffer from more than one paraphilia, or have at some point in their lives experienced multiple paraphilic interests (Abel, Becker, Mittelmen, Cunningham-Rathner, Rouleau, & Murphy, 1987).

   There are eight primary paraphilias listed in the DSM IV-TR: exhibitionism, voyeurism, frotteurism, sadism, masochism, fetishism, transvestic fetishism, and pedophilia. Additionally, there are several other disorders labeled paraphilias not otherwise specified (NOS). It is important to note the distinction between the disorder (paraphilia) and the criminal act. Media reports about sexual offending often use interchangeable language that indicates a person can be convicted of a paraphilia, which is incorrect. For instance, a person cannot be convicted of pedophilia, but instead a person who has been diagnosed with pedophilia may sexually abuse a child and be convicted of rape, sexual abuse, aggravated sexual abuse, etc. (depending on the nature of the criminal act and the nomenclature for that act by jurisdiction).

   Most paraphilic acts do not come to the attention of authorities for several reasons (American Psychiatric Association, 1999). These are often private acts that take place in the home, and they only come to the attention of authorities (or therapists) when they become habitual, involve a victim, or result in a criminal act. Many paraphilic acts (for example, exhibitionism, frotteurism, voyeurism), involve strangers and take place quickly. As such, the victims rarely get a sufficient view of the perpetrator that would enable them to provide a full description to the police. Additionally, some victims do not know they are subject to this abuse (for example, voyeurism) and are unable to notify authorities.

   Paraphilias differ greatly; some involve no contact with a victim (for example, exhibitionism), some involve minor contact (for example, frotteurism), whereas others contain much contact and even violence (for example, sadism). Research shows that paraphiliacs typically have more than one paraphilia, and that there is crossover between types of acts committed by paraphiliacs. For instance, one report states that “paraphilac persons tend to cross over between touching and non-touching of their victims, between family and nonfamily members, between female and male victims, and to victims of various ages” (American Psychiatric Association, 1999, p. 47). The primary paraphilias are summarized in Table 3.1.

TABLE 3.1 Eight Main Paraphilias of the DSM IV

Noncontact and Minimal Contact Paraphilias

The most common noncontact paraphilia that comes to the attention of therapists and authorities is exhibitionism, or the exposure of genitals to a stranger. Exhibitionism is almost exclusively male, though there are some females known to be exhibitionists. Sometimes, the offender masturbates when he exposes himself, and at other times the act is simply to shock the stranger. However, many exhibitionists fantasize that the stranger is aroused by their exposure, and they go home to masturbate about this fantasy after the act occurs. Those who expose themselves tend to do so frequently, and often expose themselves many times before being caught and arrested. Additionally, they have the highest known number of sexual offenses per offender (Abel et al., 1987). Researchers have found that exhibitionists, like rapists and child sexual abusers, often experience loneliness and have intimacy deficits (Marshall, 1989), and they show higher levels of arousal to consensual adult sexual relations than to exhibiting (Marshall, Anderson, & Fernandez, 1999). This indicates that sexual needs are not the only motivating factor for exhibitionists, and their primary motivation may be nonsexual in nature.

   Another common paraphilia, though one that comes to the attention of authorities far less frequently than exhibitionism, is fetishism. Fetishism involves sexual fantasies and urges involving nonliving objects. The sexual attraction may also center on behaviors (for example, stepping on bugs) or body parts (also called partialism), though technically these are not fetishes but other types of paraphilias. For those diagnosed with fetishism, the object of the fetish is usually required for sexual excitement; without it there is some level of erectile dysfunction. The range of fetishes is vast; though the most common fetish objects are clothing, particularly women's lingerie and shoes, there are also fetishes about nearly every object and behavior imaginable. Such attractions can be quite harmless, or they may involve dangerous or criminal behavior. There are too many fetishes to name here, but examples include the sexual attraction to stuffed animals (plushophilia, or more commonly “plushies”); urine (urophilia); feces (coprophilia); eyes (oculophilia); statues, dolls or mannequins (agalmatophilia); small bugs or animals being squished (“crush” fetish); people with impaired mobility (abasiophilia); amputees (acrotomophilia); watching or staging accidents (symphorophilia); and being eaten (vorarephilia).

   Though the most common fetish involves women's clothing, this is not the same as dressing up in women's clothing. Transvestic fetishism is another type of paraphilia; this involves men who keep a collection of women's clothing and intermittently use it to cross-dress. While dressed, the man will usually masturbate and imagine he is the object of his sexual fantasy. This occurs only in heterosexual males, or males whose primary sexual preference is to be with women. As with all paraphilias, there are different degrees of transvestic fetishism. For some males cross-dressing creates a peace of mind, whereas others are severely distressed about their need to do so. One convicted rapist who cross-dresses describes his experience with transvestic fetishism in the following way2:

• I was leaving the house at night, going off, dressing up, and spending the night dressed up in the stuff, which made me feel totally different. But it also put a strain on my relationship, so I turned to the drugs. Because I would get so low, my self-esteem would go so far down, that I would take drugs to bring myself back up.… I want to be a normal human being, I don't want to be weird. I want to be a normal person, a father to my kids, a husband to my wife.

   A fourth minimal-contact paraphilia is frotteurism, which is touching and rubbing up against a nonconsenting person. This occurs in a crowded place, such as a subway car during rush hour, and is an almost exclusively male paraphilia. The frotteur may touch his genitals against the person or “accidentally” rub the other person's genitals or breasts. He usually fantasizes about having an exclusive relationship with this person, and he will generally masturbate about the contact at a later date.

   Another noncontact paraphilia is voyeurism, which is the observation of unsuspecting individuals in the process of either disrobing or engaging in sexual activity. No sexual activity is sought with the “victims,” though the voyeur may masturbate while watching the persons or later in response to the memory. Though this is a noncontact behavior, some offenders who commit serious sexual offenses such as rape often begin their deviant sexual behavior through “peeping” (Terry, 1999). For example, a rapist described the escalation of his behavior in the following way3:

• I went out and got drunk one night and walked by a clothesline and saw some women's underwear and [stole] them. Then I started peeping in women's windows. And then I started fantasizing about having sex. I started fantasizing about raping and, it wasn't only rape, it was about me hitting her on the head, and her unconscious and then having sex with her, because that is the only way I thought I would get sex.

   This excerpt shows an individual with more than one paraphilia—voyeurism and fetishism—and it shows how there was an escalation of paraphilias into a serious, violent fantasy. Most paraphiliacs do not become violent, though some voyeurs do eventually desire sexual contact with an individual they are watching.

   In addition to the noncontact or minor contact paraphlias discussed, the DSM IV-TR lists paraphilias NOS, many of which are also noncontact. For example, telephone scatologia is the urge to make obscene phone calls, and the paraphiliac repeatedly calls strangers and speaks to them sexually. These are not consensual phone calls, and the caller is sexually aroused sometimes by a conversation that ensues and sometimes by the shock that is caused (Holmes, 1991). The common element between the noncontact or minimal-contact paraphilias is that the offender typically is excited by his behavior and masturbates in response to the behavior later. With exhibitionism, frotteurism, and scatologia, the offender envisions excitement by the victims. He misperceives the victims' cues of shock, anger, or fear as sexual excitement at his exposure, touch, or sexually suggestive words. Though these paraphilias have minimal contact with potential victims, other paraphilias could be more dangerous if acted upon.

High-Contact Paraphilias

Serious paraphilias are those involving violence, children, or other nonconsenting persons. Pedophiliainvolves the sexual attraction to prepubescent children and, if these desires are acted upon, could cause significant harm. For an individual to be classified as a pedophile, he must have recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges or behavior involving a prepubescent child over a period of time (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Additionally, the individual would be at least 16 years of age and at least five years older than the child (American Psychiatric Association, 2000).

   Not all child sexual abusers are pedophiles because, like rapists, they are not all driven by sexual needs and therefore may not experience these intense sexual urges. Neither are all pedophiles child sexual abusers, because they might not act on these intense sexual urges. Additionally, many of the children who are sexually abused are not prepubescent. Although not considered a formal diagnosis in the DSM IV-TR, many clinicians and researchers consider those with recurrent sexual fantasies, urges, or behaviors regarding adolescents to be a unique group that displays the characteristics of paraphilias. The term applied to this disorder is ephebophilia or hebophilia (these terms are used interchangeably). The American Psychiatric Association (APA) considered including ephebophilia in the DSM V, though a determination was made not to include this as a specific disorder. However, there is a proposed revision for pedophilia to become pedohebophilia in the DSM V, with subtypes of pedophilic type (attraction to prepubescent children) and hebophilic type (with an attraction to pubescent children) (American Psychiatric Association, 2010).

   Sexual attraction to children is not the only paraphilia with potential harm. Other dangerous paraphilias involve violence or prohibited sexual acts, the most common of which are sexual sadism and sexual masochism. Sexual masochism is the act of being humiliated, beaten, bound, or otherwise made to suffer. Some acts are conducted on the person's own, such as binding themselves, shocking themselves electrically, sticking themselves with pins, or similar actions. Other times acts are committed with partners, such as bondage, blindfolding, and whipping. Sexual sadism takes place when the individual derives sexual excitement from the psychological or physical suffering of another person. This involves the same actions as in masochism, but performing instead of receiving. The acts can be minor and cause little damage, such as humiliating one's partner, or the acts may potentially cause a lot of damage, such as hypoxia (the deprivation of oxygen). Sexually sadistic acts often increase in severity over time, and sadists who are diagnosed with antisocial personality disorders may cause serious injury or even death to their victims (American Psychiatric Association, 2000).

   Many sadists and masochists experience both of these paraphilias, and as such they are often combined into one disorder: sadomasochism. Sadomasochists partake in giving and receiving pain, humiliation, and degradation. Though called a paraphilia, there are many “normal” couples who participate in sadomasochistic activities. This once again illustrates how our changing societal acceptance of acts once considered deviant is modified over time, resulting in acts no longer being taboo. The only time sadomasochistic acts are brought to the attention of authorities is when the violence involved creates a negative outcome. One controversial case involving such activity occurred in England in 1987. In the case of Brown and others (1992), the police arrested three men who were in possession of videotapes of them performing sadomasochistic activities with 44 other men over a 10-year period. The activities included maiming of the genitalia (for example, piercing with fish hooks and needles), branding, and beatings with hands and instruments such as cat-o'-nine-tails, some of which drew blood and caused scarring.

   All of the activities that occurred were consensual,4 they took place in the privacy of the home, and they occurred for no other reason than sexual gratification. The case eventually was heard by the European Court of Human Rights in order to determine if the state has a right to interfere in private sexual encounters. The court stated that the state does have a right to intervene, even though the behavior constitutes a “private morality” because of the harm (potential and actual) resulting from the acts. The decision was based on the extreme nature of the acts and was deemed necessary for the protection of public health. The court compared the nature of the acts to drug abuse, declaring that the state has the obligation to intervene in activities that potentially may result in harm to an individual, even if that individual chooses to participate in that activity and it harms no one other than him- or herself.

   Sexual sadism is a paraphilia that typically develops in adolescence, with interests piqued through masochistic masturbatory practices. Autoerotic asphyxia is a dangerous activity that constricts the oxygen during masturbation, accomplished with the use of a strangulation device (typically, a ligature with padding in order to prevent rope burns), a plastic bag, a chemical (for example, nitrous oxide), water, chest compression, or choking (Geberth, 1996; Hazelwood, Dietz, & Burgess, 1983). Both males and females participate in autoeroticism, and the purpose of it is to create a higher level of sexual excitement through the restriction of oxygen to the brain. The sexual excitement does not just occur through the restriction of oxygen, but as a combination of ritualistic behavior, oxygen deprivation, danger, and fantasy (Geberth, 1996, p. 319). Unfortunately, accidental deaths occur from this activity—estimated at 500 to 1000 per year in the United States—many of which are mistaken for suicides or homicides (Hazelwood et al., 1983).

   Though autoerotic asphyxiation is generally linked to sexual masochism, not all individuals who partake in autoerotic activities are diagnosed with this paraphilia, and many exhibit other paraphilias. Hazelwood et al. (1983) conducted a study on autoerotic fatalities, with a sample of 150 subjects. Cited as the most extensive study on this issue (Geberth, 1996), the authors noted that subjects evidenced the following paraphilias in addition to masochism and/or sadism: fetishism, transvestic fetishism, pedophilia, voyeurism, coprophilia, and mysophilia (sexual attraction to mud or dirt). These diagnoses were substantiated through previous actions (for example, repeated abuse of children substantiated pedophilia), material the subject possessed (for example, drawings of sadistic activity), or the state in which they were found (for example, the bodies are often found dressed in women's clothing, indicating transvestic fetishism).

   Like other forms of deviant sexual behavior, autoerotic asphyxiation has been documented historically, with the earliest known evidences found in a Mayan relic dating to A.D. 1000 (Hazelwood et al., 1983). It was also documented in European artifacts and books from the 18th through the 20th centuries, presumably sparked by publication of papers by the Marquis de Sade (Hazelwood et al., 1983).

   Another deviant sexual act that occurs with relatively high frequency is bestiality, or sexual activity with animals. Any sexual activity with animals is prohibited by law in the United States, yet it is practiced in many rural areas where animals are easily accessible. This is not always, and in fact often not, a paraphilia. In order to be diagnosed with a paraphilia—zoophilia—the individual must have a sexual attraction to animals that fits the criteria of a paraphilia. Yet, it is clear from the popularity of Internet sites containing images of bestiality that the practice is intriguing, if not avidly practiced, among a subsection of the general population.

   Bestiality was also of concern to practitioners at the beginning of the century, as Krafft-Ebing (1886/1965) recorded several cases of bestiality in Psychopathia Sexualis involving intercourse with rabbits, hens, goats, dogs, and other domestic animals. He describes some of these cases as pathological in nature, and others resulting from perceived sexual inadequacy. For instance,

• A man was caught having intercourse with a hen. He was thirty years old and of high social position. The chickens had been dying one after another, and the man causing it had been wanted for a long time. When asked by the judge for the reason for such [an] act, the accused said that his genitals were so small that coitus with women was impossible. Medical examination showed that his genitals were, in fact, extremely small. (pp. 470–471)

   Another serious paraphilia is necrophilia, or the sexual attraction to dead bodies. Rosman and Resnick (1989) describe three types of necrophiles, with varying degrees of severity. The first is the pseudo necrophile, also called a fantasy necrophile; this is an individual who either fantasizes about sex with dead bodies or has sex with dead bodies only periodically. The pseudo necrophile prefers the sexual partner to be alive but pretend to be dead, and there are many reports from prostitutes that their clients make them partake in this behavior. A second classification of necrophile is the regular necrophile; this is an individual who regularly has sexual intercourse with dead bodies. He is attracted to corpses and frequently works in an occupation where there is access to dead bodies, such as a coroner, or in a place like a morgue or graveyard.

   Though the pseudo and regular necrophiles are dangerous and partake in prohibited behavior, they do not kill the victims in order to have sexual intercourse with them. This describes the third degree of necrophilic behavior, where the person is labeled a homicidal necrophile. This person kills in order to have intercourse with dead bodies, which is an extreme form of the paraphilia. Some serial killers are homicidal necrophiles, the most infamous being Jeffery Dahmer. Dahmer lured young men to his apartment and then proceeded to drug, strangle, dismember, and cannibalize them. He kept them alive for several days, turning them into “love slaves” by torturing them prior to killing them. Once dead, he had sexual intercourse with some of the victims before dismembering them and keeping body parts (and photos of the dismembered body parts) as trophies.

   The case of Jeffery Dahmer is extreme, and most offenders who commit sexual homicides do not commit necrophilic acts. Rather, most sexual murderers achieve sexual gratification by killing a person. It is common after a sexual murder (also called lust murder) for the individual to masturbate over the body or to insert a foreign object into the vagina or rectum as an act of sexual substitution (Ressler, Burgess, & Douglas, 1988). Ressler et al. (1988) conducted a study of sexual murderers and found several commonalities between the offenders; most important, they have an active fantasy life, and their fantasies are violent and sexual in nature. They found a link between sadistic acts and fantasies, as sadists' violent fantasies can lead to sexual murder. It therefore follows that some sexual sadists are in danger of escalating into becoming sexual murderers if they are not detected and stopped.

   In sum, paraphilias are diagnosable sexual disorders that can cause an individual to have intense sexual urges and fantasies about certain individuals, objects, or behaviors. Some of these paraphilias can lead to sexual abuse of children (for example, pedophilia) or the sexual assault of adults (for example, sadism). However, the etiology of offending behavior may be explained through the interaction of these disorders and other social, cultural, psychological, and biological factors.

DID YOU KNOW…?

Development of Paraphilias in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

Various organizations and agencies attempted to classify mental disorders beginning in the 19th century, but it was not until 1952 that the APA created the first edition of the DSM. Prior to this time, the majority of psychologists understood mental illness simply in terms of different types of psychoses and neuroses. The need of the Army and Navy for a formal system of diagnoses to better understand the conditions of men returning from World War II appears to have been a large influence on the publication of the first DSM. Sexual deviance and sexual disorders were mentioned only briefly in this first edition and the term “paraphilia” was not used until 1954. Sexual deviance at this point was considered only one of a host of “reactions” to sociopathic personality disturbance along with alcoholism (McAnulty, 1995).

   The second edition of the DSM (DSM-II, 1968) was virtually unchanged from the first edition (Schmidt, Kotov, & Joiner, 2004). However, specific “sexual deviations” (paraphilias) were, in the second edition, listed under the category “Personality Disorders and Certain Other Non-Psychotic Mental Disorders” (McAnulty, 1995). As the DSM continued to follow a psychoanalytic perspective in the 1960s, behaviorists at this time theorized that paraphilias developed as a result of learning. In other words, certain objects, people, or situations could easily become associated with sexual arousal and could later serve as objects of sexual fantasies (Abel & Osborn, 1995). Treating paraphilias would mean reconditioning sexual arousal to be associated with other innocuous objects, people, or situations.

   A major turning point in the understanding of paraphilias came in 1970 when Masters and Johnson published Human Sexual Inadequacy, which prompted an interest in sex-specific therapy methods and also a change in attitude toward sex disorders (Masters & Johnson, 1970; Segraves, Balon, & Clayton, 2007). Instead of paraphilias being a result of deficient intrapsychic development, Masters and Johnson suggested that these disorders were the result of certain interactions between people. To treat the paraphilia, clinicians should focus on the interaction as well as the person's unique psychological development. Masters and Johnson not only influenced the general public with their new ideas and attitudes but they were also instrumental in the third revision of the DSM (Segraves et al., 2007).

   The DSM-III, published in 1980, represented a significant change in diagnostic methodology, as it incorporated an atheoretical approach that emphasized observable behavior (Coolidge & Segal, 1998; Schmidt, Kotov, & Joiner, 2004). Also in the third edition, conditions were officially called disorders and the manual included the implementation of the multiaxial (Axis I, Axis II) diagnostic system. Furthermore, personality disorders were separated from major clinical disorders in this edition, and medical and social influences were taken into account when assessing a person's overall level of functioning (Coolidge & Segal, 1998; Oken, 2007). Under this system, paraphilias were first listed by the names that are still used today and the diagnostic criteria stated that paraphilic fantasies were necessary for sexual excitement. These changes were an attempt to establish the diagnostic criteria as more reliable and to distinguish between occasional paraphilic behavior and chronic paraphilia (McAnulty, 1995). However, because the DSM-III was written with an atheoretical approach, diagnoses of paraphilias did not hint at their causes or what kind of treatment may have been best. Quite simply, a diagnosis was made if an individual displayed enough of the essential observable behaviors that were considered symptoms of that specific paraphilia. The DSM-III-TR, published in 1987, incorporated two changes to the diagnoses of paraphilias. First, the criteria in this edition specified that the individual in question must have acted on his or her paraphilic fantasies in some way, and could no longer be diagnosed solely based on their private thoughts and fantasies. Secondly, the criterion was added in this edition that these paraphilic fantasies must cause the individual subjective distress (McAnulty, 1995; Segraves et al., 2007).

   In 1994, the DSM-IV was published, and its revision followed in 2000 (DSM-IV-TR). One modification to the diagnosis of paraphilias in the DSM-IV was a further elaboration on the matter of subjective distress; in the DSM-IV-TR, not only did the individual have to be experiencing distress for an official diagnosis, but the individual must have experienced “clinically significant distress.” This addition further complicated the diagnostic criteria by requiring a high level of stress and ongoing impairment related to the paraphilia or the paraphilic fantasy. In other words, a man who was sexually attracted to children and who molested prepubescent children could not have been officially diagnosed as a pedophile unless his behavior and his attractions were distressing him enough to cause disruptions in other areas of his life.

Questions

• 1. Should a person be diagnosed with a paraphilia if he spends hours every day looking at pornography on the Internet? Why or why not?

• 2. How can diagnoses or paraphilias influence treatment of sexual offenders?

© Cengage Learning

PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORIES

Austrian psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud is generally credited with examining sexual deviancy through a psychoanalytic framework, though his theories are no longer widely supported. Freud called individuals' sexual desires “perversions”—in particular, paraphilias such as exhibitionism, voyeurism, and pedophilia—and argued that sexual deviations were the consequence of childhood deprivation, developmental fixation, or regression back to any one of the four stages of sexual development (Freud, 1953). Freud labeled the four stages of development as oral, anal, phallic, and genital; unresolved problems brought about fixations during these stages of development. These fixations were sexual in nature, and included oedipal conflicts, castration anxiety, and penis envy.

   The oedipal conflict, which Freud claimed that boys could develop during the phallic stage of development, is characterized by competition between father and son for the mother's affection. Castration anxiety and penis envy result from boys and girls discovering the differences in their genitalia; boys conclude that girls are actually boys whose fathers have cut off their penises, and girls are jealous of boys. Children should eventually outgrow these stages. It is when the boys do not resolve their oedipal conflicts that they develop a permanent aversion to adult females, whose appearance brings back their anxiety about castration.

   Psychodynamic theory also explains the interaction of the three elements of the human psyche: the id, the ego, and the superego. The id, considered to be the “pleasure principle,” is the basis of desire and the division of the psyche from which instinctual human drives originate. The id seeks instant gratification of these instinctual urges. The ego, or the “reality principle,” is the mediator between the id and superego. The superego, or the “conscience,” is responsible for decisions based on past experiences of rewards and punishments. These parts of the psyche are internalized and work together to help the individual develop a system of morals.

   For more than a half century, psychoanalysts (for example, Fenichel, 1945; Hammer, 1957) expanded on Freud's explanations of sexual deviations. A common characteristic of these theories was the belief that deviant behavior was unlikely to go away. Psychoanalysts believed that the psychopathology of the offender is a deep-rooted aspect of the person's personality, and, if treatment is to occur, it must be lengthy and based on the restructuring of the character. While psychoanalysis at this time focused primarily on sexual dysfunction, paraphilias, and traits such as homosexuality, psychoanalytic theories in the 1970s began to shift toward serious sexual offenses.

   In the 1980s, psychodynamic theorists proposed family-based etiological explanations for deviant sexual behavior. For instance, MacLeod and Sarago (1987) suggested a “family dysfunction model” whereby sexual problems are characterized by an ill, absent, or sexually frigid mother who provides an unsatisfying marriage for her husband. Loneliness and the need for intimacy develop, and the husband turns to his children for the undemanding love that he seeks. All types of sex offenders show intimacy deficits and expressions of loneliness (Marshall, 1989), yet these traits are not sufficient in themselves to explain deviant sexual behavior. Nonetheless, they may be significant factors in a multicausal explanation of the etiology of sexually deviant behavior.

BIOLOGICAL THEORIES

Many researchers have attempted to explain sexually deviant behavior through biological and physiological abnormalities. Most of these explanations are based on the assumption that abnormal hormonal levels adversely affect sexual behavior. Biological theorists (for example, Berlin and Rada) suggest that biological functions are likely to be only one component of multiple etiologies for sexual deviations—sexual behavior is multidetermined and is not likely based on hormone levels alone. Biological theories usually pertain to rape or sexual assault of adults rather than child sexual abuse, because rape is considered an act of violence and there has been a postulated correlation between aggression and high levels of testosterone (Money, 1970; Rada, Laws, & Kellner, 1976). Biological theories of child sexual abuse have been primarily concerned with abnormal hormonal and androgenic levels in the brain.

   The primary focus of biological explanations of aggressive sexual behavior is the role of androgens and androgen-releasing hormones in males. Secretion of the androgens is controlled by the hypothalamus and the pituitary gland, and the anterior lobe of the pituitary carries the androgens to the testes. The testes control the level of hormones, particularly testosterone, that are released into the bloodstream. When testosterone circulates in the bloodstream, it may or may not be bound to proteins. If it is bound, androgens may become active if they come into contact with receptors for testosterone. This happens during puberty, at which time males experience physical changes, such as increases in body hair and muscle mass and penis enlargement, as a result of the androgenic effects (Hucker & Bain, 1990).

   Because of this androgenic process, the level of testosterone in the testes increases dramatically in males when they reach puberty. Sex drive also increases at this time. As such, there is an implicit belief that testosterone is the primary biological factor responsible for sexual drive in males. Empirically, researchers have shown that increased levels of erotic activity correspond to increased levels of plasma testosterone. Pirke, Kockott, and Dittmar (1974) showed that the level of plasma testosterone for subjects watching an erotic film increased by approximately 35 percent over subjects who were not watching an erotic film. This correlation has not been consistently validated, however, as some biological studies have not shown a clear link between these variables. Despite these inconsistent results, Bancroft (1978) states that there is a general implication that hormone levels are affected by erotic stimulus.

   The underlying question posed by biological theorists about rape is whether or not there is a connection between aggression and increased levels of testosterone, and, if so, whether this hormonal imbalance leads to sexual aggression. Aggression and sex appear to be mediated by the same neural substrates involving predominantly midbrain structures (the hypothalamus, septum, hippocampus, amygdala, and preoptic area), while the same endocrines activate sex and aggression (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990a, p. 259). Some self-report studies have shown a correlation between aggression and high testosterone levels (Olweus, Matteson, Schalling, & Low, 1980; Scaramella & Brown, 1978), and studies of convicted prisoners have shown that those with violent histories do have higher testosterone levels than nonviolent offenders (Kreutz & Rose, 1972). Although there has been some research showing a correlation between “aggressive feelings” and high testosterone levels in young men (Persky, Smith, & Basu, 1971), most studies show a tenuous correlation, if any, between paper-and-pencil tests measuring aggression and the level of plasma testosterone in males (Ehrenkranz, Bliss, & Sheard, 1974; Kreutz & Rose, 1972). Testosterone is not the only hormone important in mediating behavior (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990a). Even if aggression is linked to testosterone levels, it is unclear whether testosterone actually produces aggressiveness or simply causes an increase in muscle mass and strength, allowing individuals to manifest their aggression more effectively (Hucker & Bain, 1990, p. 98).

   As for studies that measure levels of testosterone and sexual aggression, results are largely conflicting, and the correlations that do exist are slight. One study showed that rapists scored higher than controls on a hostility inventory, yet plasma testosterone levels were not related to hostility scores (Rada et al., 1976). A further study by these researchers showed no differences between hormonal levels in rapists and controls (Rada, Laws, Kellner, Stiristava, & Peake, 1983), with the lack of correlation between testosterone levels and sexual violence supported by other researchers as well (Bradford & MacLean, 1984). In some studies, only the most violent and/or sadistic offenders were found to have elevated plasma testosterone levels (Rada et al., 1976), whereas other studies did not establish this correlation (Langevin et al., 1985).

   Most of the hormonal studies that have been conducted contained small samples and produced conflicting results (Hucker & Bain, 1990). Although testosterone is presumed to be the source of sexual drive in males, few researchers claim to find a link between sexually deviant acts and abnormal hormonal or androgenic levels. Most biological theorists conclude that even when a hormonal imbalance is present in a male to act as a physiological potentiator for violence, these factors must still be triggered by environmental and social learning factors in order for sexual aggression to occur (Hays, 1981; Hucker & Bain, 1990; Kreutz & Rose, 1972; Meyer-Bahlberg, 1987).

   One controversial biological theory of rape was suggested by Thornhill and Palmer (2000). They explain rape from an evolutionary biological perspective, contending that males are driven to rape in order to reproduce. They state that although rape is not a morally good or even acceptable act, it is an act of natural selection. They support this by making claims such as that most rape victims are in their prime reproductive years. They contradict most sociological research and actually promote rape myths, stating that women should not dress provocatively because those who do so are more likely to be raped. Though highly publicized because of its unique perspective, other biological and evolutionary theorists have strongly criticized their work for being unscientific and based upon anecdotal evidence (Coyne & Berry, 2000).

FEMINIST THEORIES

Feminist theories about sexually deviant behavior focus primarily on rape; specifically, they center around the motivation of men to commit acts of sexual violence against women. These theories emerged in the late 1960s, when it became evident that the female victims were persecuted as much as the male offenders in cases of sexual violence. Most researchers at this time were male, and their explanations of deviant behavior focused on the victims' actions as much as the offenders'. The feminist movement was also moderately successful at changing the perception of female victims in the criminal justice system. With the increased public support for the active prosecution of offenders, the rate of reporting and convicting these offenders rose considerably through the 1980s.

   A pioneer on research regarding sexual violence in the 1970s was Susan Brownmiller, who analyzed rape in a cultural, political, and historical context and cited sexual crime as an example of men's oppression of women (Brownmiller, 1975). She and other feminists regarded sexual assault as systemic to a patriarchal society of conditioned male supremacy. Accordingly, theories surmised that the use of coercion to achieve sexual conquest represented an exaggeration of prevailing norms rather than a departure from them (Brownmiller, 1975; Herman, 1990; Matthews, 1994). Sexual gratification is not considered by most feminists to be the primary motive for rape (Allison & Wrightsman, 1993; Brownmiller, 1975; Burt, 1980; Darke, 1990; Ellis, 1989). Rather, rape is used as just one other tool to dominate and control women, who are considered relatively powerless compared to men and, therefore, subservient to them (Allison & Wrightsman, 1993). From a theoretical perspective, rape is seen to be the consequence of deep-rooted social traditions of male dominance and female exploitation (Ward, 1995, p. 10). Men who commit sexual offenses are considered normal, rationalized through the epidemiological explanation that almost all sexual offenders are male and a notable proportion of the male population has committed a sexual offense (Herman, 1990).

   Feminist theorists view rape as a cultural rather than an individual problem. Sexual violence is said to represent an extension of attitudes and practices surrounding male-female relations in a male-dominated culture (Darke, 1990). Cultures that encourage gender stereotyping create “gender socialization,” whereby sexually aggressive men have been socialized to feel little need for intimacy and a low capacity for empathy (Lisak & Ivan, 1995). Social violence is not unique to any one culture or historical period (Stermac, Segal, & Gillis, 1990); however, some characteristics such as interpersonal violence, male dominance, and sexual separation are common to rape-prone societies (Sanday, 1981). Long-term prevention necessitates changing the societal conditions that generate sexual violence, such as belief in rape myths and sex-role ideology favoring restricted roles toward women. These attitudes may lead to gender socialization and thereby encourage and sanction a generalized hostility and, subsequently, sexual abuse, toward women (Brownmiller, 1975; Darke, 1990; Medea & Thompson, 1974; Stermac et al., 1990; West, 1987).

   Though feminist theories focus primarily on rape, sex-role stereotyping can also explain child sexual abuse. Whereas feminist theory describes men as having sexual entitlement over women, child sexual abusers express sexual entitlement over children (Hanson, Gizzarelli, & Scott, 1994). Child sexual abusers tend to be narcissistic and selfish, considering their own desires and ignoring potential harm caused by their own actions. Through their own narcissism, they exhibit “sexually specific sexist attitudes” similar to those of convicted rapists (Hanson et al., 1994, p. 198).

ATTACHMENT THEORIES

Due to the widespread reporting of intimacy deficits among sex offenders, researchers have sought to develop overarching theories to explain a possible pathway between intimacy deficits and sex-offending behaviors. Attachment theory follows the premise that humans have a natural propensity to form emotional bonds to others, and that models of bonding in infancy provide a framework for understanding attachment patterns in adulthood. Many sexual offenders exhibit a lack of close adult relationships as well as a lack of intimacy in their relationships generally (Marshall, 1989; 1993).

   Though attachment theorists study bonds between individuals from infancy to adulthood, it is the period during adolescence that is most critical in the development of sexuality and social competence (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990a). By this time, adolescents with adequate parenting should have acquired prosocial behavior, including proper inhibitions on aggression and sexual behavior. Parents should also help instill in the adolescents a sense of self-confidence and the ability to form emotional attachments to others. If this is the case, adolescents should be able to transition to adulthood with both social constraints against aggression and the skills necessary to develop effective relationships with age-appropriate partners.

   Individuals who have poor emotional attachments are more likely to commit a sexual offense than those with strong emotional attachments to others. Research shows that many of the men who sexually abuse children have poor social skills and little self-confidence, and thus, they have difficulty in forming intimate relationships with agemates (Marshall, 1989). This failure creates frustration in these men that may cause them to continue to seek intimacy with under-aged partners. Seidman, Marshall, Hudson, and Robertson (1994) conducted two studies that showed that sex offenders have deficiencies in social skills that restrict the possibility of developing intimate relationships. In particular, sex offenders appear to misperceive social cues and do not act appropriately as a result of these deficiencies. These deficiencies in intimacy are common across various types of sex offenders. In the study by Seidman et al., rapists and nonfamilial child sexual abusers in the sample had the most significant deficiencies in intimacy.

   According to attachment theorists, insecurely attached individuals may try to overcome feelings of loneliness through sexual activity, which runs the risk of involving inappropriate and unwanted advances given the overall level of inexperience with such behavior. Ward, Hudson, Marshall, and Siegert (1995) furthered this idea by suggesting that a lack of experience with intimate relationships may result in empathy deficits, which may, in turn, lead to sexual offending in certain individuals. Attachment models also focus on the sexual offender's ability to attribute appropriate thoughts and feelings to others. Keenan and Ward (2000) stated that sexual offenders may have deficits in their theory of mind, which is the awareness and understanding of others' beliefs, needs, and particular perspectives. These broad deficits lead to more specific deficits in intimacy, empathy, and cognition, which together put these individuals at risk for inappropriate interpersonal relations and behavior.

   Regardless of the framework that most accurately describes the root and pathways of the relationship, empirical studies have shown that there does appear to be a link between intimacy deficits and sexual offending. In terms of romantic and sexual intimacy, Garlick (1989) and Seidman, Marshall, Hudson, and Robertson (1994) found that both incarcerated and nonincarcerated rapists and child sexual abusers reported higher levels of loneliness and lower levels of intimacy in adult relationships as compared to both nonsexual offenders and nonoffender controls from the community. More recent work has focused on intimacy across different types of adult relationships, including friendship, family, romantic, and sexual relationships. In one such study, Bumby and Hanson (1997) found widespread intimacy deficits in both incarcerated rapists and child sexual abusers, suggesting that these individuals experience a lack of intimacy in many different types of relationships including friendships with males, friendships with females, and relationships with family members. Rapists and child sexual abusers reported significantly more loneliness than nonsexual offenders and community control subjects, and child molesting behaviors were the best single predictor of degree of fear of intimacy.

   Bartholomew (1990) has identified four categories of attachment styles: secure, preoccupied, fearful, and dismissing. These models of attachment explain the individual's self-concept as positive or negative, depending on the degree to which they believe they deserve to be loved (Bartholomew, 1990). An individual with a secure attachment style has a positive concept of himself and others, and as a result is able to make friends and have age-appropriate relationships. An individual with a preoccupiedattachment style has poor self-esteem and low self-confidence but does have a positive attitude toward others and often needs their assistance to deal with personal matters. An individual with a fearfulattachment style has a poor self-concept and a poor concept of others, thus often blaming himself for his problems but being too frightened to talk to others about these problems. An individual with a dismissingattachment style has both a positive self-concept and a high level of self-confidence, yet he has a negative concept of others and thus does not seek out help or support. The individual who is most likely to abuse a child is the person with a preoccupied, insecure attachment style (Ward et al., 1995, as cited in Marshall & Marshall, 2002).

BEHAVIORAL AND COGNITIVE-BEHAVIORAL THEORIES

Behavioral theorists began offering explanations as to the etiology of sexually deviant behavior in the late 1970s, led by researcher Gene Abel. Behavioral theories mainly relate to the assessment and treatment of sexually deviant behavior and view the behavior is, not as a disorder that can be treated. Unlike psychodynamic theories, behavioral theories are based on the assumption that there is no single underlying problem of which the deviant sexual behavior is a symptom. Abel's approach (Abel, Blanchard, & Becker, 1978) is based upon an implied model of etiology that is seen as underlying other disorders that are amenable to treatment through behavior therapy.

   Langevin (1983) expanded upon Abel's theory and classified deviant sexual preferences according to their stimulus and response characteristics. As such, the deviant behavior is conditioned in the individual to the effect that “sexually indulgent behavior displays a pattern that is entrenched and perpetuated by intermittent positive rewards” (Kear-Colwell & Pollock, 1997, p. 21). Elaborating on the conditioning premise, Wolf (1985) developed a three-part theory as to the etiology of deviant sexual behavior. He alleged first that sexual offenders have a disturbed developmental history, including potentiators for later deviant attitudes; second, he stated that there is a presence of disinhibitors that will allow deviant behavior to occur; third, he concluded that the offender has deviant sexual fantasies. All three factors work together to develop and maintain deviant sexual behavior. A fourth behavioral theorist, Lanyon, states that sexual disorders are “conceptualized as an inappropriate frequency of one or more events (behavior, thoughts, or feelings), and this inappropriate frequency is thought to be maintained by the pattern of antecedents and consequences for the events” (Lanyon, 1991, p. 38).

   Cognitive-behavioral theories were developed in an effort to build on the foundation of behavioral theories by taking into account the thoughts of offenders as well as their behaviors. Abel et al. (1984) explored the content of cognitions in sex offenders and analyzed the effect of cognitions on behavior. They found that sex offenders, like most individuals, are able to legitimize their behavior and the behavior of others through cognitive distortions (CDs). There are a number of CDs common to sex offenders, discussed in Chapter 4; these allow offenders to continue committing deviant sexual acts by averting blame from themselves and projecting it onto their victims or their environment. Some researchers (Ward & Keenan, 1999) claim that CDs derive from implicit theories that sex offenders have about themselves, their victims, and the world around them. Implicit theories, which are structured from the offenders' beliefs and desires, generate CDs that in turn permit inappropriate sexual behavior. They allow offenders to exist within a socially constructed reality and behave according to their beliefs about the world and their role in it. Ward and Keenan (1999) claim that implicit theories consider the following factors in relation to child sexual abuse:

• ▪ Offenders View Children as Sexual Objects They assume that children, like adults, are motivated by a desire for pleasure and thus desire and enjoy sexual behavior.

• ▪ Offenders Are Entitled to the Sexual Behavior The desires and beliefs of the offender are more important than those of the victim, which are either ignored or viewed as only of secondary importance.

• ▪ The World Is Dangerous The offender views other adults as being abusive and perceives that they will reject him in promotion of their own needs.

• ▪ The Offender Has a Lack of Control The offender perceives his environment as uncontrollable wherein people are not able to exert any major influence over their personal behavior and/or the world around them.

• ▪ Sexual Behavior Is Not Harmful The offender believes not only that there is no harm done to the victim, but that sexual activity is beneficial.

   Offenders rarely modify these implicit theories, even when faced with evidence (behavior) to the contrary. Instead, the offender may simply reinterpret or reject a theory. For example, a child's friendly behavior might be evidence to the offender that the child wants to have sex with him. Though it is not clear how these implicit theories develop, it is likely from a combination of developmental, social, and psychological influences.

   As for the etiology of deviant sexual behavior, cognitive-behavioral theory proposes that deviant sexual arousal is learned through classical conditioning (Hunter & Becker, 1994). As such, the effect of outcome on the offender's first deviant sexual act is important: if the act meets with no adverse consequences, an addictive pattern may be powerfully reinforced (Becker, 1990).

PSYCHOSOCIAL THEORIES

Psychosocial theories work from the viewpoint that deviant sexual behavior is a response to external factors, and that there is an interconnection between psychological and sociological variables that influence sexual behavior. Sexual behavior is a learned response to particular conditions, and deviant sexual behavior is the outcome of inappropriate socialization. This may result from personal experiences, such as childhood sexual abuse, or be influenced by general factors, such as pornography.

   One trait common to rapists, child sexual abusers, and exhibitionists is poor social skills. These individuals tend to have difficulty formulating normal adult relationships and are described as suffering from “courtship disorder,” in which “the terminal phase of courtship is exaggerated and distorted, and precoital courtship is virtually absent” (Freund, 1990). Rapists see violence as the only way to secure their goals of sexual gratification (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990a), and they use as much violence as necessary to achieve a sexual relationship. Many child sexual abusers, on the other hand, have an inability to form age-appropriate relationships. In many cases of sexual abuse, regardless of victim type and motivation for the offense, sex offenders display characteristics of low self-esteem, poor self-image, and, subsequently, poor ability to socialize and form appropriate relationships with agemates.

   Many sex offenders who lack proper relationship skills tend to misread social cues, and they do so in two ways. First, they misread cues from their victims, interpreting the victims' actions as sexual in nature. For instance, child sexual abusers often have a sexualized view of children (Hanson et al., 1994; Hartley, 1998; Ward & Keenan, 1999). They interpret children's actions as sexual in nature, and any overt symbol of affection is considered to be a sexual cue. Rapists, too, may misinterpret the actions of their victims as indicative of a sexual desire. For instance, if a woman dresses provocatively, it may be interpreted that she wants to have sex. Or if, when she is assaulted, she does not retaliate due to fear, this may be interpreted as a desire to comply with the sexual act.

   Sex offenders not only misperceive cues of their individual victims, but also societal intimations. These cues can be in the form of patriarchal prerogatives of fathers for children (Hartley, 1998) or sex-role stereotyping of women (Burt, 1980). One societal condition that in Western cultures has been presumed to encourage sex-role stereotyping is pornography (Burt, 1980; Marshall, Anderson, & Fernandez, 1999). Feminist theorists recognize this as a definitive expression of male supremacy that also plays a role in masturbatory fantasy and sexual response (Herman, 1990). Some feminist researchers claim that a link exists between violent pornography and sexual violence (Allison & Wrightsman, 1993), although there has been no systematic empirical evidence to validate this statement. One study showed that some men are more likely to rape if given instructions that it is acceptable behavior (Quinsey, Chaplin, & Varney, 1981). However, another study showed that exposure to hard-core pornography enhances sexual aggression only in already angered males (Gray, 1982). In other words, pornography is not the origin of the deviant sexual behavior, but it can promote a relapse in offenders. This later study also showed that approximately one in three convicted sex offenders said that violent pornography stimulated their desire to offend after viewing it. Gray, as well as other researchers, however, concluded that violent pornographic depictions may act as potentiators for a few sadistic individuals to commit aggressive acts against women, yet most men will not be induced by this material to commit sexual assaults (Gray, 1982; Quinsey et al., 1981).

   Though negative gender socialization may be one factor that influences rape, explanations of child sexual abuse often revert to the offenders' upbringing. In addition to the familial influences mentioned previously, researchers focus on the effect of childhood sexual abuse and whether this leads to a cycle of abuse (Freund & Kuban, 1994, p. 560). The “cycle of abuse” theory alleges that there are statistically significant links between childhood victimization and current sexual interest in children (Bagley, Wood, & Young, 1994). Though this hypothesis has several supporters (Garland & Dougher, 1990; Groth & Burgess, 1977), there are some inconsistencies with the abused-abuser theory. To begin with, it does not account for the fact that more female than male children are sexually abused, and yet there are more male than female sexual offenders. Additionally, it does not account for the fact that many offenders were not sexually abused as children. Similarly, the majority of children who were sexually abused do not go on to abuse others. Most researchers therefore conclude that childhood victimization is but one of many factors that may act as a prelude to later offending behavior.

ROUTINE ACTIVITIES THEORY

Most theories about sexual offending attempt to explain crime based on individual aspects of the offender. However, scholars have begun to assess the role that the environment plays in the commission of sexual offenses. The environment, and particularly the situations in which abuse occurs and the opportunities that offenders have to commit sexual offenses, play a critical role in whether or not abuse occurs. Based on this premise, offenders can be prevented from abusing if they feel that the opportunity to commit the crime presents too much risk, if the reward isn't big enough, or if too much effort is required (Terry & Ackerman, 2008 p. 645).

   The theoretical approach that focuses on the crime element rather than the offender is routine activities theory (RAT). RAT holds that in order for a predatory crime to occur, three elements (the “crime triangle”) must be present at the same time and in the same space: a motivated offender, a suitable target, and the lack of a capable guardian to prevent the crime from happening. Situational crime prevention (SCP) strategies are opportunity-reducing measures directed at highly specific forms of crime, and involve the management, design, or manipulation of the immediate environment in as systematic and permanent way as possible in order to make crime more difficult, risky, less rewarding or excusable for a wide range of offenders. SCP is based on the assumption that offenders are rational beings who weigh the costs and benefits of criminal behavior (Terry & Ackerman, 2008 p. 645). Potential offenders use the environment to their advantage and, thus, effectively implemented SCP can reduce criminal activity.

   Based on the SCP approach, Felson and Clarke (1998) state that four opportunity reducing techniques must occur: increasing effort, increasing risk, controlling prompts, and reducing permissibility. Increasing effort entails making it more difficult or inconvenient to commit a crime through controlling access to facilities, target hardening, and controlling tools. Increasing risk is amplifying the threat of detection, mostly by providing guardianship. Controlling prompts refers to reducing situational triggers. Reducing permissibility refers to making potential offenders understand that their behavior is harmful to their victims. These techniques have generally been applied to property crimes, though researchers have recently begun to apply this paradigm to child sexual abuse (Marshall, Serran, & Marshall, 2006; Terry & Ackerman, 2008; Wortley & Smallbone, 2006a).

   The most comprehensive analysis of situational factors related to sexual abuse has been conducted by Richard Wortley and Stephen Smallbone. In their study of sexual offenders in Australia, Wortley and Smallbone (2006a) observed seven factors that are consistent with a situational explanation of child sexual abuse. Specifically, they stated that child sexual abusers have: (1) a late onset of deviant behavior; (2) a low incidence of chronic sexual offending; (3) a high incidence of previous nonsexual offenses; (4) a low incidence of stranger abuse; (5) a low incidence of networking among offenders; (6) a low incidence of child pornography use; and (7) a low incidence of paraphilic behavior. The authors also note that location is an important factor in the commission of sexual offenses, for sexual abuse almost always occurs in private and often in the home of the offender.

   Child sexual abuse is pervasive in situations in which adults have unguarded access to children, including in youth-serving organizations. Wortley and Smallbone (2006a) found that 20 percent of extrafamilial offenders reported having accessed children via an organized activity, with some 8 percent having joined a child or youth organization for the primary purpose of perpetrating a sexual offense. Colton, Roberts, and Vanstone (2010) found that adult male abusers were attracted to particular positions within educational institutions or voluntary organizations that would afford them easy access to potential victims and allow them to maintain the abuse without being detected. In a study of 41 “professional” perpetrators, Sullivan and Beech (2004) found that 15 percent reported having specifically picked their profession to access children while 41.5 percent reported that access to children was at least part of their motivation for having selected their profession. Indeed, over 90 percent of the abusers they studied were reported to have been aware of their sexual attraction to children prior to having begun their professional careers.

INTEGRATED THEORIES AND EMPIRICAL RESEARCH

Although the individual theories discussed lend possible explanations as to the etiology of offending behavior, they are rarely sufficient explanations of all deviant behavior. The majority of offenders do not initiate sexually deviant behavior because of one variable, such as childhood sexual abuse or exposure to pornography. Rather, there are numerous interrelated factors that, when comprehensively studied, may better explain the etiology of offending behavior through multifactor models. Various researchers (for example, Finkelhor, 1984; Marshall, 1993; Marshall et al., 1999) claim that sexually deviant behavior results from a combination of psychological, developmental, and sometimes biological factors, including (among others) deviant sexual arousal and conditioning; few or poor intimate attachments to family, friends, or partners; loneliness; CDs and lack of empathy; and poor social and relationship skills.

   Marshall, Anderson, and Fernandez (1999) claim that the most important factor that predisposes an individual to future deviant behavior is the strength of the bond between the child and his or her parents, for insecure children frequently lack social skills and have low self-esteem. This poor self-perception persists into adolescence and adulthood, leading to intimacy deficits and loneliness in relationships with family, friends, and partners (Bumby & Hanson, 1997). Children who have strong bonds to their parents develop a resistance to deviant behavior because of their beliefs, cognitions, skills, and emotional dispositions (Marshall et al., 1999, p. 28). Children from unhappy homes with poor attachments are most likely to offend, as they are most likely to accept and welcome attention and rewards from abusers. They are also the most likely to be vulnerable, be lonely, and develop a fear of intimacy, particularly in adult relationships.

   The integrated theories, which envelop various developmental explanations for deviant behavior, indicate that childhood experiences predict a modeling effect because experiences in childhood relationships provide a basis for the formation of adult relationships. These theories also take into consideration possible biological explanations of deviancy. For example, boys who have weak bonds with their parents may have an inability to deal with stress and bodily changes once they reach puberty. At this time, the increase in testosterone in addition to social changes related to adolescence make the transition to adulthood difficult. Those with weak familial bonds tend to be vulnerable, and these vulnerable boys seek methods of power and control. With few outlets of sexual power available, the vulnerable boys may turn toward violent relationships or relationships with children. The availability of pornography, which encourages sex-role stereotyping, and even the popular media (for example, video games, movies) may encourage deviant attitudes in those adolescents who are already vulnerable.

   In regard to child sexual abuse, David Finkelhor (1984) proposed a four-factor model of the preconditions of abuse, which integrate the various theories about why individuals begin to participate in sexually deviant behavior. This organizational framework addresses the full complexity of child sexual abusers, from the etiology of the abuse through the rationalization for it. Finkelhor's model focuses on the internal communications of child sexual abusers regarding their observations and opinions about the world around them. This internal communication creates an opportunity that allows the offenders to break through barriers that, until this time, had prevented them from acting out their feelings. They are able to rationalize their actions to themselves, reducing the barriers of guilt and shame. Once these barriers are absent, they can act on the opportunities they have created, thereby reducing their negative feelings of loneliness, isolation, and other such stressors.

   In order to better explain this process, Finkelhor constructed an organizational framework consisting of four underlying factors that act as preconditions to sexual abuse. He states that in order to sexually abuse, an individual must (1) have motivation to sexually abuse, (2) overcome internal inhibitions, (3) overcome external factors that may act as inhibitors to the abuse, and (4) overcome the child's resistance to the abuse.

   The first precondition, motivation, simply means that an individual must want to abuse the child. The abuser's motivation may result from many factors, such as the idea that he or she relates better to children than adults, that there is a sexual attraction to children, or that the abuse is addictive, like a drug. Next, the offender must overcome internal inhibitions to abuse a child, or must be able to justify the abuse to him- or herself in order to abuse. The offender may justify the abuse by saying, for example, that he or she was abused and enjoyed the abuse as a child, that the abuse is not harmful, or that it is educational. After overcoming internal inhibitions, the individual must overcome external factors that may inhibit the abuse. At this stage, the abuser begins creating opportunities for the abuse to occur. Opportunities may include any situation in which trust is built up between the abuser and the family of the child (if abuser and victim are not related), such as babysitting, coaching the child in a sporting event, or helping the child with homework. Finally, the abuser must overcome the child's resistance to the abuse. This often involves emotional manipulation of the child, such as telling the child how special he or she is, or that if the child tells someone, the abuser will go to prison.

   In addition to these four preconditions to abuse, Finkelhor explains that adults who sexually abuse children experience “emotional congruence” to children, sexual arousal to children, blockage to adult relationships, emotional loneliness, a belief that there is no other way of obtaining this pleasure, a failure to understand damage caused, and poor impulse control. Emotional congruence describes the relationship between the adult abuser's emotional needs and the child's characteristics. For example, if an abuser's emotional needs are not fully mature, he or she may relate better to children than adults. These childish emotional needs may be exacerbated if the abuser has low self-esteem and inadequate social skills, thus making the abuser more comfortable in relationships with children in which he or she is able to exert more power and control.

   Finkelhor also explains that adults who abuse children must have some level of sexual arousal to the children, whether it is innate or learned. Whether explained through social learning theory (through conditioning and imprinting, the abuser begins to find children arousing later in adulthood) or poor psychosexual development, sexual arousal to children is a necessary component of the motivation to abuse. Child sexual abusers also usually experience some type of blockage, or lack of ability to have their sexual and/or emotional needs met in adult relationships. The abuser's blockage may be developmental or situational; with developmental blockage, the abuser is prevented from moving into the adult sexual stage of development (an internal blockage), while situational blockage is when the abuser is unable to attain or maintain an adult relationship due to external factors, such as frustration from a relationship with an adult.

   Overall, this organizational framework describes who is at risk to offend. It is likely that individuals who offend have been able to cope with many of the problems mentioned (for example, developmental blockage) and opportunities (for example, access to children) at different times. However, it is the combination of these problems, in addition to some type of demand on their coping system that contributes to an attitude supportive of sexual offending, thereby establishing a risk to offend. That risk increases the likelihood that a person may act out in a sexual fashion, because his or her belief system has filtered out the normal inhibitions toward sexual offending. Unfortunately, the relief that is associated with sexual offending is reinforcing, because it provides an emotional and physical response to coping in a way in which the offenders feel they have control, unlike many of the other parts of their lives.

   Traits that appear to be most strongly connected to sexually deviant behavior are dynamic variables, or features that are changeable, such as cognitions, feelings, and attitudes. Unfortunately, it is these variables that are least understood, though empirical research in the past two decades has focused largely on them rather than static variables such as age and ethnicity. Empirical research generates data-driven models that are derived from a combination of theoretical perspectives rather than a specific theoretical approach. Empirical research tends to be developmental, cognitive, and social in nature, and it has led to the development of comprehensive theories of sexual offending.

   Empirical studies on rape expanded at the time of the feminist movement, following the idea that rapists were not deviant characters, but rather like “the man next door” (Medea & Thompson, 1974; Russell, 1984). Empirical research has shown correlations between offending behavior and offender psychopathology, arousal patterns, attitudes, and social skills. A variety of factors have been measured, such as rape-supportive attitudes (Scully & Marolla, 1984) and prevalence of childhood sexual abuse in offenders (Seghorn, Prentky, & Boucher, 1987), as well as cognitive factors such as emotional disturbances and loneliness (Marshall, 1989). Some researchers have constructed equations that aim to predict factors of offending behavior (Malamuth, 1986), and others have utilized traditional theories such as Cohen's psychodynamic theories of rape to build empirical typologies of offenders to aid in the assessment for their management and treatment (Prentky & Burgess, 1990).

   Other researchers who have proposed integrated theories to explain child sexual abuse focus on the offender's desire for sexual pleasure. For instance, O'Connell, Leberg, and Donaldson (1990) claim that child sexual abusers begin offending because of the attraction to the pleasure derived from the acts; they have a perception that this is the only way to obtain such pleasure; there is a lack of understanding about the damage resulting to the child from this pleasure; and there is a lack of inhibitors to prevent the offender from seeking this pleasure. Hall and Hirschman's (1992) quadripartite model identifies motivational precursors that increase the probability of offending. The four components of Hall and Hirschman's (1992) theory are physiological sexual arousal, inaccurate cognitions that justify sexual aggression, affective dyscontrol, and personality problems.

   Ward and Seigert (2002) have critiqued many of the individual theoretical perspectives for explaining sexual abuse and present the most comprehensive integrated model of offending known as a pathways model. They explain that each distinct pathway has its own etiology. However, all sex offenders suffer from certain core deficits and “dysfunctional mechanisms.” According to the pathways model, the four distinct and interlocking psychological mechanisms that are exhibited by sex offenders are (1) intimacy deficits; (2) deviant sexual scripts; (3) emotional dysregulation; and (4) antisocial cognitions. Sex offenders may also exhibit multiple dysfunctional mechanisms. Ward, Polaschek, and Beech (2006) provide an overview and critique of theories on sexual offending, including what they call Level I Theories (Multifactorial Theories), Level II Theories (Single-Factor Theories), and Level III Theories (Descriptive Models) of sexual offending.

TABLE 3.2 Theories of Sexual Abuse

© Cengage Learning

   Despite years of research, theories on sexual offending are still inconclusive. There has been a shift in theoretical focus over the past three decades, and it is now clear that no single explanation accurately encompasses the myriad factors associated with the onset of deviant behavior. While comprehensive theories are able to explain general conditions associated with sexual offending, it is not possible to predict, on an individual level, who will offend based on these general characteristics. Table 3.2summarizes theories of sexual abuse.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

• ▪ Theories developed throughout the century, focusing at various times on physiology, psychology, psycho-social factors, cognitive-behavioral factors, and ultimately integrated models of offending.

• ▪ The most thorough explanation of deviant sexual behavior lies in integrated theories. Integrated theories consider the preconditions to sexual abuse and take into consideration other factors such as attachments, emotions, and CDs.

• ▪ A common thread through most theories is that sex offenders tend to have poor social skills, low self-esteem, misperceive social cues, and are able to rationalize their behavior.

• ▪ Some sex offenders are diagnosed with paraphilias, which are sexual disorders that can explain the etiology of offending behavior. Some paraphilias are serious and can lead to significant distress for both the offender and the potential victim. Others are relatively minor, do not involve contact with the victim, and are practiced as consensual acts among “normal” adults.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

• 1. Why is it important to understand the theoretical underpinnings of sexual abuse?

• 2. Is there any crossover between different theoretical frameworks for explaining deviant sexual behavior?

• 3. What are some of the critical factors that play a role in explaining why people commit sexual offenses?

• 4. How do familial or other close relationships impact those who go on to become sexual abusers?

• 5. Why is it important to diagnose paraphilias?

• 6. What role do social skills play in sexual offending? How is this similar or different in offenders who abuse children and adults?

CASE STUDY

Aileen Wuornos, Serial Killer

Most sexual offenders are male, and nearly all known serial killers are also male. It is unusual to hear about violent female offenders, and particularly rare to hear about extreme cases, such as that of Aileen Wuornos. Wuornos was perhaps the highest-profile female serial killer in the United States. Between 1989 and 1990, she killed six truck drivers along Florida's highways. She claimed that these men had raped or attempted to rape her. Prior to the killings, Wuornos had worked these same highways as a prostitute. In 1989, she began picking up traveling truck drivers and taking them into nearby woods where she killed them (Shipley & Arrigo, 2004).

   Aileen Wuornos had a difficult upbringing, and researchers have attempted to explain her behaviors through this difficult childhood. Wuornos was raised by alcoholic and abusive grandparents, and by the age of 11 she had begun trading sex for candy and cigarettes (Pearson, 2007). Her grandfather used to make her strip before beating her. At the age of 14, Wuornos became pregnant after being raped by one of her grandfather's friends. She gave birth to the child and then gave it up for adoption. When Wuornos turned 15, her grandfather threw her out and she turned to prostitution as a means of survival (McCloskey & Ramos-Grenier, 2006). Throughout her adult life she had run-ins with the police for various types of criminal behavior, including robbery, assault, fraud, and motor vehicle theft.

   Those who have studied Wuornos's case argue that her childhood disrupted the development of safety and security that is important in early development, and as a result she had no ability to regulate her emotions. Additionally, her history of sexual abuse and, likely, physical and emotional abuse, may have led Wuornos to target individuals looking for prostitutes (Shipley & Arrigo, 2004). Assessments of Wuornos using the DSM have suggested that Wuornos suffered from Antisocial Personality Disorder, which is characterized by deceitfulness, impulsivity, and a reckless disregard for the safety of one's self and others (Pearson, 2007).

   Wuornos was convicted for the murder of six men. She was executed by lethal injection in October 2002. She was the 10th woman to be executed in the United States since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976.

Questions

• 1. Are theories of offending equally applicable to male and female offenders?

• 2. What theories best explain Aileen Wuornos's behavior?

© Cengage Learning

1. Information about paraphilias in this chapter is based upon the DSM IV-TR, the current version at the time of publication. The DSM V is scheduled for release in May 2013.

2. Quote taken from an interview with a rapist in prison in England, 1996.

3. Quote taken from an interview with a rapist in prison in England, 1996.

4. Though consensual, one of the 44 men videotaped was under the age of 21. The age of consent for homosexual behavior was, at that time in England, 21 years of age. As such, the defendants were also charged with committing a sex

4 Cycle of Sexual Offending

Whereas Chapter 3 outlined theories of why individuals begin to sexually offend and described the preconditions to sexual abuse, this chapter discusses the offense cycle. This includes the planning that goes into the offense as well as the cognitive processes that the offender uses to be able to continue offending. When individuals commit sexual offenses, they rarely do so spontaneously. Usually, there is a level of planning that leads up to the offense and, in the case of child sexual abuse, “grooming” behavior. Additionally, many offenders commit multiple offenses. In order to do so, they excuse or justify their behavior so that they feel little or no remorse, guilt, or shame. This rationalization allows the offender to continue the abusive behavior and, thus, the cycle of offending.

   The offense cycle describes the interaction of the offender's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. The cycle shows how sexual abuse is not a random set of acts, but rather is the result of a series of multideterminant decisions. Once begun, this offense cycle is able to continue because sex offenders neutralize their feelings of guilt, shame, and responsibility through cognitive distortions (CDs). These altered thought processes vary in both type and intensity, and they are crucial to the maintenance of the offenders' deviant fantasies, thoughts, and behaviors. Understanding the determinants of sexual offending is important in order to establish practical policies for treatment and supervision of sex offenders.

THE OFFENSE CYCLE

When committing sexual offenses, offenders make a series of decisions prior to the commission of these acts. Some of the decisions in this cycle transpire after a long period of time. Other decisions may occur quickly if the offender is in a situation where an abusive opportunity presents itself. Understanding this decision process helps explain the onset and persistence of offending behavior, because it is necessary to understand the conditions that create a pro-offending environment and how certain antecedents to sexual abuse vary among offenders.

   Sexual offenders rarely make a straightforward decision to abuse a person. Instead, they tend to make a series of decisions that, when taken together, lead to sexual abuse. This series of seemingly irrelevant decisions (SIDs) (also known as seemingly unimportant decisions or apparently irrelevant decisions) creates a pro-offending environment for the offenders. For example, a rapist may decide to go to his neighborhood bar, even though his prior offense occurred against a woman he met at a bar while he was intoxicated. Another example is of a convicted child sexual abuser who goes to the corner deli at 3 P.M.—the exact time that kids in his neighborhood get out of school and stop to get snacks. Although the decisions in each example do not constitute deviant sexual behavior or even necessarily overt sexual thoughts, these SIDs place the offenders in environments in which they have access to potential victims through their routine activities. If the process is not stopped, the potential offender may continue to make SIDs until an offense takes place.

   The offense cycle is more than just decisions, however. The offense cycle involves multiple determinants, including the interaction of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. These determinants may be situational in nature (that is, the offender is in a situation in which offending is possible), they may involve negative affective states (in particular, depression, anger, or loneliness), they may be based on past learning (that is, the offender was abused in a similar way as a child), and the offender's actions may be reinforced (that is, from the pleasure derived from the abusive act). In other words, the offending cycle ties together the theoretical underpinnings of sexual abuse, as discussed in Chapter 3, including the preconditions of sexual abuse, the opportunity structure for abuse to occur, and the CDs of the offenders.

   There are several steps involved in the offense cycle. At the outset, the offender has negative thoughts, often leading to self-pity and the idea that “nobody likes me” or “I'm no good.” These self-pitying, negative thoughts lead to negative feelings, in particular anger, frustration, loneliness, and inadequacy. These negative thoughts and feelings interact and lead to negative (abusive) behavior. The thoughts and feelings lead the offender to make SIDs that, among other things, lead him or her to withdraw from others. The result is further loneliness and isolation, which results in a lack of communication that causes the original negative thoughts and feelings to go unresolved and further heightens the intimacy deficits of the offender.

   Once the offender is ensconced in the negative thought-feeling-behavior cycle, he or she begins to experience inappropriate sexual thoughts or fantasies. These may be abstract fantasies about particular groups of individuals (for example, teenage boys, blond women, college students) or focused on a particular individual (for example, the neighbor). Though the offender may not act upon the fantasies immediately, the fantasies eventually lead to masturbation, where pleasure is derived as a result of the abusive fantasy. With this positive reinforcement, the offender's negative thoughts and feelings begin to wane, further reinforcing the negative behavior. It is at this point that the offender begins to take steps toward overtly deviant behavior if he has not done so already, targeting a victim and engaging in a fantasy rehearsal of the future abuse of that victim.

   Once the offender has engaged in the fantasy rehearsal, he or she begins to plan the abusive act and “groom” the victim. Once adequate grooming has taken place, the offender will abuse the victim. Similarly to the masturbatory act, the abusive act itself is a tangibly positive reinforcement of the original fantasy. However, the abuse may also lead to negative feelings, particularly that of anxiety (What have I done?) and fear (Will I get caught?), despite the release of tension achieved through the sexual abuse. It is these negative feelings that lead to the desistance of the abuse cycle. Yet, the offender rarely addresses the original negative thoughts and feelings that led to the abusive behavior, and as a result the offense cycle often begins again if the offender has not been caught. Thus, the abusive behavior is cyclical.

GROOMING AND PLANNING

Throughout the offense cycle, offenders make a series of decisions that lead up to and allow the offender to commit the deviant act. Yet, many offenders do not recognize the amount of planning that occurs before a sexual offense is committed. Child sexual abusers tend to have a greater awareness of the planning than do those who sexually assault adults, because they generally “groom” children before engaging them in a sexual act. Grooming is a premeditated behavior intended to manipulate the potential victim into complying with the sexual abuse (John Jay College, 2004). Some child sexual abusers do not recognize their grooming patterns, or they may deny that such patterns exist, whereas others carefully develop elaborate schemes that encourage children to participate in sexual activity.

   Pryor (1996, pp. 123–154) describes several methods by which child sexual abusers approach and engage their victims in sexual behavior, including verbal and/or physical coercion, seduction, games, and enticements. He explains how child sexual abusers are able to manipulate their victims into sexual compliance and how the offenders either continue the manipulation or adjust it in order to continue with the abuse. The first grooming tactic noted by Pryor is the seduction and testing of the child, whereby sexual activity is initiated after a common interaction such as tickling or bathing. Here, the child is seduced and sexual behavior is “tested,” increasing incrementally unless the child overtly tells the offender to stop the action. The following two quotes are examples of this tactic. Both offenders were convicted of raping their daughters, though intercourse occurred only after years of touching and fondling.*

• [The abuse] actually started when Christine1 was three and it went on until she was eleven. I started bathing her, and I touched her while I was bathing her.

• Q: How did you groom her?

• A: I would ask for a kiss and a cuddle, and that is how it all started. Then I got bolder and bolder, and eventually I had intercourse with her.

   A second grooming tactic involves catching the victim by surprise (Pryor, 1996). This happens when the offender has planned for some length of time to abuse the victim, yet there was no opportunity for the abuse to occur. The offender either manipulates the situation so that he is alone with the victim or takes advantage of an opportunity that presents itself. The following offender utilized this tactic.

• Q: How did the abuse start?

• A: Handstands. She asked me if I would hold her legs while she did handstands, and so I said yes. So she did handstands, and I asked her if she wanted to do them again. When she did them a second time I put my hand down her pants.

   A third tactic for engaging children in sexual behavior is verbal or physical coercion. Most child sexual abusers use manipulation, but few use physical force, weapons, or threats of physical force with their victims. Yet, some serious, repeat offenders do use physical and/or verbal force to make their victims comply. For example, an offender who was convicted of abusing six victims over a period of several years made the following statement. His victims were his nieces, his grandchildren, and their friends.

• I was cunning, devious, you name it. I would use every trick in the book to get them to sit on my knee. I bribed them. I threatened them as well. I threatened, but I wouldn't really do it.… I threatened them with violence.… I threatened to hit them, even though it was not my jurisdiction to hit them.

   Pryor (1996) describes another tactic used by child sexual abusers as masking sex in a game context. The offenders who use this tactic tend to be the more manipulative offenders and often have several victims. These schemes are well planned and premeditated, meant to trick the victims into participating in sexual acts. The first of the two excerpts is by an offender describing his first victim, his stepdaughter, when the abuse began at age 10. The second statement is by an offender who went to elaborate lengths to groom children and make them comfortable with the sexual nature of their games.

• Q: How did you get her to comply [with the abuse]?

• A: I acted like it was all a game, and she went along with it. I appreciate that now, she was looking at me as an authority figure and I let her down badly.… My grooming tactics were so good that the boys never said no. I started by play-fighting and wrestling and I took them swimming. I took them to a club … that had a common changing room, that way I could see them undressing and they could get used to seeing me naked.

   Perhaps the most common tactic used by child sexual abusers in order to groom the victims is emotional and verbal coercion. There are many ways in which this may occur, such as bribes or lack of disciplinary action in exchange for sexual favors, or emotional blackmail if the victim does not comply. The victims are almost always given incentives in order to comply with the abuse, such as money and gifts. This is often the tactic used with incest offenders or offenders who have regular contact with their victims. Following are two examples of this tactic. The first offender had sexual intercourse with his biological daughter, and the second had a sexual relationship with his stepson. In both the cases, the abuse went on for several years.

• Q: What led up to the intercourse? Did she ever say “no” to the sexual acts?

• A: I groomed her for several weeks. The first time I tried to touch her she ran away from me.

• Q: Why did she eventually let you touch her?

• A: Because I am her dad, and she probably just thought it was natural. I used to bathe her, and when I would touch her I would tell her it wouldn't hurt. She used to say “no, don't do it” sometimes, but I would buy her extra sweets.… I told her that if she told anyone, daddy will go away for a long time.

I don't see, I don't think I groomed them.… There were no treats or anything. Except with Danny. Danny was different. His treat was that he was allowed to stay up late for the simple reason so that we could masturbate each other.

   Some child sexual abusers do not admit to initiating contact with the victim, but claim instead that the victim initiated the contact and instigated the sexual behavior. Pryor describes this as “taking over from the victim,” in that the offenders carry on with the behavior once the victims initiate it. Though it is possible that such a scenario may occur, it is unlikely. A more plausible explanation is that the offenders have a distorted perception of the abuse and believe the victim to be culpable. The following excerpts are examples of this tactic:

• From the time I first met him he was all over me. I tried to stop little Johnny from hanging around, but it didn't work.

• She used to like to go to [soccer] matches.… And you see, she used to come to me and say to me, “I want to go to the [soccer] match Dad, so we can do you-know-what.” I didn't used to buy her presents or anything like that, just take her out to [soccer] matches.

• I know this sounds like I am minimizing, but this is the truth: it all started when I was sleeping, and I woke up and my nephew was giving me oral sex.

   Rapists, particularly those who are opportunistic, often do not recognize the level of planning that goes into their offenses. Most claim that the decision to rape was made instantaneously and believe that only child sexual abusers plan offenses. Yet some rapists do eventually recognize that some planning went into the offenses. For instance, the following excerpt was taken from an offender who was convicted of sexual assaults against 10 prostitutes. The statement was taken after he completed a treatment program; prior to the treatment, he did not admit to planning any part of the offenses, saying they happened spontaneously.

• Q: What else about the treatment stood out to you?

• A: Just how you plan your offense. At the time you don't think about it, you know. But it is planned, it is all sectioned. When you look at it, you think yeah, I did do that.… [My offense] was all planned, all planned from start to finish. I used to, I took them to a park to attack them, and I used to go out to the park beforehand to make sure no one was there. And I knew exactly what I was gonna do before it happened. It wasn't spur of the moment, it was all planned. I knew where I was gonna take them, what I was gonna do, how much time I had, and when I had to pick the wife up from Bingo.

CASE STUDY

TED BUNDY: Planning His Offenses

In 1978, Ted Bundy was convicted of killing two female students at Florida State University. These were two of his estimated 30 murders, and he was ultimately executed in 1989 for the murder of a 12-year-old girl. His killing spree spanned five years and occurred across seven states. The question was, how was he able to become such a prolific killer without being caught?

   During interviews about the homicides, Bundy admitted that he studied his victims' behavior prior to attacking them. Bundy noted that he was most organized while operating in his “predator mode,” during which he selected a dump site, conducted research on his victims, and completed planning which included having an alibi and flight option. Bundy relied on his charm and social skills to ensure that his victims would feel comfortable enough to leave a populated area with him. Bundy would often rely on the same pattern, as he would feign an injury or pretend to be an authority figure. Using these guises, he would convince his victims to accompany him to his car where he would knock them unconscious with a crowbar. Bundy would then drive around with the victim, reaching his preselected dump site. It was here that he would again knock the victim unconscious and strangle her while raping her.

   Bundy clearly illustrates the grooming and planning techniques utilized by sex offenders. Bundy used his likeable personality to his advantage, putting his victims at ease enough to lure them to areas where they would be alone. He also relied on his previously planned strategies, such as impersonating a police officer or pretending to be injured, to convince his victims that they had nothing to fear or could be of help to him. Bundy lured his victims to a desolate area where he was then able to catch them by surprise and act out his attacks. Bundy planned his attacks down to every detail and this planning contributed in part to his success in committing numerous murders and evading detection by law enforcement.

Questions

• 1. Are there similarities between the grooming/planning techniques of Ted Bundy and child sexual abusers?

• 2. How does the offense cycle apply to Ted Bundy? How could the cycle have been stopped?

© Cengage Learning

PERSISTENCE OF OFFENDING BEHAVIOR

Once there are motivational factors in place that create a predisposition to sexual offending, and once the offense cycle has begun, offenders must then overcome any internal or external inhibitions in order to commit an offense (Finkelhor, 1984). After the individual commits a sexual offense, additional factors must be present in order for the offender to maintain the deviant behavior. As with the etiology of offending behavior, there is no single variable that explains why sexual offenders continue perpetrating offenses. There are several variables, however, that have been associated with the maintenance of deviant sexual behavior. In particular, offenders almost universally exhibit distorted thought processes, or CDs, that allow for continuation of abuse without feelings of guilt or remorse for their actions (Murphy, 1990). Moreover, many sex offenders have fantasies about a victim, a particular type of victim (for example, young boys), or certain sexual practices, and the continuation of such fantasies is correlated to the maintenance of deviant behavior. The fantasies are not always sexual in nature; rather, many rapists and child sexual abusers fantasize about issues such as power and control. Additionally, child sexual abusers often fantasize about loving their victims, which, though not violent, is a CD and allows the offender to continue participating in the inappropriate relationship.

   In addition to CDs and fantasies, sex offenders often blame their behavior on external factors, such as stress, alcohol, or strained marital relations. Though these disinhibitors are not causal, they do act as “triggers” for the sexual offense. The triggers can be either psychological (for example, use of alcohol) or sociocultural (for example, weak criminal sanctions against sexual offenders) in nature (Hartley, 1998, p. 26). Researchers have identified CDs, fantasies, and triggering factors as pertinent to the persistence of offending behavior, and as such these variables are addressed at length in cognitive-behavioral treatment programs (discussed in Chapter 11).

Cognitive Distortions

When individuals commit wrongdoings, they often try to diminish their feelings of guilt and shame through “neutralizations” (Sykes & Matza, 1957). Individuals primarily neutralize feelings of wrongdoing through excuses and justifications for their behavior (Scott & Lyman, 1968; Scully, 1990). These neutralizations take the form of CDs that allow the offenders to remove from themselves any responsibility, shame, and guilt for their actions (Abel, Becker, & Cunningham-Rathner, 1984). These rationalizations of deviant behavior protect the individual from self-blame and allow the individual to validate the behavior through cognitive defenses.

   CDs are not unique to sex offenders. Rather, all individuals distort thoughts regularly. For most individuals these distorted thoughts are not necessarily harmful (for example, a student who receives a bad grade on an exam assumes the teacher doesn't like him or her), but the distorted thoughts of sex offenders generally are harmful (for example, “She didn't fight with me so she must have wanted sex”). It is not the distortions themselves that are unique to sex offenders, but rather the content of the distortions (Marshall, Anderson, & Fernandez, 1999, p. 60). Though sex offenders do not form a homogeneous group of individuals, they show strikingly similar CDs about their victims, their offenses, and their responsibility for the offenses.

   It is unclear as to whether CDs are conscious distortions or whether offenders genuinely believe these altered perceptions of reality. Some researchers suggest that CDs are self-serving and, thus, the offender consciously distorts thoughts initially (Abel et al., 1984). However, it is also suggested that the offenders eventually believe the distortions as they become more entrenched in their behavior (Marshall et al., 1999). Regardless, CDs are considered crucial to the maintenance of offending behavior for both rapists and child sexual abusers, because they serve the needs of the offenders to continue their behavior without feeling guilt for their actions.

   There are many ways in which distortions manifest themselves in sex offenders. Sykes and Matza (1957) list five primary neutralization techniques, including the denial of responsibility, the denial of injury, the denial of the victim, the condemnation of the condemners, and the appeal to higher loyalties. Cognitive-behavioral theorists have explained these techniques in terms of CDs, the most common of which are minimization and/or denial of the offense and justification of the offense. Additionally, sex offenders often lack victim empathy and show an inability to recognize the level of planning that went into their offenses (including grooming of the victims). Some researchers also label sexual entitlement as a specific CD, resulting from the narcissistic attitudes of offenders who seek only to fulfill their own desires (Hanson, Gizzarelli, & Scott, 1994, p. 197). However broadly or specifically the CDs are defined, these distorted thoughts are conducive to the maintenance of deviant sexual practices.

Minimization and Denial   Most sex offenders minimize or deny their offenses, including the damage caused to the victim, the violence used, their responsibility for the offense, the planning of the offense, and the lasting effects as a result of the offense. Several researchers have categorized types of minimization and denial (Haywood et al., 1994; Marshall et al., 1999); these include complete or partial denial of the offense, minimization of the offense, minimization of their own responsibility, denial or minimization of harm to the victim, denial or minimization of planning, denial or minimization of deviant fantasies, and denial of the personal problems that led to the deviant behavior.

   Some sex offenders deny all or part of their offenses. They may completely deny that they committed the offense—claiming, for instance, that the victim made up the story or they cannot remember what happened—or they may not admit to aggravating factors of the offense. Partial denial, as described by Marshall et al. (1999), includes refutation of a problem (for example, “I am not a sex offender”) or the refusal to accept that an act was sexual abuse (for example, “The victim consented”). Though some researchers claim that denial is not an accurate predictor variable for recidivism (Hanson & Bussiere, 1998), there is a substantial body of literature that claims the opposite (Marques, Day, Nelson, & West, 1994; Simkins, Ward, Bowman, & Rinck, 1989). Few therapists allow deniers to participate in treatment until they at least admit that they committed the offense (Marques, Day et al., 1994).

   Offenders with either adult or child victims may deny the offense by claiming that they were falsely accused or that they do not remember the offense. Some blame their memory loss on the extended period of time between the commission of the offense and the arrest, whereas others blame substances such as drugs or alcohol. The following excerpts from two child sexual abusers typify such denials.

• Q: What about the USI [unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 16]?

• A: The USI, the reason I am guilty is because of medication, opium-based painkillers.… I don't remember what happened. If anything happened I will agree to it. But I can't remember because I was on medication.

This was a long time ago, 25 years ago. I have a very, very, poor memory.… This rape business, I have practically put it out of my mind, I never forget it but I have more or less put it out of my mind. [He was convicted of raping his 10-year-old niece.]

   If offenders do not deny that they committed the offense, it is common for them to minimize the damage resulting from their acts. They rarely acknowledge the harm they caused the victim, and this is particularly true for child sexual abusers. Because most child sexual abusers are not violent toward their victims, they do not recognize the damage caused by what they view as a “consensual” relationship. They tend to see the assault on the child as the product of a mutual sexual interest, and they minimize any damage that might result from a child partaking in such a relationship. The first excerpt below is a statement made by a sex offender who was convicted of raping one daughter and indecently assaulting2another. The second is by an offender who was convicted of raping a 13-year-old girl.

• In court she wouldn't say she consented, that is why it came back as rape.… The affair started in 1978, and the first time she said no at the last minute. But after that it was consenting.

• A: I went out on a Sunday morning and the youngest daughter of Kathy asked me if she could go for a ride. We got along, we were laughing and joking, and one thing led to another and, well, let's put it this way, I went a little farther than I should have done.

• Q: What was going through your mind when she started screaming and crying?

• A: I thought she was a virgin.

   Although child sexual abusers rarely acknowledge that their “consensual” relationships are harmful, offenders with adult victims tend to minimize the damage they cause in other ways. They rarely recognize the level of coercion or violence used in order to make the victim comply with the assault. This is compounded if the victim is either a partner or spouse, or if the victim is involved in an occupation such as prostitution. In such cases, the offenders express a distorted thought of sexual entitlement, believing that they have the right to sexual intercourse with this person and that the act should not be considered rape. The following excerpts are from interviews with rapists. The first was convicted of raping his girlfriend, and his CD of entitlement to sex is clear from his description of his relationship with the victim. The second offender shows severe minimization of his actions and the harm caused by them. The victim was his girlfriend, whom he severely beat, throttled, and left unconscious when she said she did not want to have intercourse with him.

• Q: Did you rape her?

• A: We had a relationship, and there were times when we had sex and it was forceful. But she didn't leave me.… She ended up living with me. She didn't have to. She could have gone home.

My offense was not against the general public, it was against my girlfriend. … I was brought up with ethics and so I tend to respect women. I have never committed an offense against anybody nor have I been rude to anybody in my life. This is the first time it happened. I didn't—I mean, there was no violence involved. It was just that the lady said no on this particular occasion, and I think she was more surprised than anything.

Justifications   In addition to minimizing or denying their offenses, sex offenders make excuses as to why they committed the deviant acts. By justifying their actions, offenders acknowledge their guilt in the acts but they do not take responsibility for them. Commonly, they blame the victims for their offenses or justify their offenses through the victims' actions.

   Justification is common in the vast majority of sex offenders, as it assists in allaying remorse and guilt for the acts committed. Scully and Marolla (1984), who interviewed 114 incarcerated rapists, explain five ways in which rapists commonly justify their behavior. Rapists claim that (1) the victim is a seductress, and she provoked the rape; (2) women mean yes when they say no, or the victim did not resist enough to really mean no; (3) most women relax and enjoy it, and the rapists are actually fulfilling the woman's desires; (4) nice girls do not get raped, and prostitutes, hitchhikers, and promiscuous women get what they deserve; and (5) the rape was only a minor wrongdoing, so the perpetrator is not really an “offender.”

   Child sexual abusers also justify their actions by neutralizing their guilt. Common justifications include claims that they are helping the child to learn about sex; sexual education is good for the child; the child enjoys it; there is no harm being done to the child; the child initiated the sexual contact; and the child acts older than he or she is. Like offenders with adult victims, child sexual abusers often assert that the child did not resist and therefore must have wanted the sexual interaction. They fail to recognize any other explanations as to why the child might not have resisted, such as fear, uncertainty about what was happening, or the idea that the perpetrator is someone they knew and trusted. The following excerpt shows an offender justifying his contact with the young daughter of his friend because she did not resist his advances:

• Q: What made you abuse her?

• A: I don't know. The opportunity just was given to me. She came and sat in my lap and asked me how to draw something. So while she was drawing, I put my hand up her skirt. She didn't say no.

   Many children, when abused, respond to the abusers by copying their actions or by doing what they are told to do. For instance, if a man shows a young girl how to masturbate him, she may comply without fully understanding the purpose or consequence of her actions. The offenders tend to assume that this type of compliance with a sexual act is indicative of the child's enjoyment of the act, and they are able to justify their actions accordingly. Other offenders sexually touch a child but do not have the child touch them. They are aroused by the touching and usually fantasize about the act at a later time. The offenders often believe that they are pleasuring the child, and they do not view this type of act as intrusive and harmful. Still others believe that they are teaching the child about sex, and that sexual intercourse is pleasurable and the child is enjoying the interaction. The following excerpts illustrate these points:

• I was putting my thing on her private parts, mind you through her [underpants]. At no time did I force her to do anything, nor did I ever physically force her to touch me.

• Q: Did you know what you were doing was wrong?

• A: At the time I was giving myself the excuse, I was doing nothing wrong.… I would say to myself, she likes it. She has to learn that sometime, she has to learn sooner or later. I would make myself think I wasn't doing anything wrong.

   Many children do not exert physical resistance to sexual advances. As discussed previously, this is largely due to the grooming techniques employed by the offender leading up to the abuse. Nonetheless, this lack of resistance to sexual advances signifies to most offenders that the child is enjoying the sexual interaction. Added to this are the natural biological reactions of the child to the sexual contact, such as when one offender told a researcher in an interview, “I remember touching her breasts at that point. And … immediately her nipples got hard” (Pryor, 1996, p. 127). This is particularly applicable to offenders whose victims are girls who are just reaching puberty. The following excerpt is from an offender who abused his 12-year-old niece and justified his actions through all of the listed methods of neutralization:

• Q: How did the abuse begin?

• A: We used to kiss and cuddle, and then it progressed from there. She never really objected to any of it, only sometimes did she say she didn't like it. And only once did she say no, we can get in trouble for this. She was such a pretty little girl, so well developed for her age.… I suppose this must have mentally scarred her, but I know deep down that she really just loved it.

   Many child sexual abusers seek out children who are vulnerable for abuse. This includes children who have been abused physically, emotionally, or sexually, and who often desire the attention paid to them by the offender. The offender is able to neutralize guilt in such a situation by believing that he is showing the child love as no one else does. Or, the guilt is neutralized because others have already abused the child and the offender is therefore not to blame. The following excerpt illustrates this point:

• I abused my nephew and two of his friends. My brother was also abusing my nephew, and I guess I thought “He's already been abused, so I can abuse him too.”

   All types of sex offenders have a tendency to misread social cues by others and are poor at identifying emotions such as anger or fear in the victims. Both rapists and child sexual abusers often perceive their victims as initiating sexual contact and see their victims' actions as sexually provocative. Rapists view flirtatious actions by their victims as indicative of desiring a sexual relationship. Many do not understand prosocial boundaries to sexual contact and believe that if a sexual interaction has begun, then it should continue through intercourse. Thus, if the victims later make an attempt to terminate contact (victim says “No”), the rapists do not take the desire to stop the contact seriously (offender assumes she means “Yes”). Blaming the victim for initiating sexual contact alleviates the guilt of the act from them and transposes it to the victims.

   Child sexual abusers misread cues from children in several ways, and the better they know the victim the more likely this is to happen. Children are naturally affectionate toward adults, particularly those whom they know well. Child sexual abusers view these naturally affectionate actions—such as sitting on an adult's lap—as sexual in nature and perceive the children as initiating sexual contact. They also perceive any sexual curiosity displayed by the child as a desire to know about sex, and they want to “teach” the child through sexual experiences. These misperceptions reinforce the offenders' narcissistic beliefs and detract from the ability of an offender to feel any empathy for his victims.

Victim Empathy

Research in cognitive psychology suggests that all individuals interpret situations differently, and they construct implicit theories about their worlds in order to explain the reality as it relates to them. The socially constructed reality of sex offenders revolves around two concepts: desires and beliefs (Ward & Keenan, 1999, p. 825). They form mental constructs about what they believe the victim wants, and because offenders exhibit narcissistic traits, they generally believe that the victim desires sexual activity with them (Hanson, Gizzarelli, & Scott, 1994). As such, they are often unaware of the damage that they cause to their victims. Without understanding the impact of their actions, or feeling empathy toward the victim, offenders are not likely to cease their offending behavior.

   Empathy refers to the understanding of another's feelings and emotions. There are several components of empathy, including both cognitive and emotional factors (Davis, 1983; Moore, 1990). It is believed that prosocial empathic response patterns develop primarily during childhood, with parents having a significant impact on the development of behavior and emotional responses (Zahn-Waxler & Radke-Yarrow, 1990). Simply put, if parents show low empathic response patterns, it is likely that their children will model their conduct and also be deficient in empathic behavior. This deficiency in empathy is apparent in almost all sex offenders, and this is what allows them to continue offending despite the damage they cause to the victims.

   Studies measuring general empathy in sex offenders show mixed results. Williams and Finkelhor (1990) claim that incestuous fathers lack empathy; Pithers (1994) claims that rapists lack empathy more than child sexual abusers; Hayashino, Wurtele, and Klebe (1995) claim that there is no difference in empathy between child sexual abusers and non-sex offenders. Additionally, sadistic rapists do not lack empathy, which is the failure to understand the feelings and emotional state of others. Rather, they do understand the pain, degradation, and humiliation of the victim and seek this out for sexual arousal.

   Marshall, Hudson, Jones, and Fernandez (1995) propose that sex offenders do not necessarily lack empathy as a general trait, but they lack victim-specific empathy. Sex offenders do express empathic responses toward victims of sexual offenses. There are particularly pronounced group differences for empathic responses to victim harm: child sexual abusers are distressed about violence toward women, and rapists are sympathetic toward child victims. The following excerpt shows such a situation:

• I was very disturbed after hearing about [a rapist] who stabbed his victim's eyes out and then mutilated her genital area, and then I had to go back to my cell to think about it. Me, I never hurt my victims so this is disturbing.

   The offender who made this statement was convicted of nearly 200 counts of child molestation. The victims were 11- to 14-year-old boys, and the abuse occurred over a 10-year period. Even after treatment, he failed to recognize the harm that he brought upon his victims, which is common to child sexual abusers when the victims display no overt resistance to the abuse (Stermac & Segal, 1989). Many offenders believe that there are degrees of offending behavior and, thus, degrees of harm (Ward & Keenan, 1999), and that the “consensual” nature of their offenses makes them less culpable than those with intrusive, violent offenses. The same offender went on to describe his relationship with his victims in the following way:

• I treat my boys, I mean my victims, better than I was ever treated. I have never forced them to do anything. I loved some of the boys. Some of them will not be affected; some will be homosexual anyway. This was just an earlier experience for them.

   Many child sexual abusers feel similarly to this offender, and many believe that the victim enjoys the sexual behavior. Offenders who abuse adolescent boys most commonly feel this way, seeing the relationship as consensual rather than harmful. Two more examples of such relationships are as follows:

• Q: Did you ever think about the consequences [of the abuse] for the victims?

• A: Not with Danny. With him it was a mutual thing, it was something that we both wanted, even though he was only fourteen.

• I met my boyfriend [14-year-old victim] through another man and the boy told a friend of his. That is how I got caught. All the boys consented to the intercourse, but they were underage.

   Child sexual abusers have a narcissistic view of their power, which is derived from the offenders' implicit theories about the importance of their desires taking precedence over those of the victims. Child sexual abusers made the following statements upon completion of a treatment program, exemplifying this type of narcissistic behavior:

• I thought I was not doing any harm, and yet it was so blatantly obvious that I was. I didn't pick up, or I didn't care, or I was so high in my ego that I didn't think about the other person.

• Q: Why did you continue to abuse her [15-year-old victim]?

• A: Because it was easier to keep abusing her than to get a regular partner. I was being totally selfish.

• Q: Did you think she was enjoying herself?

• A: Yes, because she did not complain.

   Rapists, like child sexual abusers, lack victim empathy and express feelings of sexual entitlement, assuming the victim is less important and should exist to satisfy their sexual needs (Ward & Keenan, 1999, p. 828). They, too, have a narcissistic view of their power and importance. Feelings of sexual entitlement often develop at a younger age, as a child observes the interaction between his or her parents or other adults. The following excerpts are examples of such scenarios:

• Q: You didn't think your first offense was rape?

• A: No.… I honestly thought that men just coax women. I looked at it like, if a man buys a woman a drink in a bar, all you are doing is coaxing her at the end of the date to have a sexual relationship of some sort.

I think I had a lot of wrong messages given to me growing up as well. My father, the way he treated my [mom], well, he sent a lot of the wrong messages.…It was that you could take what you want when you want it. It was the same kind of scenario here. … I was like, you look all right and I wouldn't mind having you. You've got no say in the matter.

   This feeling of sexual entitlement is even more pronounced when the victim is a partner or someone viewed as promiscuous by the offender. Offenders feel they are allowed to treat such individuals either as property or as someone who should comply with their sexual requests. The following two excerpts are examples of this attitude:

• Right up until I was sentenced I was saying this is ridiculous, I didn't rape my wife. But … most of us [sex offenders] … are very selfish. We think only about ourselves. You don't see it at the time; you just think of yourself. It's not until you start thinking about the other side, the victim, that you start realizing there are two sides.

• I run a club … and the girls who were around the club were promiscuous. So I started judging everybody else by the world I lived in. It was attitude. … I just thought that all women were the same.

The Role of Fantasies

Historically, researchers assumed that sex offenders had deviant sexual fantasies, which in turn motivated them to commit deviant sexual acts. Additionally, it was believed that these deviant fantasies were conditioned through masturbation (McGuire, Carlisle, & Young, 1965) and that the fantasies could be modified through deconditioning or aversion therapy (Abel & Blanchard, 1974; Evans, 1968). Even the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 2000) lists sexually arousing fantasies as a condition of paraphilias, indicating that this belief continues to be prevalent (Langevin, Lang, & Curnoe, 1998).

   Unfortunately, there is little empirical evidence to support the notion that sex offenders have more fantasies than non-sex offenders or that these fantasies are more deviant (Langevin et al., 1985). The prevalence and type of fantasies that the sex offenders have seem to vary by type of offender and extent of offending behavior. Pithers et al. (1989) claimed that only 17 percent of the rapists and 51 percent of the child sexual abusers in their study had deviant sexual fantasies. Marshall, Barbaree, and Eccles (1991) reported that 53 percent of child sexual abusers in their study had deviant sexual fantasies, and of those only 29 percent had fantasies prior to adulthood. Prentky et al. (1989) looked at a group of offenders convicted of sexual homicide and found that 86 percent of the serial sexual offenders had deviant fantasies, but only 23 percent of those convicted of only one offense had such fantasies. Additionally, it is impossible to know how many men who have never been convicted of a sexual offense have deviant sexual fantasies.

   It is difficult to accurately measure fantasies in sex offenders, and it is equally difficult to know how to interpret the role of these fantasies in deviant behavior. Commonly, sex and non-sex offenders give self-reports about the types of fantasies they have, though many offenders either deny that they have fantasies or do not recognize that their fantasies are deviant. A second method of measuring arousal, and one that is more reliable than self-reports, is through the penile plethysmograph (PPG), which gauges the circumference of the penis through an elastic mechanism attached to it. Though the accuracy of PPG results is disputed because of methodological variance, the majority of results show that deviant sexual interest is a significant problem for extrafamilial child sexual abusers (Laws, Hanson, Osborn, & Greenbaum, 2000). Results are not as consistent for other groups of sex offenders, and many rapists and incestuous offenders show the same level of deviant arousal as non-sex offenders. For these offenders, there is often arousal to depictions of consensual adult erotica as well as deviant stimuli (Marshall et al., 1999). Even when arousal exists to the deviant stimuli, it is not clear whether the sex offenders fantasized about such issues prior to the commission of their offenses or whether the act itself caused the fantasies.

   For those who do have deviant sexual fantasies, the types of fantasies vary widely depending on the type of offender and the motivation of the offense. Some offenders are motivated by sexual needs, while issues such as power and control motivate others. The fantasies may center on a particular sexual behavior, violence, power, control, or a specific victim or type of victim. As Marshall et al. (1999) point out, many offenders do not admit to fantasizing about deviant sexual behavior prior to their first deviant act. However, offenders who participate in a treatment program may admit to their deviant fantasies upon completion of the program. For example, the following excerpts are from a child sexual abuser prior and subsequent to treatment, when asked about his sexual attraction to children:

DID YOU KNOW…?

• ▪ Did you know that both male and female offenders may experience the offense cycle? Most of the literature on sexual offending relates to male offenders, but female offenders experience a similar cycle of offending. They are also likely to have CDs and participate in the grooming and planning of offenses.

• ▪ Did you know that many “normal” men experience sexual arousal to “deviant” sexual images? Measures of physiological arousal (from the plethysmograph) show little difference in the sexual attraction to deviant images, such as sexualized images of children, between men who have no history of sexual offending and those who do. This is one of many indications that sexual offending is not caused by sexual attraction alone. There are differences in some groups of serious sexual offenders and those who have diagnosed sexual disorders such as pedophilia.

© Cengage Learning

• Q: Are you attracted to children?

Pretreatment:

I am not attracted to them, no, no.

Posttreatment:

You see, next door to me there was a woman with daughters, 13 and 15 years old, and they used to go out in the backyard in skimpy bathing suits in the summer. I used to fantasize about them. About the time my wife started rejecting me, I started fantasizing about these girls … and I used to go down to the beach, I used to go down there to watch the kids, sort of swimming and playing and all that. I wouldn't say I used to fantasize about them, but I liked watching them.

   Some offenders compare their desire to commit deviant sexual acts to a drug addiction. They say that they have to have a “fix,” and though they feel guilt while committing the acts, they desire the act again soon afterward. Whether or not the fantasies are related to the etiology of offending behavior is unclear, the fantasies do play a role in the maintenance of their behavior. The following excerpt illustrates this point:

• All I had on my mind was sexual gratification. Sex is like a drug—you know that when you haven't got it the desire is always stronger than when you have some. So you need someone to give you that little kick.

Behavioral Triggers

Many sex offenders blame their sexual offending on situational and transitory factors such as drugs, alcohol, stress, and loneliness. Though these factors alone do not necessarily cause deviant behavior, they are often triggers to the commission of deviant sexual acts. These triggering factors can act either as disinhibitors, the most common of which is alcohol, or as potentiators, including negative affective states such as depression. Both disinhibitors and potentiators contribute to offending behavior, though they do so in different ways.

   Disinhibitors such as alcohol allow the offender to justify the deviant behavior as being caused by an altered mental state. Many offenders are intoxicated before or at the time of their offenses, and intoxication acts as a link in the causative chain of events leading to the deviant act (Marshall et al., 1999). The offenders sometimes cite alcohol as the reason they committed their offenses, without recognizing other risk factors beyond the alcohol. For example, the following excerpt shows how one rapist used alcohol and drug use as an excuse in his offense:

• Q: Were you drinking or on drugs the night of your offense?

• A: Oh, yes.

• Q: If you had not been drinking or on drugs, would this have happened?

• A: If I had not been drinking or on drugs, no, it probably wouldn't have happened.

• Q: What happened the night of your offense?

• A: I went over to my [friend's] house and got ahold of some grass and started getting wasted. At 8:00 in the evening, I decided to go down to the shop and get some special lager, extra strength. I drank these five bottles within the space of a half-hour. Going into town, I bumped into the girl I had been going out with. I got the sense that she was not amused with me turning up at this pub. So I thought, fair enough, I'll just carry on drinking for the rest of the evening. And at each pub I went into I had a couple of bottles of Newcastle Brown Ale. In one of the pubs, I saw a dealer in there and bought some speed and some acid and I dropped them all in one go. So by this time I was quite intoxicated. By 11:00 I was a … mess. There were a lot of people who witnessed me sitting there smoking drugs.

   It is likely that the drug-induced state of this offender was one causative link in the decision to commit the rape. However, the offender also explained during the interview that he had received divorce papers from his wife earlier that day and had argued with his girlfriend before going out that night. The negative affective states of anger, loneliness, and inadequacy were present, and these likely acted as potentiators for the offense he committed. His level of intoxication during the evening, however, acted as a disinhibitor and allowed him to justify his offense through a removal of responsibility.

   Several researchers have shown a link between negative affective states and deviant sexual behavior. McKibben, Proulx, and Lusignan (1994) claim that rapists exhibit characteristics of loneliness, anger, humiliation, and inadequacy; Pithers, Kashima, Cumming, Beal, and Buell (1988) show a link between deviant sexual behavior and anxiety, depression, boredom, and resentment. When asked about their emotional state at the time of the offense, rapists and child sexual abusers made the following comments:

• I was getting really depressed. At times I couldn't talk to anybody. People would come over to the house and I would just go upstairs.… It got so bad that I wanted to kill myself.

• Before, I would be depressed an awful lot. I tried to get through that by artificial means at different times with the drugs, but they only work for a period of time.

• I felt trapped.… I'd get pissed off, and anxious.… I felt claustrophobic when I got close to people. When I get close to people, I feel like they know me and they're trying to take me over. Not that they're trying to take control of me, but like they know me and I can't get away from them. I wind myself up over it. Maybe I won't do that now, but I used to let it affect me.

• I was feeling frustrated.… I was feeling inadequate. During [the offense], I was becoming more and more frustrated, and I was taking my frustrations out on her. I was angry but I felt like I was losing control, like I was out of control on the inside but on the outside I was controlled.

   Negative affective states such as the ones above may act as catalysts for deviant sexual behavior. However, they also may play a significant role in the maintenance of deviant behavior. Several offenders explained a link between their fantasies and their feelings of anger, frustration, and inadequacy. The following excerpt is from a rapist who said he would set himself up for rejection with women, which would in turn create feelings of anger and a desire for power over women:

• My fantasies were about rape, taking off her clothes, trapping her. I think they started through lack of self-confidence, my own inadequacies, rejection. … I was always setting myself up for rejection so that I would have an excuse to be angry. In my fantasy, I could do anything I wanted, I had complete control. But [during the rape] Lisa kept saying to me “I don't want to do that, why are you doing this to me?” This type of thing was not in my fantasy.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

• ▪ Sexual offenses do not just happen spontaneously. The offense takes place over a cycle, including a series of decisions regarding the potential victims and potential actions against the victims. This cycle includes planning the offense, fantasizing about the victim, grooming the victim (if the victim is a child), making decisions to commit the offense, and rationalizing the offending behavior.

• ▪ “Grooming” occurs when the offender participates in a premeditated behavior intended to manipulate the potential victim into complying with the sexual abuse. Not only does the offender groom the victim, but often grooms the family of the victim.

• ▪ Sex offenders have CDs that allow them to excuse and justify their behavior. The purpose of this rationalization is to alleviate feelings of guilt, shame, and remorse, and often the offender blames the victim for the offense.

• ▪ Sex offenders often lack victim empathy. Though they may empathize with victims generally, they lack victim-specific empathy or empathy for their own victim.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

• 1. What is grooming? What is the most common type of grooming behavior?

• 2. What are the key components of the offense cycle?

• 3. How are sex offenders able to maintain their abusive behavior without feeling guilt or shame? What types of sexual offenders are most likely to rationalize their behaviors?

• 4. Describe the role of fantasies in sexual offending. Is it possible to eliminate sexual fantasies? Change sexual fantasies?

• 5. Give examples of behavioral triggers and how they may lead to sexual abuse. What is the difference between potentiators and disinhibitors?

* From personal interviews with sex offenders in the English prison system.

1. The names of all victims have been changed.

2. Indecent assault is a charge in England equivalent to sexual assault in the United States. It involves inappropriate sexual touching in any way, and can include manual penetration, penetra

5 Types and Typologies of Sexual Offenders

Reducing recidivism of sexual offenders is best accomplished by understanding and identifying the characteristics of offenders and the situations in which they offend. To better understand distinctions between types of offenders, researchers have created typologies, or classification schemes, that utilize offenders' characteristics and/or victim-choice information to outline a framework for analysis. Understanding the interpersonal and situational characteristics that are the basis of offending behavior will lead to a greater likelihood of controlling such behavior in the future.

   Sex offenders, however, constitute a heterogeneous group of individuals and many offenders do not fit into discrete categories. Research in the last few decades has shown that sexual offenders do not fit into “stereotyped caricatures” (Hollin & Howells, 1991, p. 1). Sex offenders have unique personal and criminal histories, and the attitudes and beliefs that support their deviant behavior may vary (Gordon & Porporino, 1990). Additionally, the environment in which the sexual offense takes place should be taken into consideration when explaining who is offending, who is victimized, and in what situations (Wortley & Smallbone, 2006b).

   Much of the research on sexual offenders has focused on the offenders' motivations for committing sexual offenses. Researchers have classified offenders into discrete typologies based on characteristics of the offenders and their offenses, considering both stable (historical) and dynamic (changeable) characteristics. Although some offenders might have similar characteristics, there is no single typology that can account for all offenders. Some background and cognitive traits are common to most sex offenders, yet the heterogeneity of offenders rarely allows for single typologies to be an adequate characterization. As such, some of the more sophisticated classification models (for example, Knight & Prentky, 1990) classify offenders among multidimensional axes. The usefulness of such classification systems, however, may be questionable based on recent research that shows few offenders are “specialists.” Instead, most sex offenders are “generalists” who commit more nonsexual offenses than sexual ones.

   This chapter provides an overview of the literature on specialization of offending and a summary of the existing typologies of male and female sex offenders (typologies of juvenile offenders are presented in Chapter 6 and child pornography offenders in Chapter 7).

SPECIALIZATION AND GENERALIZATION OF OFFENDING BEHAVIOR

There is a significant amount of criminological literature devoted to the study of persistent offenders, or those who commit criminal behaviors over a long period of time (see Blumstein et al., 1986; Wolfgang et al., 1972). Longitudinal analyses have shown that a small number of individuals are responsible for committing a large percentage of all criminal acts. These “career criminals,” or “persistent offenders,” are also more likely to be “generalists” than to specialize in a particular type of criminal behavior throughout their careers (Farrington, 2003; Piquero et al., 2003). Research on sexual offenders has shown similar patterns (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004; Lussier, LeBlanc, & Proulx, 2005; Miethe et al., 2006; Simon, 2000; Smallbone & Wortley, 2004; Soothill et al., 2000; Zimring et al., 2007); sex offenders are more likely to be generalists than “specialists,” and most do not persist in committing many sexual offenses over a long period of time.

   The level of specialization within sexual offending is important in regard to both treatment and policy development (Lussier, LeBlanc, & Proulx, 2005). Many of the current treatment programs as well as supervision and management strategies (discussed at length in Section III of this book) are based on the assumption that sex offenders are a unique group of offenders who specialize in sex crimes (Simon, 2000). Sex offender-specific treatment may not be necessary or appropriate, for example, for an offender who has a career of property offenses and a single sexual offense. Additionally, registration and notification policies are based on the assumption that sex offenders are highly recidivistic. In fact, meta-analyses show that sex offender recidivism rates are relatively low; less than 14 percent of sex offenders are convicted of a new sexual offense and approximately 36 percent are convicted of any new offense within five years (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004).

   Though sex offenders constitute a heterogeneous group of individuals, some researchers have distinguished between types of sex offenders to determine if some are more likely to recidivate or specialize than others. Studies show that child sexual abusers are more likely to specialize than rapists, but they still are more likely to commit a greater number of nonsexual offenses than sexual offenses. Simon (2000) found that incarcerated child sexual abusers are two times more likely to have another conviction of child molestation than other offenders. In a study of 10,000 sex offenders released from prison, Miethe et al. (2006) found that sex offenders as a whole specialized in offense type substantially less than other types of offenders. They did find that child sexual abusers specialized more than rapists, and that the most specialized child sexual abusers are comparable in their levels of specialization to nonsexual offenders. They also found few persistent sex offenders—only 8 percent of child sexual abusers in their sample had three or more convictions—and that the greater number of offenses, the greater the level of generalization. Lussier, LeBlanc, and Proulx (2005) found that both rapists and child sexual abusers were more likely to have previously committed property offenses than sexual offenses, and rapists were also more likely to have committed previous violent offenses than sexual offenses. They did note, however, that child sexual abusers have a later onset of offending behavior than rapists, commit less deviant behavior over their lifetime, and have a higher level of specialization in sexual offenses.

   These findings about the versatility of offending have been consistent with populations of sex offenders internationally as well as populations of juvenile sex offenders. Soothill et al. (2000) examined a sample of convicted sex offenders in England and found that there was a high level of versatility among the offenders in their sample. They did find, however, that when sex offenders recidivated with another sexual offense, it tended to be the same one for which they were originally convicted. Zimring, Piquero, and Jennings (2007) analyzed juveniles with sex crime convictions in Racine, Wisconsin, and found that juvenile sexual offending had little predictive value on likelihood of committing sexual offenses in adulthood. The greatest predictor of adult sexual offending was a large number of nonsexual offenses. These findings were replicated in a longitudinal study of the Philadelphia birth cohort (Zimring, Jennings, Piquero, & Hays, 2009).

   Some researchers have further explored the level of specialization among different types of child sexual abusers. Smallbone and Wortley (2004) studied 362 child sexual offenders in Queensland, Australia, and identified four types of offenders: intrafamilial, extrafamilial, mixed-type (consisting of both intra- and extrafamilial offenders), and deniers. They found that 64.4 percent of the offenders had previous convictions, but that 86.3 percent of those convictions were for nonsexual offenses. The mixed offenders—or those least likely to specialize in victim type—had the most sexual offenses of all groups, with 41.7 percent having previous sexual offense convictions. Sixty-two percent of the mixed offender group, however, had nonsexual convictions, indicating versatility even among those with more sexual offense convictions. Smallbone and Wortley (2004) also found that few offenders were driven by sexual disorders, or paraphilias. Less than 12 percent of the child sexual abusers in their sample had any given paraphilia other than pedophilia. In fact, they found that paraphilic activity was more likely to be significantly linked to nonsexual offending than sexual offending (Smallbone & Wortley, 2006). The Smallbone and Wortley (2006) findings were replicated on other populations of child sexual abusers, including child sexual abusers in the Catholic Church (Terry & Ackerman, 2008).

   Because of the heterogeneous nature of sexual offenders, no system of classification based on the type and motivation of the offender has universal validity. However, it is important to understand characteristics common to the different types of offenders, as only then can they be treated and managed effectively.

TYPOLOGIES OF RAPISTS

Rapists,1 like the general population of sex offenders, do not form a homogeneous group. In order to understand why individuals begin offending, researchers have tried to identify common characteristics among sexual assaulters. Although all rapists display differing characteristics, studies have found some cognitive factors to be present in many aggressive offenders, including negative views of women, endorsement of rape myths, condoning violence, and displaying a hyperidentification with the masculine role (Marshall, Laws, & Barbaree, 1990b; Scully, 1990). Many rapists also display personality deficits such as a sense of worthlessness and low self-esteem, a sense of vulnerability, impaired social relations, a dysphoric mood state (with an underlying mood state of anger, fear, and/or depression), and a mismanagement of aggression (Groth, 1983, p. 163). They also exhibit traits of social inadequacy, thus leading to negative emotional states and ultimately resulting in low self-esteem, stress, anxiety, anger, hostility, and aggressive behavior (Marshall, 1989; Marshall & Barbaree, 1990a; McKibben, Proulx, & Lusignan, 1994). Additionally, many rapists have difficulty processing information from women and misconstrue negative cues and messages (Lipton, McDonel, & McFall, 1987; Stermac, Segal, & Gillis, 1990).

   Rapists often begin committing deviant sexual acts at a young age; half of the known population of sexual assaulters have attempted or committed their first deviant sexual acts before the age of 18 (Abel & Rouleau, 1990; Benoit & Kennedy, 1992; Epps, 1993; Groth, 1983). Rape-supportive attitudes are seen to be strongest in adolescence, and as such adolescence is critical in the development of sexually aggressive behavior (Groth, Longo, & McFadin, 1982; Herman, 1990; Marshall & Barbaree, 1990a). Because sex drives surge dramatically in young boys at puberty, it is important at this time to establish proper sociosexual interactions. Animal research has shown that the development of controls over sexual behavior arises from a socialization process, and it is necessary for human males to acquire inhibitory controls over this “biologically endowed propensity for self-interest associated with the tendency to fuse sex and aggression” (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990a, p. 257).

   Researchers studying rape typologies have commonly classified rapists by the primary motivation of their offenses. Rape typologies can be most broadly categorized as sexual or nonsexual in nature (Barbaree et al., 1994). Though rape is a sexual offense, scholars have shown that nonsexual needs, in particular power and control, most commonly motivate rape (Brownmiller, 1975; Stermac & Segal, 1989). Feminist scholars have discussed how rape is a tool that men use to dominate and control women (Allison & Wrightsman, 1993). Additionally, there is physiological evidence that rape is not driven by sexual needs alone. Some assessment studies of arousal indicate that most rapists are aroused more by consensual than nonconsensual sex (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990b). Rapists also tend to score almost equally to control groups consisting of non-rapists when exposed to violent erotic material (Barbaree et al., 1994). There is also a high incidence of sexual dysfunction during rapes (the offender is either unable to get an erection or ejaculate) (West, 1987). Although this could be attributed to the increased level of anxiety in such circumstances, it is unlikely that sexual dysfunction would occur if rape were based purely on the sexual needs of the offender.

   Researchers have categorized rapists into typologies based on the earlier characteristics and motivations for committing offenses (see Burgess, Hartman, Ressler, Douglas, & MacCormack, 1986; Cohen, Garofolo, Boucher, & Seghorn, 1971; Groth, 1979; Knight & Prentky, 1990; Perkins, 1991; Rada, 1978; Scully & Marolla, 1985; Seghorn & Cohen, 1980). Though there are multiple classification systems for rapists, for the purpose of this book the typologies of rapists in the literature can be summarized and classified into four categories: exclusively sexual, sadistic, power/control, and opportunistic. Those classified as exclusively sexual and sadistic are motivated by sexual needs, whereas those classified as power/control and opportunistic rapists are motivated by nonsexual needs. Table 5.1 shows these typologies.

TABLE 5.1 Rape Typologies

   The typologies are neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive and should be regarded as an outline of the most common categorical classifications of rapists. Although some rapists will fit into one of the typologies, most will be cross-classified into one or more categories.

Sexually Motivated Offenses

Exclusively Sexual   Rarely is rape motivated purely by sexual needs; however, this type of rape is labeled here as exclusively sexual. These are sometimes labeled sexual, nonsadistic rapes (Knight & Prentky, 1990). Like the majority of rapists, offenders who commit a rape because of sexual needs have difficulty achieving normal relationships; they see violence as the only way to secure their goals of sexual gratification (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990a). Freund (1990) describes this as “courtship disorder,” or the inability to form a normal relationship with a partner of the same age. Rapists often have problems with intimate relations and feel they lack the ability to establish a satisfying love relationship with a woman (Rada, 1978). These feelings of sexual inferiority are common to rapists and can lead to exaggerated masculine behavior and eventually rape.

Sadistic   Sexually motivated rapes can also be classified as sadistic, where offenders achieve sexual gratification from the victims' pain and/or fear (Perkins, 1991). These are the most dangerous sexual offenders, whose crimes may lead to sexual murder. Sadistic rapists tend to be predatory, exhibit a high rate of recidivism (which often occurs shortly after release from institutions), be strangers to their victims, use violence in their offenses, and show little empathy for their victims (Ganzar & Sarason, 1973; Hare & Jutai, 1983; Hare & MacPherson, 1984; Pithers, 1994; Quinsey, Rice, & Harris, 1990; Quinsey, Warneford, Pruesse, & Link, 1975; Serin, 1991; Serin, Malcolm, Khanna, & Barbaree, 1994).

   Sadistic rapists share many of the same characteristics as individuals with antisocial personality disorder, though not all sadistic rapists are diagnosed with the disorder (Abel, Becker, & Skinner, 1980). Similar characteristics include impulsivity and aggressiveness, and both sadistic rapists and individuals with antisocial personality disorder tend to live unstable lives with no long-term plans (Hare & MacPherson, 1984; Serin, 1991). Sadistic rapists are often deceitful, irresponsible, and have a reckless disregard for the safety of others. Not only do they lack remorse and show little empathy for their victims, but the pain they cause sexually excites them. They seek out this pain and humiliation in order to become sexually excited, and the level of violence they use often escalates with each offense committed.

   Dietz, Hazelwood, and Warren (1990) analyzed 30 sadistic offenders and described how they are different from nonsadistic offenders. Though there were only 30 offenders in their sample, their study provides insight into the sadistic criminal. They claim that the offenders showed a high degree of planning for their offenses, with most taking the victims to a preselected location, binding them, and intentionally torturing them. The types of torture varied, but included acts such as use of torture instruments, inserting foreign objects, beating, biting, whipping, and electric shock. The researchers admit that their study is not generalizable to all sexual sadists; however, it does give insight into this very serious type of offender.

Nonsexually Motivated Offenses

Power/Control   All rapes are inherently motivated by an element of power and control, and many are also motivated by elements of anger, hatred, and aggression. Groth defines rape as a pseudo-sexual act, emphasizing the desire of offenders to achieve power and dominance rather than sexual gratification. He states that rape is “the sexual abuse of power and the sexual expression of needs, motives, and issues that are predominantly nonsexual. It is the sexual expression of aggression rather than the aggressive expression of sexuality” (Groth, 1983, p. 165).

   The explanation of rape as motivated by nonsexual needs is supported by feminist theories of rape, which view rape as the consequence of deep-rooted social traditions of male dominance and female exploitation (Ward, 1995). Some theorists expand upon this idea further by saying that sexual assaults are attempts to control and humiliate women (Darke, 1990; West, 1987). Darke proposes that the humiliation of women causes sexual arousal in the offenders, allowing the men to dominate and control vulnerable female victims. Although it may be argued that humiliation is a subjective term and the definition of “humiliating acts” lacks consensus, some researchers have noted an increase in “nastiness” of sexual assaults since the 1980s (Lloyd, 1991). Many victims claim that rapists use insulting and humiliating language during attacks, and force the victims to perform unusual sexual acts that they consider particularly degrading (West, 1987). Lloyd (1991) says that one interpretation of this could be that men who rape have an increasingly misogynistic attitude toward women and these acts are performed to humiliate them; however, these “humiliating” sexual acts could also be representative of consensual sexual acts that are now accepted sexual practices. It is nearly impossible to define “normal” sexual attitudes and behavior today, with society forming a “tolerantly critical acceptance of sexual acts” that would have previously been regarded with moral outrage (Saunders-Wilson, 1992).

   The issue of power and control is also evident in rape cases where date-rape drugs, or Rohypnol (a.k.a. “roofies”), are used. This drug can cause the person ingesting it to black out, have memory loss, and lower his or her resistance to sexual abuse. These effects are increased if ingested with alcohol, and this is the likely form of ingestion when used as a date-rape drug. Victims generally report that they are drugged involuntarily when an acquaintance or date slips a dose of Rohypnol, which is odorless, tasteless, and colorless, into their drink. Though Sturman (2000) points out that drug rapes can be either planned or opportunistic, he states that in either situation the offender produces a situation in which he is in control of the victim.

   The role of power and control as a motivation for rape is perhaps most apparent through the extensive accounts of rape during wartime. Soldiers in nearly every war have committed mass rapes of the enemy. Rarely, if ever, is rape during war motivated by sexual needs. Because rape is often associated with “the ideology of masculine aggressiveness” (West, 1987, p. 155), the motivation behind rape during wartime is the need for power and domination over other people. Usually occurring when victorious armies march through conquered territories, rape is used as a weapon to demoralize and destroy community honor (Lees, 1996, p. 59). Rape is often viewed as the ultimate humiliation of an enemy because it symbolizes a defiling of its people. War situations encourage an extreme type of machismo associated with a hegemonic form of masculinity (Connell, 1990). There is evidence that some soldiers have been given direct orders from superiors to rape victims both as a part of a military strategy and as a way to motivate hatred of the enemy (Lees, 1996). Although this helps to explain why some “ordinary Joes” (Brownmiller, 1975) are capable of performing sadistic acts that deviate from normal behavior, it does not explain the many victims' accounts that soldiers appeared to enjoy raping and demoralizing them (Seifert, 1993).

   Rape in war has occurred throughout history, continuing in many cultures through present-day conflicts. It has been documented in wars of revolution, such as in George Washington's papers in 1780, and in wars of religion as far back as the First Crusade (Brownmiller, 1975). Nonetheless, few detailed accounts had been written about rape until World War I, and it was only with the mass rapes in Bosnia that the issue finally came into the public consciousness (Lees, 1996). Brownmiller has called the gang rape by soldiers a normal rather than abnormal aspect of war, although the extent of rape is dependent on the status of women in society. For example, the Vietcong consider women to have status equal to that of men, and as such they considered rape to be a serious crime (Brownmiller, 1975). In other societies, the women may be viewed either as objects that can be used and discarded (such as with the Jewish women in concentration and rape camps in World War II) or as objects that can be used to eradicate the enemy (such as with the “ethnic cleansing” of Bosnia). Even though international laws have been passed that make rape in wartime a serious offense, rape has continued to proliferate in wars that are both civil in nature (for example, Rwanda, Democratic Republic of Congo) and international (for example, Afghanistan, Iraq).

Opportunistic   Opportunistic offenders, the other category of rapists who are motivated by nonsexual needs, are adventure-seeking individuals who lead impulsive, delinquent lifestyles. Also called “recreational” (Scully & Marolla, 1985) or “situational” (West, 1987) offenders, they usually commit sexual assaults during the course of another crime such as burglary. They are “generalists” who commit more nonsexual crimes than sexual ones. They do not specialize in a particular type of sexual offense, but instead commit a rape in the context of their “routine activities” (as discussed in Chapter 3). In other words, they use the environment to their advantage and may commit an offense if an opportunity presents itself.

   Opportunistic offenders tend to be compulsive, and they may have a history of antisocial behavior, characterized by poor social and relationship skills. Many offenders have experienced poor socialization in childhood, which does not allow them access to appropriate sociosexual interactions. This is often facilitated by a violent parenting style, resulting in feelings of resentment, hostility, and the use of aggression (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990a). Langevin et al. (1985) found that many rapists had parents who would administer punishment frequently but inconsistently. He described the fathers as often drunken, aggressive, and in trouble with the law, and said the sons are likely to reproduce this behavior. Knight et al. (1983) further claim that if a boy is taught antisocial behavior and grows up in a hostile home, then there is a greater likelihood that he will become a rapist. A perceived social inadequacy may increase the level of stress and anxiety, which will in turn disinhibit sexual aggression and facilitate offending behavior.

   Although these rape typologies look at varying motivations to commit sexual assault, they do not take into consideration the relationship between the offenders and the victims. Some researchers have attempted to form typologies based on multiple axes that take into consideration all of these factors, believing that sexual assault is very different between strangers and acquaintances no matter the motivation (Knight & Prentky, 1990).

TYPOLOGIES OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSERS

Prior to the 1980s, perpetrators of child sexual abuse were viewed as “a small group of individuals with psychological abnormalities whose emotional disturbances resulted in inappropriate sexual interest in children” (La Fontaine, 1990, p. 99), but this group proved to be neither small nor distinct. It was the emergence of the feminist movement (Brownmiller, 1975), an extensive national survey in Canada that looked at sexual offenses against children (Canada, 1984), and empirical research with large groups of child sexual abusers (for example, Abel & Rouleau, 1990; Finkelhor, 1986) that helped expose the true extent of child sexual abuse.

   Many child sexual abusers display characteristics similar to rapists: they tend to be socially inept in adult relations, have low self-esteem, feelings of inadequacy, and a sense of worthlessness and vulnerability. However, they usually exhibit characteristics opposite to those rapists who are overly aggressive, act on impulse, and are insensitive to victims' feelings (West, 1987). Some child sexual abusers are violent; however, these are rare and tend to be extrafamilial offenders who abuse both girls and boys (Porter, 1984). Nonetheless, they usually seek a mutually comforting relationship with a child, and because of their poor social skills they find comfort in relationships with children that they consider to be passive, dependent, psychologically less threatening than adults, and easy to manipulate (Groth, 1983; West, 1987). Offenders who prefer relationships with agemates might regress to adult-child relationships because of a hindrance to normal adult relationships (Finkelhor, 1984; West, 1987). They frequently see themselves as physically unattractive, have problems with potency, have moral inhibitions, or have previously had frustrating experiences with adult relations. There is often a connection between negative affective states and deviant sexual behavior for child sexual abusers; however, unlike rapists, these tend to be states of inadequacy, humiliation, and loneliness rather than anger and hostility (McKibben et al., 1994).

   Although several researchers have attempted to develop typologies of child sexual abusers (Groth, Hobson, & Gary, 1982; Howells, 1981; Knight & Prentky, 1990), the existing literature fails to render consistent psychological profiles and characteristics that can distinguish these offenders (Conte, 1991). Some researchers study child sexual abusers based on whether they abuse a child within their family (intrafamilial) or outside the family (extrafamilial). Other researchers explain child sexual abuse along three dimensions: age difference, specific sexual behavior, and sexual intent. Still others have classified offenders into subtypes based on an empirically derived classification system.

Intrafamilial and Extrafamilial Abusers

Most typologies of child sexual abusers distinguish between groups of offenders based on the motivation of their behavior. However, it is also important to understand whether there are differences between offenders based upon the type of victim they target. In this vein, much of the research on child sexual abusers has compared offenders based upon their victim choice and specifically whether the offender and victim are related. Overall, studies have generally found that intrafamilial offenders have a lower risk of reoffending than extrafamilial child sexual abusers. They tend to be older and more educated, and they are as, or more, receptive to treatment than other offenders (Gould, 1994). Many studies have found that alcohol and/or substance abuse is common among intrafamilial offenders, and intrafamilial offenders are more likely to be alcoholics than offenders diagnosed with pedophilia (Lang, Flor-Henry, & Frenzel, 1990). Family tensions and negative affective states are also common in the intrafamilial groups. According to Hanson, Stefly, and Gauthier (1993), intrafamilial offenders are less likely than other types of sex offenders to reoffend.

   Langevin and Watson (1991) studied 122 cases of intrafamilial sexual abuse of daughters by fathers and stepfathers. They found that while most offenders had only one victim, the offenders showed high rates of anxiety, had problematic family backgrounds, and showed confused thinking. In a small, qualitative study of intrafamilial offenders, Hartley (2001) found that participants grew up feeling distant from their parents and were commonly rejected by at least one parent. Most offenders in Hartley's study were abused either physically or emotionally and experienced unstable childhoods. They also reported feeling stress in their lives due to jobs, relationships, alcohol, or self-esteem before they began sexually abusing their children. Moreover, these offenders did not have sexual relations with their partners as often as they wanted and had become dissatisfied with the relationship. Some stated that sex was important to them and started to have sexual contact with their daughters to fulfill the desire. Similarly, Miner and Dwyer (1997) found that incestuous fathers who engaged in sexual behaviors with their daughters perceived them as being second wives and expected them to respond as such. Further, Hanson, Gizzarelli, and Scott (1994) found that some intrafamilial offenders, mostly those with a stepdaughter victim, considered their abuse to be an affair.

   The link between intrafamilial offenders and alcohol abuse has been consistent amongst several studies. Lang et al. (1988) examined aggressive behaviors and erotic attraction to females at various ages among a group of intrafamilial offenders, heterosexual pedophiles, violent offenders, and a group of volunteers from the community. The authors found that intrafamilial offenders were more likely to engage in alcohol abuse. They also found that intrafamilial offenders were older and often got angry or yelled at the victims to assume control, yet rarely resorted to violent physical behavior. Erickson, Walbek, and Seely (1987) noted differences between fathers and stepfathers who committed acts of sexual abuse; the biological fathers who abused their children were more likely to have anger and marital problems, be hostile, and have passive-aggressive personalities, whereas stepfathers were more likely to be alcoholics, not care about others' feelings, and have a tendency to act out.

   Some researchers have studied the link between psychopathy and type of child sexual abuser, with consistent findings that intrafamilial offenders were the least likely group of child sexual abusers to show signs of psychopathy. Firestone, Bardford, Greenberg, and Serran (2000) found a negative relationship between psychopathy and deviant sexual arousal among intrafamilial offenders. This study showed that intrafamilial offenders were the oldest group of offenders and were the least likely to be violent. Similarly, Oliver (2004) examined the psychopathy of 638 extrafamilial child sexual abusers, 460 intrafamilial offenders, and 110 “mixed-type” offenders and found that intrafamilial offenders displayed the lowest amount of psychopathy and did not exhibit behavioral problems or have a lengthy criminal record.

   Like other types of child sexual abusers, intrafamilial abusers have been shown to exhibit cognitive distortions that minimize the harm they cause to the victim. Hanson et al. (1994) compared the attitudes of 50 male intrafamilial offenders to those of 25 male batterers and a control group of 25 males who were not receiving any type of treatment. Analysis showed that intrafamilial offenders have more deviant attitudes than the control group and batterers and that they view children as “sexually attractive and sexually motivated.” In the study by Hanson et al. (1994), about 58 percent of the intrafamilial offenders had more than one victim, with a majority being female victims. Most offenses in this study involved exposure or touching, with only 28 percent engaging in intercourse. Results indicate that intrafamilial offenders did not report feeling frustrated nor did they view affairs as being unacceptable.

   Danni and Hampe (2000) analyzed 168 pedophiles, ephebophiles, and intrafamilial offenders in order to differentiate between characteristics of these types of child sexual abusers. They gathered data from the presentence investigation reports and found that eight independent variables—sexually victimized as a child, prepubertal victim, seduction motive, age-appropriate relationships, stress, own child as victim, social façade, and anger—significantly discriminated between these types of sex offenders in approximately 90 percent of the cases. They found that pedophiles were the most likely group to have experienced sexual victimization when they were children, were the most likely to prefer and have prepubertal sex partners, and were the most motivated to seduce their victims. Alternatively, the ephebophiles were the most likely to have experienced external stress, and intrafamilial offenders were the most likely to feel a sense of entitlement to their victims.

   Intrafamilial sexual abusers exhibit some types of psychological and emotional difficulties. In a study of the personality of biological intrafamilial abusers, nonbiological intrafamilial abusers (stepfathers), extrafamilial abusers, and non-sex offenders, Dennison et al. (2001) found that extrafamilial and nonbiological intrafamilial abusers have higher levels of anxiety. The study found no difference between levels of impulsiveness and hostility, but all sex offenders had high levels of depression and self-consciousness. Participants who committed intrafamilial abuse against immediate family members and extrafamilial members had low levels of extraversion while all intrafamilial offenders had low levels of both assertiveness and openness. These findings suggest the possibility that intrafamilial abusers are more conventional and closed minded. Nonoffenders had slightly higher levels of openness to experience; however, both nonoffenders and intrafamilial abuser step-parents had higher levels of fantasies. Intrafamilial immediate family and extrafamilial offenders both showed low levels of deliberation showing that they were more likely to suffer from self-esteem and self-control problems.

   Some researchers have evaluated the relationship between brain pathology and sexual behavior among child sexual abusers. Langevin et al. (1989) analyzed the probability of the presence of brain damage and dysfunction in 160 extrafamilial child sexual abusers, 123 intrafamilial offenders, and 108 sexual aggressors as compared to a control group of 36 nonviolent and non-sex offenders. They found no differences between the different types of offenders in regard to alcohol and drug use, use of violence, educational levels, and whether the offenders admitted the abuse. However, intrafamilial offenders were significantly older than offenders in other groups.

   Some research on intrafamilial offenders has shown that many offenders do not “specialize” in abusing a particular type of victim. Studer et al. (2002) analyzed past convictions and self-reports of 150 intrafamilial offenders and 178 extrafamilal offenders. This study found that 22 percent of the intrafamilial sexual offenders had other extrafamilial sexual offenses, and about 58 percent of the intrafamilial offenders had additional nonsexual crimes. About 53 percent of offenders who targeted biological children had additional extrafamilial victims while about 62 percent of the intrafamilial offenders who targeted nonbiological victims (stepchildren) had extrafamilial victims. Gould (1994) studied a sample of 86 extra-familial and intrafamilial abusers receiving outpatient treatment and 53 who were incarcerated. Though only 20 percent were previously arrested for other sex offenses and 15 percent were arrested for nonsexual crimes, 67 percent had been sexually involved with children before the arrest. Further, this study showed that 43 percent of intrafamilial offenders had extrafamilial victims while only 18 percent of extrafamilial offenders had incestuous victims.

   Thus, while many “intrafamilial” sexual offenders do not necessarily specialize in abusing children within their families, they do tend to differ from child sexual abusers who primarily target victims outside the family. The intrafamilial offenders are generally characterized as regressed or situational offenders, discussed following, and exhibit the characteristics of those offenders. This has important implications for treatment, supervision, and management of these offenders.

The Fixated-Regressed Typologies

Classification of child sexual abusers began in earnest in the 1970s, when researchers began to distinguish the types of child sexual abusers based on their motivation for committing sexually deviant behavior. In the early 1980s, Groth, Hobson, and Gary (1982) proposed a fundamental classification scheme rooted around two basic concepts: the degree to which the deviant sexual behavior is entrenched in the abuser and the basis for psychological needs. Based on this distinction, Groth created the fixated-regressed dichotomy of sex offending, where the fixated offender is characterized as having a persistent, continual, and compulsive attraction to children and the regressed offender tends to be situational and precipitated by external stressors (Terry & Tallon, 2004). This classification system for child sexual abusers is the basis for most typologies of child sexual abusers, even those that add factors relating to social competence and level of interaction with children.

Fixated Offenders   Fixated offenders are individuals who exhibit persistent, continual, and compulsive attraction to children. They tend to be exclusively involved with children, and are usually attracted to children from adolescence (Finkelhor, 1984). Fixated offenders are most likely to choose extrafamilial victims who are either male adolescents or prepubescent girls (Abel & Rouleau, 1990; Simon, Sales, Kaskniak, & Kahn, 1992; West, 1987). Fixated offenders show psychological and emotional characteristics of children (Holmes & Holmes, 2002), and they do not develop sexually to the point of finding agemates attractive and desirable. They are often unable to attain any degree of psychosexual maturity and, during adulthood, have virtually no age-appropriate sexual relationships. The fixated offenders' desires are embedded in their psyche, and as such their actions usually do not result from the negative thoughts and feelings of the offense cycle discussed in Chapter 4.

   Because of fixated offenders' sexual attraction to children or adolescents, researchers claim that they constitute both “a public health problem” (Abel, Lawry, Kalstrom, Osborn, & Gillespie, 1994) and a “criminal problem” (Freeman-Longo, 1996). They recruit, groom, and develop relationships with vulnerable children (in an emotional and/or a situational sense), and these “relationships” often continue for several years (Conte, 1991). Because of their own inappropriate desires, many fixated offenders believe that their sexual relationships with children are caring and mutual, and that the child is able to derive pleasure and educational experience from the interaction (Abel & Rouleau, 1995; Marshall & Barbaree, 1990b).

   Most fixated child sexual abusers have committed more offenses than those for which they have been convicted, and for that reason they constitute a high risk to the community. The extensive grooming process often creates a close personal relationship between the offender and the victim, and as a result the victims are less likely to report the abuse, or when they do report the abuse, there is a significant delay in reporting (Abel & Rouleau, 1990; Abel et al., 1994; Elliot, Browne, & Kilcoyne, 1995). Fixated offenders who abuse boys are likely to commit more offenses than other types of offenders, and of all child sexual abusers they seem to be at the highest risk of reoffending (Marques, Day et al., 1994; Marques, Nelson et al., 1994).

Regressed Offenders   Unlike the fixated offenders, child sexual abusers classified as regressed have a primary attraction to agemates. Their abusive behavior is not fixed, but rather is a temporary departure from their attraction to adults (Simon et al., 1992). The regressed offenders' behavior, which usually emerges in adulthood, tends to be precipitated by external stressors. These stressors, which are an important part of the offense cycle, can be situational in nature (for example, unemployment, marital problems, substance abuse), or they can be related to negative affective states (for example, loneliness, isolation). These stressors often lead to poor self-confidence, low self-esteem, and a self-pitying attitude (Schwartz, 1995), which subsequently lead to the abusive behavior.

   Most regressed offenders develop normal relationships with agemates, and in fact many are married or cohabiting. They begin committing deviant sexual acts at times when they are having negative thoughts and feelings, like those represented in the offense cycle; commonly these negative thoughts and feelings develop at times of unrest with marital relations or as a result of stress, loneliness, and depression. Regressed offenders are rarely attracted to a particular type of child or adolescent in terms of age and gender. Instead, they victimize children to whom they have easy access—often their own children. Intrafamilial offenders tend to spend most of their time with their family and isolate the family from society in general (Miner & Dwyer, 1997). Intrafamilial relations are often more common and more severe in stepparent families, with the most frequent sexual relation occurring between stepfathers and stepdaughters (Redding Police Department, 1996).

   Sexual abuse by a relative can be very traumatic, often more so than a stranger assault, because it is difficult for the victim to avoid contact with the perpetrator and cease such relations (West, 1987). Sexual acts among family members are also likely to be more intimate than abuse by strangers. Stranger assaults often consist of mild abuses such as exhibitionism or fondling, which are not physically intrusive in nature (La Fontaine, 1990). Though most intrafamilial offenders prefer heterosexual relationships, they form sexual relations with the children they have access to, regardless of the gender. Studies do not show child sexual abuse (either intrafamilial or extrafamilial) to be more prevalent in particular ethnic groups, and, contrary to popular perception, there is no significant difference between abuse in urban and rural areas and among various economic and social classes (La Fontaine, 1990).

   Intrafamilial offenders almost always fit the regressed typology, since they tend to be attracted to agemates and develop relations with children for nonsexual reasons. Studies have found that incestuous offenders, like most regressed offenders, have similar arousal patterns to “normal” men (Freund, McKnight, Langevin, & Cibiri, 1972; Marshall & Eccles, 1991; Quinsey, Steinman, Bergerson, & Holmes, 1975). Sexual arousal is most commonly measured through a penile plethysmograph (PPG) as the male is shown erotic material. The control group (“normal” men) generally shows some level of arousal to photos of young children in erotic poses, and it is therefore difficult to differentiate between the groups of normal and regressed offenders. Fixated offenders, on the other hand, tend to show a strong level of attraction to the erotic material involving children. This indicates that, as with rapists, not all child sexual abusers are motivated by sexual needs to commit their offenses.

   The fixated-regressed classification system is not only based upon the degree of sexual attraction to children, but also the degree of violence or force used in the sexually abusive act. Groth, Longo, and McFadin (1982) make a distinction between a sex-pressure offense and a sex-force offense. A sex-pressure offense is one where the offender either entices or entraps the victim into cooperating. Here the offender would prefer the victim to cooperate, and if the victim resists, it is unlikely that the offender will follow through with the abuse. Alternatively, in a sex-force offense the offender uses either intimidation or physical aggression. These offenders attempt to intimidate victims who can easily be overpowered and present little resistance toward the sexual advance. If the victim does resist, the sex-force offender is more likely to use physical aggression to commit the act of abuse, despite the resistance.

   Since it was originally proposed, researchers have tested and expanded upon the fixated-regressed typology, though the concept of a motivation-based classification system has remained constant. The level of attraction to children is a common variable on which to base any classification system for child sexual abusers, though this is not a dichotomous typology. Rather, the fixated-regressed typology is a continuum. Offenders are not simply attracted to children or agemates, but they have varying levels of attraction toward children.

   Simon et al. (1992), who attempted to empirically validate the fixated-regressed typology, found support in their study for such a continuum. They reviewed the cases of 136 child sexual abusers, looking at case history, Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) results, presentence reports, and police report data. They found a continuous distribution of offenders rather than the bimodal, dichotomous classification, and said that in order for the fixated-regressed typology to be correct, it must be considered on a continuum. Table 5.2 outlines the fixated-regressed typologies of child sexual abusers discussed in this chapter.

TABLE 5.2 Fixated-Regressed Typologies of Child Molesters

The FBI Typologies

In constructing their classification system, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) used Groth's fixated-regressed typologies as a basis and expanded upon them, classifying child sexual abusers into seven distinct subgroups. These seven subgroups correspond directly to the original regressed (regressed, morally indiscriminate, sexually indiscriminate, and inadequate) and fixated (seduction, introverted, and sadistic) typologies. Though these typologies are an expansion of the basic fixated-regressed classification system, little research has been done to empirically validate this classification system. As such, few scholars cite the FBI typologies today. Table 5.3 summarizes the characteristics of each of these types of offenders.

TABLE 5.3 FBI Typologies of Child Molesters

The MTC:CM3 Typologies

Like the FBI, Knight and Prentky (1990) also took into consideration issues of social competence and decision-making skills when they revised their original typologies of child sexual abusers and arranged a model based on their degree of fixation and degree of contact. They developed multidimensional typologies of child sexual abusers through a system known as the Massachusetts Treatment Center: Child Molester Typology, version 3 (MTC:CM3). This classification system is based on two axes: Axis I evaluates the level of fixation with children and the offender's level of social competence; Axis II evaluates the amount of contact, both interpersonal and sexual, that an offender has with children, including the amount and type of physical injury resulting from the contact. Each offender is assigned a separate Axis I and Axis II typology. Studies show that this classification system has a reasonable level of reliability and consistent ties to developmental antecedents of child sexual abuse (Knight & Prentky, 1990). This classification system also has distinctive prognostic implications, as shown in the preliminary results of a 25-year recidivism study conducted by the same researchers.

   Other researchers have conducted studies to replicate the findings by Knight and Prentky. Looman et al. (2001) conducted a study in Canada, whereby they classified 109 child sexual abusers in accordance with the MTC:CM3 typology. They were able to classify all of the offenders except for the sadistic types into all subgroups with an acceptable level of reliability, thus replicating the original results. They found differences between the subgroups in phallometric assessments, with the high fixation-low social competence group showing the highest levels of sexual deviance on the Axis I assessment. The only group to show a clear fixation, or sexual preference for children, was the high fixation-low social competence group, the majority of whom preferred male victims and were more likely to have been victimized as children. The deviance indices for their sample for all four levels of Axis I indicated that child sexual abusers fail to differentiate between appropriate and inappropriate stimuli. The preferential (high fixation) child sexual abusers had the highest level of deviant sexual arousal and the greatest numbers of victims, but they caused the least amount of physical harm.

   When analyzing the Axis II indices, Looman and colleagues found that low contact-high injury offenders were the most intrusive in their offenses and were the most likely to use physical force. This group also had a greater number of victims, were more likely to target strangers, and were the most likely to have deviant sexual arousal. Most offenders classified into Axis II groupings were equally likely to choose male and female victims except for the exploitative group, who were significantly more likely to choose female than male victims. Table 5.4 outlines the axes of the MTC:CM3 classification scheme.

TABLE 5.4 Knight and Prentky's MTC:CM3 Classification System

Other Typologies

The level of fixation is not the only factor on which typologies of child sexual abusers are based. Some researchers have examined the static information related to sex offenders to see if their background history is linked to their current abusive behavior, creating typologies based on this information. For example, Baxter, Marshall, Barbaree, Davidson, and Malcolm (1984) conducted a study whereby they analyzed the criminal records, personal history, social-sexual competence, and phallometric responses of incarcerated pedophiles, ephebophiles, and rapists. Their results showed that each of these groups had significantly different criminal and personal backgrounds, though all showed traits of social and social-sexual inadequacy, lack of assertiveness, low self-esteem, and negative attitudes. Otherwise, pedophiles were older, more poorly educated, less likely to be married, were rarely involved in nonsexual crime, and had a higher level of recidivism for sexual offenses. They also showed a higher degree of deviant sexual arousal, or, more specifically, they failed to show a sexual response or erotic preference for adults.

   In another study, Simkins (1993) conducted an exploratory investigation to determine how sexually repressed and nonrepressed child sexual abusers in therapy progress, measuring this change on a battery of personality and research instruments. He categorized 68 child sexual abusers as repressed, nonrepressed, or exploitive based on their psychosexual histories. He found that the sexually repressed child sexual abusers were significantly less likely to complete therapy. He also found the differences between these classifications of offenders on the MMPI, the Burt Rape Myth Scales, some of the Multiphasic Sexual Inventory Scales, and the Mosher's Sex Guilt Scale.

   Laws, Hanson, Osborn, and Greenbaum (2000) conducted a study with 124 child sexual abusers who voluntarily participated in treatment, where the aim was to determine the extent to which multiple measures of pedophilic interest improved the diagnostic accuracy of any single measure. All participants admitted that they had a sexual attraction to children or had committed a sexual act with a child. Only 72 of the child sexual abusers completed the treatment program, and those completed a self-report card-sort measure of sexual interest and had their levels of sexual arousal measured with a PPG (with both audio and visual stimuli). All three measures used to assess pedophilic interest (that is, card sort, PPG slides, PPG audio) significantly differentiated boy-object and girl-object child sexual abusers. Though the card-sort measure showed the greatest classification accuracy, all three measures together showed a classification accuracy of 91.7 percent.

TYPOLOGIES OF FEMALE SEX OFFENDERS

Little is known about female sexual offenders. The research that exists on this population is comprised mainly of studies with small samples, many of which produce conflicting results. What we do know is that female sexual abuse is reported less than male sexual abuse (Travin et al., 1990), the age of onset is generally young (Ray & English, 1995), female sexual offenders usually have young victims (Fehrenbach & Monastersky, 1988), and their offending behavior is often linked to abusive backgrounds and/or psychological disorders (Bumby & Bumby, 1997).

   Most studies on female sexual offenders have small sample sizes because there are so few females convicted of sexual offenses. While females make up about 2 percent of the adult sex offender population, they make up approximately 10 percent of adolescent offenders (13–18 years of age) and nearly 20 percent of child offenders (12 years of age and under) (Ray & English, 1995). Because of the small sample sizes, many studies of female sex offenders are case studies. As such, they produce valuable qualitative information about the female offenders, but this information is not necessarily generalizable to the larger female sex offender population.

   Some of the larger studies of female sex offenders show that the average age of adult female sex offenders is mid-20s to mid-30s (Vandiver, Cheeseman Dial, & Worley, 2008; Vandiver & Walker, 2002). Their victims are usually children rather than adults, and the majority of their victims are under the age of 12 (Freeman & Sandler, 2008). They are just as likely to have male and female victims (Vandiver & Kercher, 2004), and they are often exposed to their victims in caretaking roles (Vandiver & Walker, 2002). Adolescent female offenders most often meet their victims through a babysitting role (Fehrenbach & Monastersky, 1988). Many adult female sex offenders have male co-offenders (Vandiver, 2006; Vandiver et al., 2008), and the victims in co-offending cases are more often female (Freeman & Sandler, 2008).

   Most female sex offenders have been victims of abuse (Fehrenbach & Monastersky, 1988; Jennings, 2000; Lewis & Stanley, 2000; Vandiver et al., 2008), and many have a history of maltreatment and severe sexual victimization (Travin et al., 1990; Vandiver & Walker, 2002). The sexual abuse against them was most often perpetrated when they were prepubescent, generally by the age of 6 (Gannon, Rose, & Ward, 2008; Vandiver et al., 2008). Many female sex offenders are in abusive relationships at the time of their offending (Gannon, Rose, & Ward, 2008), and this is particularly true for those who are co-offenders (Vandiver, 2006). Female sex offenders are more likely than their male counterparts to use alcohol and illegal drugs (Freeman & Sandler, 2008), a characteristic consistent with “regressed” offending described earlier. Some qualitative studies have also indicated that female offenders have low IQs (bordering on mental retardation) (Lewis & Stanley, 2000).

   Researchers have attempted to classify female sex offenders into typologies, though these typologies differ significantly from typologies of male offenders. The most established typologies for females offenders were proposed by Matthews, Matthews, and Speltz, (1989) and Vandiver and Kercher (2004). Matthews et al. (1989) constructed three typologies of adult female sex offenders: teacher/lover, male coerced/male accompanied, and predisposed (see Table 5.5). The teacher/lover typology is composed of women who initiate sexual abuse of adolescent males. These females tend to have severe cognitive distortions, particularly in denial of the harm they cause to the victims. They are often seeking a loving relationship and, like fixated male child sexual abusers, see their actions as loving and caring. They often do not regard their abuse of the victim as harmful, but rather see themselves in relationship with the children they are abusing.

TABLE 5.5 Matthews et al (1989) Typologiesof Female Offenders

   The male-coerced/male-accompanied typology of female sexual offenders consists of females who are influenced by male abusers to sexually offend. These women tend to have low self-esteem, are often unassertive, have poor social and relationship skills, are dependent upon others, and often abuse substances. Their male partners who coerce them to offend are often abusive and violent, and there is likely a history of domestic violence among the partners. Many (approximately half of the adult female sexual offenders in most samples) are coerced into abusing by male partners. Nathan and Ward (2002) found that many of the females in the male-coerced typology were motivated by anger, rejection, and revenge. Though the male-coerced/male-accompanied typology is common among adult females, female adolescent offenders are rarely coerced into offending by male partners (Fehrenbach & Monastersky, 1988).

   The predisposed female offender is the most dangerous and abusive classification of offenders. These females initiate the sexual abuse, often against their own children or other family members. Nearly all of these offenders were abused as children, both physically and sexually. They are often angry and may have deviant sexual fantasies in terms of both sexual attraction and violence (for example, sadism). They are often seeking power and control and are the most likely of the female offenders to have serious psychological disorders.

   Syed and Williams (1996) enhanced the Matthews et al. (1989) typology system by adding two categories of offenders. The first is the angry-impulsive offender, who expresses anger and the need for power and control similarly to the predisposed offender, but has fewer psychosocial disorders. The second is the male-accompanied familial and nonfamilial offenders, to differentiate between incestuous and nonincestuous abusers, because nonincestuous abusers tend to be more serious in terms of number of victims and types of offenses.

   Further expanding on these typologies, Vandiver and Kercher (2004) created typology system for female sex offenders consisting of six categories (see Table 5.6). These typologies are based upon the characteristics of the offenders and victims, and not on motivational factors.

TABLE 5.6 Vandiver and Kercher (2004) Typologies of Female Offenders

   According to Vandiver and Kercher (2004), the heterosexual nurturers are frequently in a caretaking role to the victim at the time of the offense. They usually view the relationship as nonabusive, and they are more likely to victimize males. Noncriminal homosexual offenders often work in conjunction with co-offenders and are more likely to have female victims. Female sexual predators are the most likely to be rearrested for a sexual offense. They were also more likely to have previous or future arrests for a crime other than a sexual offense. Youngadult child exploiters are the mothers who sexually abuse their own children. They are usually younger at the time of the offense. Homosexual criminals tend to be motivated by economic rather than sexual desires. They frequently force their victims into prostitution. These are the offenders most likely to come into contact with law enforcement. Aggressive homosexual offendersare most likely to victimize older women. This group accounts for sexual assault among homosexual couples.

   All of the information about female sex offenders should be considered with caution, as most studies are not conducted on large samples. Little is known about the female sex offender population, especially when compared to the male sex offender population.

CASE STUDY

DEBRA LAFAVE: Understanding the Female Offender

Debra LaFave was a teacher at Grecco Middle School in Temple Terrace, Florida (LaFave & Simon, 2006). In 2004, at the age of 23, she met a 14-year-old student at one of the school's football games. She chaperoned a field trip that he attended, and later began spending more time with him (Crossing the Line, 2006). She began attending his football games, driving him home from games, inviting him to her classroom before school started, and frequently spoke to him on the telephone (LaFave & Simon, 2006).

   When the boy left middle school, LaFave applied for a job at King High School to remain close to the boy. It was during this time that LaFave committed her first criminal act by performing oral sex on the boy while he was at her house one evening (Crossing the Line, 2006). A couple of days after this incident, LaFave and the young boy had sexual intercourse in her classroom. LaFave and the boy had sexual intercourse numerous times throughout the following weeks, all after LaFave picked him up from his home (Lafave & Simon, 2006).

   The young boy's parents eventually found out about the meetings between LaFave and their son. After authorities placed wiretapping equipment on the boy's phone and overheard a conversation between the boy and LaFave in which the extent of their relationship was discussed, police arrested LaFave. LaFave was charged with two counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a person under the age of 16 in Hillsborough County as well as two counts of lewd and lascivious battery and one count of lewd and lascivious exhibition in Marion County, as she had engaged in sexual activity with the boy in a neighboring county (LaFave & Simon, 2006).

   On November 22, 2005, LaFave plead guilty to two counts of lewd and lascivious battery. The sentence of three years house arrest and followed by seven years of probation; a 10 P.M. to 6 A.M. curfew; no living within 1000 feet of a school, church, or playground; no working with or around children; four years of psychological therapy; annual polygraph tests; no contact with the victim until he was 18 and the court approves; no profiting from her celebrity status; no possession of pornography; and no driving alone without the approval of a probation officer were approved by both county prosecutors (Rondeaux, 2005).

Questions

• 1. What is the typology that best fits Debra LaFave?

• 2. Is the punishment of three years of house arrest and seven years of probation appropriate? Why or why not?

• 3. Should she be allowed to have children? Explain the ethical arguments for and against this.

© Cengage Learning

DID YOU KNOW…?

• ▪ Did you know that female offenders have a lower rate of recidivism than male offenders?

• ▪ Did you know that most research on sex offender typologies has been conducted since the 1970s? Prior to that time, little was known about sex offenders as a unique group. Instead, the scholars who studied them primarily focused on individuals and case studies. How much do you think our knowledge will develop in the next half-century?

© Cengage Learning

CHAPTER SUMMARY

• ▪ Individuals who commit sexual offenses share a number of common characteristics, and as such it is possible to create typologies of offenders based on these commonalities. Although researchers have devised a variety of sophisticated typologies, very few offenders fit precisely into any one category.

• ▪ Most typologies are based on the offenders' motivation for committing the deviant acts (for example, sexual versus nonsexual needs). Other typologies consider the type of victim and/or the level of social competence of the offender.

• ▪ Rapists commonly commit offenses for nonsexual reasons, in particular out of a desire for power and control. This is also true of rapes that occur during wartime, as the rape leads to further humiliation of the enemy.

• ▪ The most common basic typology for child sexual abusers is the fixated-regressed model. Fixated offenders are primarily attracted to children, whereas regressed offenders are primarily attracted to agemates; they regress to abusing children at times of upheaval in their lives (for example, ending of a marriage, loss of a job, stress at work).

• ▪ Typologies for female offenders differ from those for male offenders. Some of the female typologies take into consideration the role of co-offenders as well the relationship between the offender and victim (for example, as caretaker). However, most studies of female offenders have small samples, and it is not clear whether these typologies are generalizable.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

• 1. What is the benefit of creating typologies of offenders?

• 2. What is the most common motivation of rapists? Explain through supporting evidence how we know this.

• 3. Typologies of child sexual abusers are based primarily on what factor? How have typologies of child sexual abusers evolved over the past 20 years?

• 4. Why do you think typologies cannot be applied to both male and female offenders? Should the typologies described in this chapter be applicable to offenders in other special groups (such as offenders in the church, military, or prison)?

• 5. If most sex offenders do not “specialize” in sexual offending or selecting particular types of victims, is it even necessary to create typologies?

1. In this section of the text, the term rapist refers to a category of offenders who have sexually assaulted an adult. It is not referencing specifically convicted offenders, and does not include offenders who committed an act of assault against a child, even if that offense included penetration.

6 Juvenile Offenders

Much of the literature on sexual offending relates to adult male offenders. Juvenile sexual offenders do, however, constitute a relatively significant percentage of the population of known sexual offenders. The juvenile population is unique from the adult sex offender population in their characteristics, in their motivations, and in the way that they are treated and supervised. Knowledge of this population is limited, largely because of the lack of reporting or delays in reporting. Much of the information that does exist on juvenile sex offenders comes from self-report studies of adults who retroactively discuss their deviant adolescent behavior (Weinrott, 1996). Despite the low level of empirical knowledge about juvenile sex offenders, they are being subject to increasingly harsh penalties in the criminal justice system. Recent longitudinal recidivism studies indicate, however, that extensive, harsh penalties are not warranted for the large majority of juvenile sex offenders (Zimring, Jennings, Piquero, & Hays, 2009; Zimring, Piquero, & Jennings, 2007).

   Juveniles who sexually offend vary significantly in age, understanding of sexual issues, development, maturity, and availability of coping mechanisms (Knight & Prentky, 1993). Like adult offenders, they form a heterogeneous group and commit a variety of offenses (Harris, 2000). Clinicians and researchers note two distinct groups of juvenile offenders: adolescent and preadolescent offenders. Both groups offend for a variety of reasons, and there are no universally accepted theoretical models that can explain why either group begins and continues to offend (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 1999). There are, however, characteristics, pathologies, and histories common to many juvenile sex offenders. The aim of this chapter is to present an overview of juvenile sexual offenders, their characteristics, how they are treated and managed, and concerns about the increasing sanctions for them in the adult criminal justice system. For a much more in-depth understanding of issues related to juvenile sex offenders, see Ryan, Leversee, and Lane (2010).

WHO ARE JUVENILE SEXUAL OFFENDERS?

Because the majority of literature regarding sex offenders focuses on the adult male population, it is surprising to find that juveniles commit a large number of the known sexual crimes. There are some similarities between adult and juvenile sex offenders, particularly in terms of the etiology of offending behavior, their patterns of behavior, their social characteristics, and the cognitive distortions that help them to maintain the behavior (Ryan, 1999). However, Ryan states that when compared to adults, juveniles tend to be either less aware of the harm they cause as a result of their behavior or more aware and thus more uncomfortable. Shaw, Lewis, Loeb, Rosado, and Rodriguez (2000) found that there is no significant difference between the victims of juvenile and adult sex offenders in terms of the type of offense committed, whether there was penetration during the offense, and the amount of force used by the perpetrator. Alternatively, Allard-Dansereau, Haley, Hamane, and Bernard-Bonnin (1997) found that young sexual aggressors were more likely to engage in penetrative acts than were adult aggressors.

   Epps (1999) found many traits in juvenile sex offenders that are similar to those in adult sex offenders, including low self-esteem, poor social skills, peer relationship difficulties, social isolation and loneliness, emotional problems, shyness and timidity, educational and academic problems, intellectual and neurological impairments, psychiatric problems, gender identity confusion, feelings of confused masculinity, problems arising from sexual and physical victimization, sexual deviancy and dysfunction, substance abuse, and family problems (p. 11). Though all studies on juvenile sex offenders do not support Epps's assertion that these characteristics are significantly increased in juvenile sex offenders compared to nonsexual offenders, nonoffenders, or adults, many find similar trends.

Prevalence, Recidivism, and Characteristics

It is pertinent to understand not only the prevalence of sexual offending by juveniles but also the likelihood that juveniles will continue to offend into adulthood. Several studies have shown that serious sexual predators who have a long history of sexual offending began those careers as juveniles. Additionally, paraphilias often develop prior to adulthood (Abel, Mittleman, & Becker, 1985). For this serious group of adult sexual offenders with a history of recidivism, those who had sexual convictions as adolescents generally commit more offenses as adults (Abel, Rouleau, & Cunningham-Rather, 1986). However, studies show that most juveniles who commit sexual offenses do not fit into this category of serious, recidivist offenders (Caldwell, 2007; Zimring et al., 2007, 2009).

   Using longitudinal data, Zimring et al. (2007) analyzed the offending patterns of individuals in Racine, Wisconsin, who had sexual offense convictions as juveniles. They found that juvenile sexual offending had little predictive value on likelihood of committing sexual offenses in adulthood. The greatest predictor of adult sexual offending was a large number of nonsexual offenses. Zimring et al. (2009) replicated the findings of the Racine study using a separate longitudinal database in Philadelphia. They again found that juvenile sexual offenders tend to be generalists and commit more nonsexual than sexual offenses, and that a large number of nonsexual offenses is the best predictor of future offending. This is consistent with findings in other studies on juvenile sexual offenders (Burton & Meezan, 2004; Carpentier, Leclerc, & Proulx, 2011; Ryan et al., 2010). Burton and Meezan (2004) found that juveniles who sexually offend are about four times more likely to commit more nonsexual offenses than sexual ones. This is also fitting with research on juvenile offenders generally, the majority of whom are adolescent-limited rather than life-course persistent offenders (Moffitt, 1993).

   Despite the low levels of recidivism for juvenile sexual offenders, it is important to understand the characteristics of the juveniles who have offended. The most prominent study on juvenile sexual offenders was published by the National Adolescent Perpetrator Network (NAPN) (1993), an organization that collected data on 1,600 juvenile sex offenders in 30 states. Though this report was published two decades ago, it is still cited today as one of the most comprehensive reports on juvenile sexual offending. That said, it is not without its critics, and some of the findings of the report have come under scrutiny (Zimring, 2004). The NAPN Task Force consisted of experts in the field of adolescent sexual abuse, who together produced a report that suggested treatment and institutional and legal reforms for juvenile sexual offenders. The report culminated in a list 387 “assumptions,” or recommendations. Despite the comprehensiveness of the report, Zimring (2004) criticized the Task Force's lack of a distinction between sexual abuse and sexual deviancy, their insistence upon the necessity of punishment and treatment, the confusion between legal and medical issues, and the questions not asked by the Task Force.

   With those limitations in mind, the NAPN (1993) report provided insight into the characteristics of juvenile sex offenders and their victims. It showed that 90 percent of juvenile sex offenders are male, and 60 percent penetrate the victim in some way. This study also showed that the majority of juvenile sex offenders have committed nonsexual offenses, and only about 7 percent committed only sexual offenses. In other words, most juvenile sexual offenders are not “specialists,” as shown by Zimring et al. (2007, 2009). The age range for juvenile sex offenders in the NAPN data sample was 5 to 19, with an average age of just over 14 years. Broken down, the average age for male offenders was nearly 15 years, whereas females were younger, at just over 13 years. This estimate has been supported by other studies which have found that modal age for juvenile sex offenders is between 14 and 15 years old (Hanser & Mire, 2008). A literature review by Davis and Leitenberg (1987) showed the average age to be slightly higher, at 15.

   The exact amount of sexually deviant behavior perpetrated by adolescents is not clear, though official statistics, studies, and self-report surveys give an idea as to the prevalence rate. Weinrott (1996) summarized official statistics from the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) 1984–1993, which indicate that juveniles are responsible for 15.4 percent of forcible rape and 17 percent of other sexual offenses. Weinrott also summarized the self-reported data from the National Youth Survey, which show that approximately 3 percent of the adolescent population has committed a sexual offense—much higher than estimates given by the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which are lower than 1 percent. According to Becker et al. (1986), juveniles are responsible for approximately 20 percent of rapes and between 30 and 50 percent of cases of child sexual abuse. Letourneau, Bandyopadhyay, Armstrong, and Sinha (2010) estimated that juvenile sex offenders account for between 17 and 20 percent of all sex crimes, excluding prostitution. Ryan (1999) states that more than half of the male child victims and 20 to 30 percent of female child victims are abused by an older juvenile.

   Most juvenile perpetrators are fewer than five years older than the victim, and in the NAPN sample, only 4 percent of juvenile sex offenders' victims were adults. A large amount of sexual offending by juveniles takes place in the home, and 90 percent of the perpetrators know their victims. Of those victims, the NAPN study showed that 39 percent are blood relatives, 10 percent peers, 6 percent total strangers, and many others are known in an acquaintance or authoritative capacity, such as a neighbor. These statistics are similar to the results of a study by Fehrenbach, Smith, Monastersky, and Deisher (1986). They show that of the 305 11- to 17-year-olds in their study, 60 percent had victims under the age of 12. One-third of the juveniles' victims in this study were family members, 12 percent were acquaintances, and fewer than 10 percent committed a rape against a peer. The researchers found the most common abuse situation occurred when the juveniles misused a position of authority (for example, a female in a baby-sitting situation). Graves, Openshaw, Ascione, and Ericksen (1996) conducted a meta-analysis of the literature and found that nearly all juveniles adjudicated delinquent for sexual offenses came from lower and middle socioeconomic status.

   Repeat juvenile sex offenders tend to begin offending at a young age. Burton (2000) showed that 46 percent of the juveniles in his sample of 243 juvenile sex offenders began offending before the age of 12. Also, the offenders who began abusing prior to the age of 12 and continued abusing committed more serious offenses. The NAPN found that juvenile offenders often have multiple victims, with an average of 7.7 victims per offender.

   Researchers have found numerous factors associated with an increased risk of recidivism. Miner (2002) states that juvenile sex offenders are at a higher risk of reoffense if they are young, have victims who are significantly younger than them, and show symptoms of impulsivity. Smith and Monastersky (1986) found that juveniles are more likely to recidivate if they have peer-aged, adult, or male victims, or if they commit noncontact offenses. Kahn and Chambers (1991) found that recidivism is linked to young offenders, young victims, cognitive distortions such as denial and minimization, and poor social skills. Langstrom and Grann (2000) found four factors associated with an increased risk of recidivism: commission of a previous sexual offense, poor social skills, male victim choice, and multiple victims. Deviant sexual interest also appears to be a strong predictor of sexual recidivism, especially in juvenile child sexual abusers (Kenny, Keogh, & Sidler, 2001; Worling & Curwean, 2000).

   Despite the low levels of recidivism overall for juvenile sexual offenders, some juveniles are serious offenders with a significant history of criminal behavior. Some researchers have reconstructed the sexual histories of juvenile sex offenders to better understand the recidivism data. These studies indicate that a small group of serious juvenile sex offenders have extensive criminal backgrounds, often for both sexual and nonsexual offenses (Awad & Sanders, 1991; Fehrenbach et al., 1986). Other studies, however, have shown that sexually deviant behavior in juveniles is not strongly linked to other types of aggressive delinquent behavior (Smith, 1988). Broken down by offender type, Awad and Sanders (1991) showed that juveniles who sexually abused peers or adults were more likely to have committed previous delinquent acts than were child sexual abusers. Similarly, Ford and Linney (1995) found that juveniles convicted of rape were three times more likely than child sexual abusers to have prior offenses, and that more than 60 percent of juveniles who abuse children have no prior offenses. In a 10-year longitudinal study, Hagan, Gust-Brey, Cho, and Dow (2001) found that child sexual abusers (20 percent) have a higher likelihood of recidivism than either rapists (16 percent) or other delinquent juveniles (10 percent). Though their findings did not result in a significant difference between adolescent rapists and child sexual abusers, the authors noted that it is an important trend. Kemper and Kistner (2010) noted that juvenile sex offenders most commonly offend as either child sexual abusers or peer juvenile sex offenders and identified distinct differences between these groups. Juvenile child sexual abusers are more likely to victimize both genders, have higher rates of sexual abuse, and have fewer behavioral issues. Peer juvenile sex offenders almost exclusively victimize females, usually target acquaintances, and are more likely to have more extensive criminal backgrounds (Kemper & Kistner, 2010).

History of Abuse

Many reports indicate that a large number of perpetrators were physically and/or sexually abused at a young age (for example, Becker & Hunter, 1997; Fagan & Wexler, 1988; Fehrenbach et al., 1986; Hanser & Mire, 2008; Knight & Prentky, 1993; NAPN, 1993; Ryan, Miyoshi, Metzner, Krugman, & Fryer, 1996). NAPN (1993) shows that 42 percent of juvenile offenders have a history of physical abuse, 39 percent of known sexual abuse, and 26 percent of child neglect. Awad and Sanders (1991) found that juveniles who molested children were more likely to have been abused than those who offended against their peers. Nonetheless, many studies indicate that the prevalence of physical abuse is higher than the prevalence of sexual abuse in juvenile sexual offenders (Awad & Sanders, 1991).

   Research shows that children are more likely to sexually abuse if they were abused (Becker, Cunningham-Rathner, & Kaplan, 1986). Not only are they more likely to abuse, but juvenile sex offenders who were abused generally begin offending at an earlier age, have more victims, are more likely to abuse both males and females, commit more intrusive offenses, and tend to show more psychopathology than those who were not abused (Cooper, Murphy, & Haynes, 1996; Hilliker, 1997). They are also more likely to recidivate with sexual offenses than juveniles who were not sexually abused (Mallie, Viljoen, Mordell, Spice, & Roesch, 2011).

   Phan and Kingree (2001) showed that in a sample of 272 juvenile sex offenders, the females were more likely than the males to have experienced prior sexual abuse. Burton, Miller, and Shill (2002) found that juveniles who were sexually abused were more likely to abuse others if they had a male perpetrator (or both male and female perpetrators). Additionally, they found that they were more likely to abuse if they were abused over a long period of time and if the abuse included forceful acts or acts of penetration. Kobayashi et al. (1995) showed that juveniles who were physically abused were more likely to increase sexual aggression, but those who showed close bonding to their mother were less sexually aggressive. Prendergast (2004) identified three patterns of adaptation exhibited by youths who were sexually abused. Some deny that the abuse happened and simply repress it; others who “adjust” do not show any adverse symptoms after the abuse; and the final group “accepts” the abuse and believes they are in some way responsible for their victimization. Prendergast (2004) believes this can be used to determine the likelihood of sexual offending based on prior sexual abuse.

Female Juvenile Sex Offenders

Although females constitute a small proportion of the sex offender population, the percentage of sex offenders that is female increases as age decreases (Brown, Hull, & Panesis, 1984; Fehrenbach & Monstersky, 1988; Miccio-Fonesca, 1998; Ray & English, 1995). Whereas females make up approximately 1 to 2 percent of the adult sex offender population, they make up approximately 10 percent of adolescent offenders (13–18 years of age) and nearly 20 percent of child offenders (12 years of age and under) (Ray & English, 1995). Overall, the age of onset for sexual offending in females is younger than the age of onset for males.

   As with male offenders, juvenile female sex offenders often know their victims. Most commonly, they are related to the victim or meet the victim in a babysitting situation (Hickey, McCrory, Farmer, & Vizard, 2008; Vandiver & Teske, 2006). Unlike adult female sexual offenders, juvenile female sex offenders rarely have a co-offender (Hickey et al., 2008). Instead, much of the victimization by adolescent females is the result of them exploring their sexuality in an unacceptable way (Vandiver & Teske, 2006).

   Adolescent females who abuse were often abused when they were young and by more than one offender (McCartan et al., 2011; Righthand & Welch, 2001; Vandiver & Teske, 2006). Female adolescent sexual offenders are more likely than nonoffenders to have learning difficulties (McCartan et al., 2011). They also tend to experience abuse by more individuals than juvenile male sex offenders (Phan & Kingree, 2001), and the abuse is likely to have begun at a young age—often before age 6 (Hickey et al., 2008). Adolescent female sex offenders tend to enact the same type of abuse on their victims that they experienced (Vandvier & Teske, 2006). While both male and female juvenile sex offenders have low levels of recidivism for sexual offenses in adulthood, the rate of recidivism for females is substantially lower than that of males. The portrait of a “typical” juvenile female offender, then, is one of an adolescent who was repeatedly abused, often by more than one offender, who abuses younger children she knows and to whom she has access.

Juvenile Sex Offenders and Non-Sex Offenders: A Comparison

Many studies have compared juveniles who committed sexual offenses either to juveniles who have committed nonsexual offenses or to nonoffending juveniles in order to determine similarities and differences between the groups. Though these studies have provided important information, many have produced conflicting results as a result of methodological variation. For example, Jacobs, Kennedy, and Mayer (1997) found that there are no significant differences between sexual and nonsexual offenders in terms of IQ and academic testing. Similarly, the NAPN (1993) study states that the majority of juvenile sex offenders are either average or above average in their academic work, thereby not differentiating themselves from nonsexual offenders.

   However, these results differ from most studies, which indicate that juvenile sex offenders perform poorly in academic settings (for example, Veneziano & Veneziano, 2002). Awad and Sanders (1991) claim that nearly half of juvenile sex offenders have diagnosable learning disabilities, and 83 percent have some difficulty in an academic setting. Ford and Linney (1995) found that the majority of juveniles in their sample had lower than average intelligence and many school suspensions. Ferrara and McDonald (1996) found that nearly one-third of juvenile sex offenders have a neurological impairment of some sort. Kahn and Chambers (1991) found that school behavioral problems are linked to an increased risk of recidivism in juvenile sex offenders.

   Another difference is in terms of psychopathology and mental disorders. Many juvenile sexual offenders have diagnosable disorders, such as conduct disorder, depression, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but studies differ on whether the rate of these disorders is higher for sex offenders than other juveniles. Kraemer, Salisbury, and Spielman (1998) found that in their sample of juveniles in a residential treatment program, only 32.1 percent had no diagnostic disorders. Veneziano and Veneziano (2002) say that psychopathology is common to adolescent sex offenders, but Cooper et al. (1996) claim that it is only more common to adolescent sex offenders who were sexually abused. Frick (1998) says adolescent sex offenders are more likely than other types of adolescent offenders to show signs of psychopathy, as well as callousness and apathy. Smith, Monastersky, and Deischer (1987) found that juvenile sex offenders show a high level of impulsivity. Kavoussi, Kaplan, and Becker (1988) found that nearly half of their sample of child sexual abusers had conduct disorder, a finding similar to that of Graves et al. (1996). Becker et al. (1991) showed that sexual offenders scored twice as high on depression scales as nonoffending junior and senior high school students, and Veneziano and Veneziano (2002) found the link between social isolation and deviant sexual behavior to be very common. Alternatively, Fagan and Wexler (1988) found that most juveniles who abuse peers or adults are very similar in terms of psychopathology to nonoffenders. They claimed that the juvenile sex offenders showed high levels of prosocial behavior and did not differ significantly from a nonoffending population.

   Another factor with contradictory results in the literature relates to substance abuse by the offenders and their families. Whereas several studies indicate that juvenile sex offenders are likely to abuse substances, all studies do not confirm these results. Lightfoot and Barbaree (1993) summarized the literature on this topic and found that substance abuse rates range from 3 to 72 percent. Overall, it seems that there may be a link between substance abuse and sexual abuse of peers or adults (Lightfoot & Barbaree, 1993), but not abuse of children (Becker & Stein, 1991). In terms of alcohol and substance abuse by the parents of juvenile offenders, a study by Graves et al. (1996) shows that alcohol abuse ranges from 17 to 43 percent, and substance abuse ranged from 43 (of mothers in their sample) to 62 percent (fathers) (Graves et al., 1996).

   Both juvenile sexual and nonsexual offenders show more personal distress than nonoffenders (Lindsey, Carlozzi, & Eells, 2001). This means that they tend to be emotionally reactive, self-oriented, and are unable to focus on the distress of their victims. Though not significant, Lindsey et al. (2001) found that sex offenders tend to score slightly lower on an empathic scale than both nonsexual offenders and nonoffenders.

   Juvenile sex offenders and nonsexual offenders do not differ on all factors, though. Hastings, Anderson, and Hemphill (1997) found that both groups experienced similar levels of stress and there are no significant differences between the groups on most static factors. Ford and Linney (1995) found that there are no differences between juvenile sexual and nonsexual offenders in terms of assertiveness, self-concept, and family history variables.

   There are also differences between types of juvenile sexual offenders. Those who abuse younger children are more likely to show traits of schizoid personality disorders as well as dependent and avoidant traits. Alternatively, juveniles who sexually abuse adults or their peers are more likely to show narcissistic traits (Carpenter, Peed, & Eastman, 1995). Some studies have shown that juvenile sex offenders were likely to witness domestic violence within the home, even when they were not abused themselves (Caputo, Frick, & Brodsky, 1999). However, even though various types of juvenile sexual offenders were likely to observe or be victims of domestic violence within the home, child sexual abusers were more likely to experience this than rapists (Ford & Linney, 1995).

   It is important to note that the methodology of all the studies on juvenile sex offenders discussed here vary greatly. This variability leads to differential findings, and it is difficult to know which studies provide the most accurate data. Weinrott (1996) provides an overview of common difficulties and problems with studies of juvenile sex offenders.

WHY JUVENILES SEXUALLY OFFEND

As with adult offenders, many researchers have attempted to theorize about why juveniles commit sexually deviant behavior. Researchers do not all agree as to specific theoretical models that can explain juvenile sexual offending (APA, 1999), and some claim that there is a distinct difference in the etiology of offending for adolescent and preadolescent offenders. Until the 1980s, this behavior was almost universally dismissed, and sexually aggressive behavior was considered to be normal for adolescent males, or at the very least was a behavioral rather than sexual problem (Barbaree, Hudson, & Seto, 1993; Ryan, 1999).

Experimental or Criminal Behavior?

It is easy to identify acts as sexual “offenses” when an adult participates in sexual behavior with a child. However, when sexual acts are committed by juveniles it is often less clear. The behavior may be consensual, it may be sexual experimentation, or it may be abuse. After all, a juvenile who commits a sexual act with another child may be held responsible for a sexual offense, when that juvenile is not even old enough to consent to sexual behavior. This paradox makes for a complex understanding of culpability in juvenile sexual offense cases. Sexual acts by juveniles take place on a continuum of behavior, and the point at which they become abuse is often unclear. Some acts are quite serious, however, and as such juvenile sexual behavior should not always be dismissed as a “normal” sexual development process (Groth, Longo, & McFadin, 1982).

   Most juveniles who are convicted of sexual offenses commit their offenses against children, and the children tend to be much younger than the child victims of adults (Russell, 1986; Shaw et al., 2000). With juvenile sex offenders, the age and social relationships between the perpetrator and the victim must be examined (Groth & Loredo, 1981). The greater the age discrepancy, the more inappropriate the sexual behavior is and the more likely that the act is not consensual.

   In order to determine whether a juvenile's behavior is abusive, a number of factors in addition to the act must be taken into consideration. Specifically, what is the sexual knowledge of the juvenile, and is there any intent to commit a sexual offense? Many adolescent sex offenders have had some consensual sexual experience prior to the commission of their offense (Becker et al., 1986). Alternatively, some offenders were abused and act reactively, whereas others have minimal sexual knowledge. Because of the vast spectrum of knowledge among juvenile offenders about sexual behavior, some researchers classify juveniles into two groups of perpetrators—adolescents and children—in order to discern differences between the two groups (Calder et al., 2001).

   The amount of sexual knowledge a child has is of particular importance in determining whether he or she has committed an offense. Sexual behavior is learned, and children can learn about sex and sexuality in many ways, such as through peers, television, their parents, self-exploration, and so forth. Some children learn about sex at a very young age, and this can occur through overt or covert sexual abuse, exposure to pornography, or witnessing adult sexual behavior. Some children react to this behavior by acting out and mimicking a learned response, but many do not go on to become adult sex offenders.

   What is normal sexual behavior for children? It is normal for children to explore their own bodies and touch themselves. It is also normal for children to be curious about children of the opposite sex, and for a child to touch a sibling or another peer-aged relative. The question is then: At what point does this experimentation become an offense? The difficulty in this determination is particularly evident in the case of sibling incest. Finkelhor (1980) stated that sibling incest occurs in approximately 13 percent of the population (15 percent of females, 10 percent of males). Sibling incest generally occurs in households where the parents are either absent or inaccessible, or where there is a situation of excessive or open sexual behavior within the home and witnessed by children (Smith & Israel, 1987). The absence of the parents, either physically or emotionally, can lead to increased dependency on siblings (Smith & Israel, 1987).

   Despite the apparent prevalence of sibling incest, many children and families ignore or do not report it (Araji, 1997). As with other sexual offenses, the victims of sibling incest may experience feelings of guilt, shame, and worthlessness. The taboo of incest may also lead to confusion and create a difficulty in establishing future sexual relationships (DiGiorgio-Miller, 1998). These feelings are often exacerbated if the family does not take the abuse seriously, press charges against the abusive sibling, and support the victim in the treatment process (DiGiorgio-Miller, 1998).

Theories and Antecedents of Offending Behavior

According to the literature, the most common antecedents of juvenile sexual offending are family dysfunction, particularly a family environment that fosters violence; lack of attachments and bonds, especially to parents; excessive use of pornography; a history of sexual abuse, physical abuse, and/or neglect; substance abuse by both the offender and the offender's family; and lack of empathy. Additionally, factors such as deviant sexual arousal and cognitive distortions may serve to facilitate this offending behavior.

   Several researchers have noted a significant correlation between family dysfunction and sexually abusive behavior in juveniles. Despite the findings supporting this notion (for example, Smith, 1988), there are few patterns of family dysfunction in particular subsets of juvenile sex offenders (Weinrott, 1996). Though an abusive family situation may increase the level of violence or sexual violence in a juvenile, Kobayashi et al. (1995) found that bonding to the mother reduces the amount of sexual aggression.

   Linked to this is the development of empathy. Empathy is a socialized construct, and therefore it is affected by familial interaction and bonding. Juvenile sex offenders often come from households where familial interaction is minimal or nonexistent, and many of these offenders often experience neglect. Juveniles who experience familial neglect appear to have a poor understanding of empathy (Lindsey et al., 2001). Similarly, many juvenile sex offenders with low empathy scores have poor social skills with peers and experience a high level of social isolation (Veneziano & Veneziano, 2002). Empathy deficit has thus been identified as an important etiological factor in juvenile sex-offending (Calley & Gerber, 2008; Farr, Brown, & Beckett, 2004).

   Though debatable, some researchers claim that exposure to pornography enhances the likelihood of deviant sexual behavior in juveniles. In particular, they link excessive exposure to explicit sexual material, especially when young (that is, prepubertal), to deviant behavior (Harris, 2000; Zgourides, Monto, & Harris, 1997). Many juvenile sex offenders report exposure to both hard- and soft-core pornography. Becker and Stein (1991) reported that nearly 90 percent of their sample of adolescent offenders had some exposure to pornography, including magazines, videotapes, television, and books. It is likely that the percentage of adolescents viewing pornography has increased since the time of the Becker and Stein (1991) study, with the increased accessibility of pornography on the Internet. As such, it will be interesting to see future results of studies with juveniles who are consistently exposed to pornography on the Internet.

   Deviant sexual arousal is also correlated to deviant sexual behavior in juveniles. Hunter and Becker (1994) in their summary of the literature found that individuals who abuse children often have deviant sexual arousal. Becker et al. (1989) found that there was more deviant sexual arousal in juveniles who had been sexually abused. Though this was true of the offenders despite the gender of their victims, those who had male victims scored higher on the pedophile coercion and noncoercion indices. Hunter and Becker (1994) found that there is generally early onset of pedophilia in adult males who abuse children. Additionally, Kahn and Chambers (1991) found a link between deviant sexual arousal and recidivism. As such, it is important to determine whether adolescent sex offenders have deviant sexual arousal. If they do, these arousal patterns must be addressed in the treatment goals.

   Though all these factors are important to understand, they do not explain the etiology of offending behavior. Epps (1999) points out that deviant sexual behavior in juveniles can and should be explained through biological, psychodynamic, behavioral, social-cognitive, social-emotional, developmental, cognitive, trauma, family, and sociological explanations, much like the etiology of sexual offending behavior for adults. One theory about the onset of deviant sexual behavior is the social learning theory (Burton, Miller, & Shill, 2002), which is derived from a developmental perspective. Ryan (1999) explains that this perspective supports the view that deviant sexual behavior is learned, and that juvenile offenders should be able to learn socially acceptable sexual behavior despite any developmental deficits. Some researchers do not agree with the idea that deviant sexual behavior is learned based on the concept of conditioning. Marshall and Eccles (1993) stated that deviant sexual behavior may be one factor in the etiology of deviant behavior, but it is likely a predispositional rather than a causal factor.

   Ryan et al. (1987) created a model of a sexual abuse cycle that follows a theoretical framework for conceptualizing abusive patterns. The cycle begins when the juvenile has a negative self-image. There are a number of factors that may create a low self-image in the child, primarily relating to his or her upbringing. Many juveniles who abuse are sexually or physically abused, and many others come from chaotic or violent households. All of these factors can lead to low self-image, low self-esteem, and situations of social isolation for the child. This low self-image can lead to poor coping strategies when negative situations arise, or it can cause the juvenile to predict negative reactions from others. This anticipation of negative reactions may lead to further social isolation, withdrawal, and fantasies stemming from lack of power and control. If the juvenile experiences a triggering event, these thoughts, feelings, and behaviors can lead to the commission of an offense. This offense, in turn, facilitates the low self-image in the juvenile, thus creating a sexual abuse cycle.

   Once the offending cycle begins, cognitive distortions often help to facilitate the offending behavior. Common cognitive distortions in juvenile sex offenders include the minimization of responsibility, blaming the victim, and minimizing the harm to the victim (Knight & Prentky, 1993; Lakey, 1992). Juveniles also may have distorted thoughts regarding social roles (that is, supporting rape myths) and sexuality. However, Weinrott (1996) states that few empirical studies have yet been conducted to determine the extent of cognitive distortions and their role in the etiology of offending behavior.

Typologies of Juvenile Sex Offenders

Juvenile sex offenders constitute a heterogeneous population similarly to adult sex offenders, and as such, different offenders have varying characteristics and needs and create varying risks. Several researchers have attempted to categorize juvenile sex offenders into typologies in order to better understand subsets of the juvenile sex offender population. One early example of such a classification system was derived by O'Brien and Bera (1986).

   First, they identified the naïve experimenters. These offenders tend to be young, lack social skills and sexual knowledge, and participate in situational acts. Their second category of offenders is the undersocialized child exploiters. Like the naïve experimenters, these juveniles generally do not have a history of delinquent behavior, but they tend to show a more severe degree of social isolation. They often come from families with a high level of dysfunction, and they have a high level of insecurity and a poor self-image. The third typology consists of sexual aggressives. These juveniles are the most likely to use force and violence during the commission of their offense, and they will most likely abuse peers or adults. They may have a history of delinquent behavior, substance abuse, a high level of impulsivity, and come from a household rife with dysfunction and violence. Sexual compulsives make up the fourth typology; these offenders have deviant sexual fantasies that become compulsive. They may be quiet, anxious, and exhibit paraphilic behavior such as voyeurism. Unlike the sexual aggressives, they are likely to come from a rigidly strict and perhaps religious household. The fifth typology is the disturbed impulsives, whose actions are impulsive and may result from psychiatric disorders. The sixth typology consists of group-influenced offenders, who commit offenses to impress their peers. The final category is the pseudo-socialized, who show characteristics similar to psychopaths. They tend to exhibit psychological disorders such as narcissism, lack intimacy, have many superficial relationships with peers, and show a high level of intelligence.

   O'Brien and Bera's (1986) classification system is quite thorough because it addresses major psychological and sociological issues related to the etiology and maintenance of offending behavior. Similarly, Prentky, Harris, Frizzell, and Righthand (2000) created an empirical classification of juvenile sex offenders consisting of six typologies based on their clinical work with the population. Their classification scheme is based on a more basic offending structure than O'Brien and Bera's. First, they differentiated between child sexual abusers and rapists. The third typology is of sexually reactive children, or those who follow a method of socially learned behavior. Their fourth category includes less invasive offenders, labeled fondlers. They also distinguished paraphiliac offenders, or those who as juveniles committed offenses such as voyeurism and exhibitionism. Finally, recognizing that typologies cannot be mutually exclusive or exhaustive, they added a category for sex offenders who do not fit into the defined typologies.

   Though O'Brien and Bera (1986) and Prentky et al. (2000) are the most cited early typology models for juveniles, others also created typology systems. Jacobs (1999) claims that there are three ways by which juveniles should be classified: by the age differential between offender and victim, by the intrusiveness of the offense committed, and by the gender of the victim(s). Graves (as defined by Weinrott, 1996) claims that juvenile sex offenders can fit into three typologies: pedophilic, or those who consistently abuse children at least three years younger than themselves; sexual assault, or those who abuse peers or adults; and undifferentiated, or those who abuse a variety of victims. Becker and colleagues have studied the pathways to offending for juveniles and the outcomes for different types of juvenile offenders. For instance, Becker and Kaplan (1998) identify three paths of behavior for juveniles once they began offending: continued delinquency, continued sexual offending, and no further offending.

   O'Brien and Bera's (1986) and Prentky et al.'s (2000) typology systems served as foundational sources for understanding juvenile sex offenders. However, more recent juvenile typology research has differentiated between juvenile sex offenders with psychosocial deficits and those with more general conduct problems (Leversee, 2010). For example, Hunter, Figueredo, Malamuth, and Becker (2003) studied differences between juvenile sex offenders who abused children and those who abused adolescents. They found significant differences between these groups, most notably that adolescent males who abused prepubescent children had greater psychosocial deficits and were not as aggressive as those who abused adolescents. Using the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory (MACI), Richardson, Kelley, Graham, and Bhate (2004) classified juvenile sex offenders based upon personality patterns. They identified five types of personality patterns—normal, antisocial, submissive, dysthymic/inhibited, and dysthymic negativistic—but were unable to link personality characteristics and particular types of offending. Similarly, Oxnam and Vess (2006) used the MACI to identify three groups of offenders—antisocial/externalizing, withdrawn/socially inadequate, and those with no clinical elevation. Most importantly, they showed that juvenile sex offenders exhibited personality profiles similar to nonsexual offending juveniles. Worling (2001) also used a personality inventory to identify subgroups of juvenile sex offenders. He identified four groups of offenders—antisocial/impulsive, unusual/isolated, overcontrolled/reserved, and confident/aggressive—but adolescent offenders in these groups were not significantly differentiated based upon characteristics of their offending patterns such as their victims' ages or genders.

   Clearly, there is still much to be learned about the different types of adolescent sex offenders and their motivations for offending. Though there are many ways to classify offenders, with little agreement on specific methods or categories, these typology schemes are helpful in understanding the pathways to offending and the most appropriate ways in which to assess, treat, and supervise the offenders (Worling, 2001). By breaking up heterogeneous groups into identifiable and relatively homogeneous categories, treatment providers can better assess the risks and needs of offenders.

ASSESSMENT AND TREATMENT OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS

Several influential studies of juveniles, including the NAPN (1993) report, indicate that assessment and treatment of juvenile sexual offenders is critical in order to reduce the likelihood of recidivism and life-course persistent offending. However, this claim has been criticized in the last decade (see Zimring, 2004). Letourneau and Miner (2005) noted that substantial clinical interventions for juveniles has resulted from three false assumptions that are not supported by existing data: that there is an epidemic of juvenile sexual offending, juvenile sex offenders have much in common with adult sex offenders, and without treatment juvenile sex offenders will reoffend. That said, some juveniles do commit serious sexual offenses, have developmental and psychological problems appropriate for treatment, and would benefit from participation in a treatment program.

   Studies that assess the recidivism rates for juvenile sex offenders show that adolescents who participate in treatment have low recidivism rates (Davis & Leitenberg, 1987; Sipe, Jensen, & Everett, 1998; Smith & Monastersky, 1986). Those who reoffended were most likely to commit property crimes (Brannon & Troyer, 1995). The rate of recidivism is higher for violent juvenile sex offenders, who are more likely to commit further sexual offenses than are nonviolent sexual offenders (Sipe et al., 1998). Early research showed that recidivism rates are lower for juveniles who are offered treatment early on in their offending careers (Freeman-Longo & McFaddin, 1981; Groth, 1979). One flaw in these studies, however, is that they rarely considered recidivism rates for juvenile offenders who were treated compared to those who were not. More recent research shows that most juvenile sex offenders, regardless of whether they participated in treatment, have low recidivism rates for sexual offending in adulthood.

   The treatment schemes commonly used for juvenile sex offenders include family therapies, cognitive-behavioral therapies, relapse prevention, and psychoeducational interventions. In order for treatment to be effective, the juvenile must be accurately assessed so that the therapist fully understands his or her treatment needs (Lane, 1997). Brannon and Troyer (1995, p. 324) claim that “successful” treatment emphasizes high levels of community involvement, stress-challenge education, student interpersonal problem-solving activities, energetic administrative leadership, and extensive staff training.

   Studies have shown that inappropriate matching of risks and needs can actually increase recidivism among offenders (Andrews, Bonta, & Hoge, 1990). This is especially true of adolescent offenders when their behavior is misdiagnosed or considered to be “normal” (Longo, 1983). Additionally, many juveniles who participate in treatment programs do not complete them. This is particularly true of residential treatment programs, as one group of researchers consistently found that just over half of the participants completed the program (Kraemer et al., 1998). Kraemer et al. found two factors significantly associated with failure to complete a residential treatment program: impulsivity and age. They found that older adolescent offenders and those who showed generally impulsive behavior were the least likely to complete the program successfully. This supports other research that indicates younger children are more amenable to treatment. They found that treatment completion did not depend on the juvenile's IQ, ethnicity, or grade level. Hagan, King, and Patros (1994) looked at the number of adolescent rapists in a residential treatment program who were able to successfully complete the program (that is, they were not convicted of a future sexual offense in the following two years). Though 58 percent of their sample committed another delinquent act in this time, only 10 percent were convicted of another sexual offense.

   Treatment should focus on offense-specific interventions to address the realities of the developmental needs and deficits of the juveniles. Treatment should also address offense-related issues such as substance abuse, eating disorders, childhood abuse, domestic violence that the juvenile may have witnessed, other crimes such as property offenses and arson, self-abusive behavior such as eating disorders and suicidal tendencies, and any behavior that harms others (Ryan, 1999). Because their sample showed a high level of generally delinquent behavior, Hagan et al. (1994) stated that treatment should also focus on antisocial criminal behavior. They found that antisocial behavior is likely to continue post-treatment if it is not specifically addressed in the program.

The Assessment Process

The assessment process for adolescent sex offenders is very detailed and time consuming, because these assessments require multiple interviews with the adolescents and their parents (APA, 1999). Though the process varies from institution to institution, the National Task Force on Juvenile Sexual Offending promotes six stages of evaluations: the pretrial investigative assessment; the presentencerisk assessmentto determine placement and prognosis; the post-adjudication clinical assessment to address treatment issues and modes; a needs assessment for treatment planning and progress in treatment; an assessment for release or the termination from treatment program, which aims to determine community safety and successful application of treatment tools; and a follow-up assessment to monitor the juvenile in the community. Most clinicians recommend this thorough assessment process, based on multiple resources rather that a single clinical or actuarial risk assessment tool (Rich, 2011).

   The primary goal of the assessment process is to accurately identify the risks and needs of the offenders, and to make sure that the juvenile understands the dynamics of his or her offense (DiGiorgio-Miller, 1994). This means that the treatment provider must find out detailed information about the deviant act, including the degree of damage inflicted on the victim and whether the goal of the act was to control, degrade, or embarrass the victim, as these are factors that alert experts to juveniles suffering from paraphilias. Additionally, it is important to establish the sophistication of the deviant sexual act and to assess whether the knowledge demonstrated is beyond the average knowledge of children in the particular age group (APA, 1999). If so, this likely means that the child was abused or has been exposed to deviant sexual behavior previously.

   Treatment providers must also aim to find out the true rate of abuse caused by the juvenile. In their research of three treatment programs, Baker, Tabacoff, Tornusciolo, and Eisenstad (2001) found that more than half of the juveniles in the sample disclosed more offenses and/or victims than those for which they were convicted. Throughout the treatment, the juveniles also revealed more information about previous sexual and physical abuse, and information about the abusive household they live in (often with the father subjecting the mother to domestic violence incidents).

   In order to accurately identify the risks and needs of the juveniles, the treatment provider should use various assessment tools including official documents (that is, police records, victim statements), interviews, phallometric testing, polygraphs, and psychometric testing (Righthand & Welch, 2001). The official documents are necessary to understand the specifics of the crime committed, including the amount of harm caused to the victim. The interviews allow the treatment provider to assess the offender's sexual knowledge, family history, abuse history, and cognitive distortions, including the amount of denial, minimization, justification, and whether the offender feels any empathy toward his or her victim. Phallometric testing should be used to determine the level of deviant sexual arousal in the offender. Though this is ethically questionable and should not be considered an entirely accurate method by which deviant sexual arousal can be measured, it can give the treatment provider some basic understanding of the offender's arousal patterns. Polygraphs should be used throughout both the assessment and treatment processes to ensure that the offender is being truthful about his or her offense and offense history. Finally, psychometric tests are pertinent in understanding factors such as the offender's IQ, whether he or she has any diagnosable disorders, whether he or she shows traits of psychopathy, and his or her opinions about sexual issues (that is, supporting rape myths).

The Treatment Process

Once the juvenile offender is fully assessed, the treatment provider should determine what type of program is appropriate for the juvenile. Many clinicians promote a cognitive-behavioral approach to treating juvenile offenders, similarly to those used for adults (for example, Charles & McDonald, 1996; O'Reilly, Morrison, Sheerin, & Carr, 2001), though there is no consensus that this approach is best for all juveniles. For instance, Brannon and Troyer (1995) suggest that specialized programs are equivalent to general treatment programs that work to improve social skills, self-esteem, and other general problems that the juvenile may be experiencing. Also, juveniles diagnosed as psychopathic should be considered high-risk offenders who need extensive treatment beyond the core cognitive-behavioral program (Reiss, Grubin, & Meux, 1996).

   O'Reilly et al. (2001) claim group-based cognitive-behavioral approaches are the most beneficial for the majority of juvenile offenders. The group-based approach, specifically in terms of relapse prevention, helps to motivate juvenile sex offenders to change their behavior. The cognitive-behavioral group treatment process aims to help juvenile offenders address problems with their interpersonal relationship skills, which are often an antecedent to deviant sexual behavior. This process also helps the offender learn to take responsibility for his or her actions, reduce and restructure cognitive distortions, and learn about sex education (Grant & MacDonald, 1996).

   There are several goals of a juvenile sex offender treatment program. According to Righthand and Welch (2001, p. 43), the target areas of treatment are impaired social skills; empathy deficits; cognitive distortions; deviant sexual arousal; problematic management of emotions; impulsive, antisocial behavior; and consequences of personal history of child maltreatment. Focus on antisocial behavior is especially pertinent as numerous studies have suggested that sexual offending is one antisocial behavior in a midst of general criminal behavior. Though all of these factors must be addressed in treatment, Ryan (1999) states that the key to treatment for juveniles is victim empathy and empathic accountability. She states that “the absence of empathic accountability is the most obvious deficit in abusers” (p. 428). This is particularly important for offenders who have experienced neglect, which may be linked to a lack of empathy. Early interventions (for example, treatment early on in the juvenile's offending career) may help to increase empathic accountability (Hagan et al., 1994).

MANAGEMENT OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS

Supervision and management strategies for sex offenders have increased in frequency and severity in the last two decades. Unfortunately, this has also trickled down to include juvenile as well as adult offenders. In particular, the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (Adam Walsh Act), passed in 2006, requires that juveniles adjudicated delinquent of aggravated sexual abuse, who were at least 14 years of age at the time of the offense, register as a sex offender and submit to notification. Such requirements will lead to juveniles being registered sex offenders for decades or even life, restriction of residency location and types of jobs, and notification to the community about the acts committed. Considering the statistics that show how the large majority of juvenile sex offenders are not life-persistent offenders, these consequences for juveniles are quite extreme. This act, and the collateral consequences that may result from it, is discussed in more detail in Chapter 10.

   When juvenile sex offenders are living in the community, there are numerous agencies involved in their supervision process including child protection services, child and family services, social services, treatment providers, the police, and probation. For serious juvenile sex offenders who are at high risk to reoffend, the key to effective treatment, supervision, and management is a multiagency approach in which the agencies work together to reduce the chance of recidivism (Erooga & Masson, 1999).

   With the passing of SORNA, the agencies most responsible for supervising juvenile sex offenders in the community have moved from social service agencies to criminal justice agencies. This is a move away from the goal of a juvenile justice system, which was to help the juvenile offender, provide services, and avoid stigmatization. Researchers almost universally disagree with the recent move toward increased criminal and civil sanctions (Zimring, 2004) and decreased judicial discretion for juvenile sex offenders (Bowater, 2008).

   As of 2010, juveniles accounted for up to 10 percent of all registered sex offenders (Letourneau et al., 2010). If juveniles do account for 20 to 30 percent of rapes or attempted rapes, the number of registered juvenile sex offenders will increase substantially. As Becker (1998) noted more than a decade ago, there should be caution in applying such supervision and management techniques to the juvenile population, because there need to be further longitudinal studies on juvenile sex offenders to determine what their true long-term risks are.

DID YOU KNOW…?

Moving Away From the Juvenile Justice System Philosophy

The juvenile justice system was created in the late 19th century. Prior to this time, juveniles accused of committing crimes were processed through the adult criminal justice system. The focus of the juvenile justice system was to rehabilitate juveniles, rather than to imprison and punish them. The juvenile justice system essentially acted as the parents of the child, a philosophy known as parens patriae. In doing so, the court would make decisions about what to do with the juvenile offender based on the juvenile's best interests.

   Over the last three decades, juvenile courts have become the subject of debate, specifically as to whether to “get tough” or “treat.” Advocates of the get tough philosophy have claimed that the juvenile justice system is lenient, does not deter crime, and does not protect the community. Advocates of the parens patriae philosophy claim that most juveniles only commit minor offenses, punishment can do more harm than good, most juveniles age-out of delinquent behavior, and that the adult system will label and stigmatize juveniles. The research on juvenile sexual offenders also shows that most do not go on to become adult sexual offenders. Despite all the potential setbacks of harsh sentences for juveniles, the justice system is increasingly creating harsher sanctions for juveniles for many offenses.

Questions

• 1. What should be the primary focus of the justice system when a juvenile commits a sexual offense—community protection or the best interests of the juvenile offender? What are the drawbacks of each of these?

• 2. What might be the long-term effects of having juvenile sex offenders register and be subject to community notification?

© Cengage Learning

CHAPTER SUMMARY

• ▪ Like adults, juveniles who commit sexual offenses make up a heterogeneous group of individuals. They have various family histories, offend for a number of different reasons, and require different methods of treatment and supervision.

• ▪ Most juveniles who commit sexual offenses are not persistent life-course offenders. Instead, the majority are adolescent-limited offenders. Additionally, most adolescent sexual offenders commit more nonsexual offenses than sexual ones.

• ▪ As with adults, researchers classify juvenile sex offenders into typologies. However, unlike with adults, the juvenile typologies tend to be based on levels of psychosocial development and/or attachment and bonds to family.

• ▪ Juveniles are often dismissed out of the criminal justice system prior to conviction. However, when their cases do go to court and the juveniles are found delinquent, they receive an extensive assessment process and treatment regime.

• ▪ Many juvenile sex offenders are now subject to registration and notification schemes like adults. Researchers have indicated that such sanctions can lead to more harm than good for juveniles, and there is no evidence yet as to the effectiveness of these management strategies for reducing recidivism in the juvenile population.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

• 1. What are some of the similarities and differences between adult and juvenile sexual offenders?

• 2. How can criminal justice officials or psychologists distinguish between juveniles who are “experimenting” with sexual behavior and those who are committing criminal acts?

• 3. Explain the benefits and the problems with juveniles having to register as sex offenders.

• 4. Should juvenile sex offenders be allowed to attend school? Should the offenders' classmates be notified about their offending behavior?

CASE STUDY

GENARLOW WILSON: Does the Punishment Fit the Crime?

On December 30, 2003, 17-year-old Genarlow Wilson attended a New Year's Eve party with a group of friends in Douglas County, Georgia. Wilson was a star athlete of the football and soccer teams, was an honor student, and Douglas County High School's first ever homecoming king (Dewan, 2006). The party was held at a local hotel and partygoers participated in drug use, alcohol consumption, and sexual activity. One of the attendees brought along a video camera to document the party. It was on this video camera that Genarlow Wilson was seen receiving oral sex from a 15-year-old girl also attending the party (Redmon & Joyner, 2007).

   Under Georgia's 1995 Child Protection Act, oral sex with a 15 year old constituted aggravated child molestation. This crime was punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in prison and lifetime registration on Georgia's sex offender registry (Downey, 2008). The video showing Wilson and the 15-year-old girl engaging in oral sex was brought to prosecutors by a third party. Prosecutors then decided to charge Wilson with aggravated child molestation (Dewan, 2006).

   Wilson claimed that the acts were consensual. So did the 15-year-old alleged victim and her mother, Veda Cannon (Redmon & Joyner, 2007). Despite these claims that the sexual activity was consensual, Douglas County District Attorney David McDade decided to pursue the charges against Genarlow Wilson and five other teenage boys seen engaging in sexual activity with another girl on the video tape. McDade argued that the six boys, including Genarlow Wilson, had gang raped a 17-year-old girl who attended the party and engaged in repeated sex acts with the 15-year-old girl (Dewan, 2007).

   Despite arguments by Wilson's lawyer, B. J. Bernstein, that the acts were consensual for all parties involved, Georgia law stated that an individual under the age of 16 was unable to consent to any kind of sexual activity. As a result, prosecutor McDade charged Wilson with rape and aggravated child molestation. Upon reviewing the video tape, the jury disagreed with the prosecutor's charge of rape and acquitted Wilson of this charge. While the jury did not feel that Wilson was guilty of statutory rape due to the consensual nature of the act, according to law they were bound to find him guilty of aggravated child molestation (Dewan, 2007). On April 18 2005, Wilson was found guilty of aggravated child molestation and sentenced to 10 years in prison without the possibility of parole and lifetime registration as a sex offender (Redmon & Joyner, 2007).

   The case just described illustrates how juvenile sex offenders can often be forced to register as sex offenders due to consensual and sometimes normal adolescent acts. The case of Genarlow Wilson brings to light the question of whether statutory rape laws should be applied to juveniles when the age difference is minimal. Wilson is not at a high risk of sexual offending in the future, but due to his conviction, he is forced to register as one for the rest of his life.

Questions

• 1. What are the benefits and problems of statutory rape laws?

• 2. Should there be a minimum age differential between victim and perpetrator for an act to be considered statutory “rape”?

• 3. Should sexual behavior between adolescents be policed?

• 4. What sanction, if any, should have been applied to Genarlow Wilson?

© Cengage Learning

7 Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children

The types and level of sexual exploitation of children and adolescents have increased substantially in the last few decades. Technological advances allow for the more discreet exploitation of children, with computers and digital cameras, and the Internet provides a forum for mass distribution as never before. Cameras on phones and computers provide the opportunity for children and adolescents to take photos of themselves, send them to friends or post them online. And while social media and other forums have provided access to a globalized world, it has also exposed children and adolescents to dangers in unprecedented levels.

   The good news is that children are becoming more educated about the dangers of technology, particularly in regard to meeting and talking to strangers. Yet they underestimate the dangers of their own behaviors, such as texting naked photos of themselves to friends and posting personal information online. But the exploitation of juveniles is not just online; rather, some adolescent boys and girls have become involved in prostitution, either for money or survival (in exchange for a place to live, food, etc.). Recent studies about juvenile prostitution have just begun to show the reality of the population of juveniles who are sexually exploited by adults, how they became involved in prostitution, and why they cannot get out. Though pimps and human traffickers play a role, more juveniles are sexually exploited through peers or others close to them.

   Research on the exploitation of children and responses to it are nascent, as the types of exploitation continue to evolve. This chapter provides an overview of the exploitation of children online and offline, the types of adults who exploit children and adolescents, and the laws that govern this behavior.

SEXUAL OFFENDERS AND THE INTERNET

The dangers of child pornography and the Internet are threefold: children are being exploited for pornographic images, children are accessing pornographic images, and children are being solicited online. Child pornography is the depiction of sexually explicit behavior involving a minor under the age of 18 years, though the exact definitions of “child” and “pornography” vary by state and country. In the United States, child pornography includes actual or simulated: vaginal intercourse, oral or anal intercourse, bestiality, masturbation, sexually sadistic or masochistic behavior, and exhibition of the genitals of minors under the age of 18 (U.S. Code, Title 18 § 2256). Some states have adapted this definition to also include offenses such as penetration of the vagina or rectum digitally or with foreign objects, and excretory functions performed in a lewd manner. Images are also considered pornographic if the child is the focal point of a sexually suggestive setting; the child is in an unnatural pose or in inappropriate attire; the depiction suggests coyness or willingness to engage in sexual activity; or the depiction is intended to elicit a sexual response in the viewer. As of 2003, when the PROTECT Act was enacted, virtual and computer-generated sexual images of children are also illegal.

   The definition of, and response to, child pornography is a social construction, based upon the culture and time period (Jenkins, 2001). Though many international organizations, such as Interpol (International Criminal Police Organization) and ECPAT (End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography, & Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes), use vague definitions of child pornography, they agree on the general tenets of what constit