Introduction
Juvenile sex offenses have increased in the last decade. In earlier history, children were treated as “mini adults.” It wasn’t until the 1900s that juvenile courts even came into existence, and as late as the 1950s it was recognized that childhood was a “long and powerless phase in the cycle of life” (Empey, Stafford, and Hay, 1999).
Berlinger (1998) states, “The social policy response to adolescents who commit sexual offenses has undergone dramatic change since the early 1980s. Prior to this time, acts of child molestation or rape by teenagers were often dismissed or trivialized. These youth were seldom prosecuted, and treatment programs were rare” (p. 1). Juveniles who committed sex crimes were not required to accept any accountability for their actions (Ryan, et. al, 1996). Unfortunately, it has only been during the last couple of decades that research has been devoted to Juvenile sex offenders (JSOs); therefore, research regarding recidivism rates and many other aspects of juvenile sex offenses do not have the long-term studies behind them that many of the studies of adult sex offenders have.
JSOs do not necessarily develop into adult sex offenders or serial offenders, but most adults who sexually abuse children begin offending in adolescence (Glazer, 1996; Ryan, et. al, 1996; Zolondel, et. al, 2001).
Little research previously existed on JSOs, because the concept of juvenile sex offenders as a classification of offender separate and different from adult sex offenders is new. Only been in the last decade or so has research been devoted to the area. Some of the research is contradictory, and because research is relatively new, little long-term research on recidivism rates, effectiveness of treatment, and rehabilitation exists; therefore, additional research should be devoted to this area of study.
Who Are Juvenile Sex Offenders?
The research surrounding JSOs is relatively small in comparison to research in other areas. Brown and Kolko (1998) state, “there is no universally accepted terminology to describe these children” (p. 8). Brown and Kolko (1998) further state,“…JSAs [Juvenile sexual abusers] are a complex group, experiencing a variety of psychiatric and behavior difficulties. . . .We also have limited empirical understanding of the role of the entire system (i.e., lawyers, judges, probation officers, service providers, teachers, families) in the treatment of JSAs” (p. 1-2).
It is estimated that juveniles are responsible for “15 to 20 percent of all rapes and 30 to 60 percent of child sexual assault cases committed in the United States” (Hunter, 2000, 1). There are many variables when discussing Juvenile Sex Offenders (JSOs). Child maltreatment, social development, sexual knowledge, academic and cognitive development and mental health all factor into the behaviors of a JSO (Righthand and Welch, 2001). Researchers found that of JSOs studied, only “one-third of the juveniles perceived sex as a way to demonstrate love or caring for another person” whereas 25 percent felt sex was a means to “feel power and control,” 9 percent believed sex was an avenue to dispel anger, and 8 percent felt that sex was to “hurt, degrade, or punish” a person (Righthand and Welch, 2001, p. xii).
Juvenile Sex Offenders are typed and classified into the following categories: “naïve experimenters, undersocialized child exploiters, sexual aggressives, sexual compulsives, disturbed impulsives, group influenced, and pseudosocialized” (Righthand and Welch, 2001, p. xiii). Adult serial sex offenders are also typed and classified, as will be discussed later.
Righthand and Welch (2001) state that females have committed more juvenile sex offenses than males, and that there were little differences in the aggressiveness of the offenses between female and male offenders.
Psychology and Characteristics of Sex Offenders
Some researchers have found many similarities between juvenile and adult sex offenders (Berlinger, 1998). Berlinger (1998) states, “They many engage in serious sexual crimes, have multiple victims, exhibit deviant sexual preferences, have comparable cognitive distortions, and lack victim empathy” (p. 1).
It seems that JSOs use coercion more than violence in the commission of their crimes. They appear to only use as much aggression or violence as is necessary to carry out the crime (Zolondel, et. al, 2001), and like adult sex offenders, 33 percent of JSOs blame their victims, and 48 percent stated that when molesting a much younger child (five or more years younger), the younger child either initiated the activity or it was mutual.
Zolondel, et. al, (2001) state that JSOs engage more in fetishisms, obscene phone calls, child molestation and phone sex, whereas adult sex offenders have a higher rate of involvement in zoophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism, sadism, and use of pornography. Transsexualism and transvestitism were equal for both JSOs and adult sex offenders.
Recidivism Rates Of Sex Offenders
In one study conducted, 37 percent of JSOs committed sexual offenses as adults (Righthand and Welch, 2001). Other research has found that subsequent to a JSOs offenses becoming “public,” recidivism rates are low (Righthand and Welch, 2001), and Zolondel, et. al (2001) state that in the event a JSO commits further offenses following treatment, they will more likely commit non-sexual offenses. Comparing numerous studies of JSOs, it was found that relatively few JSOs were arrested for sex offenses as adults (Righthand and Welch, 2001).
Brown and Kolko (1998) state that first-time, adjudicated JSOs admitted that they had committed anywhere from two to five sexual offenses before being caught, and goes on further, “…an adolescent abuser who continues a paraphiliac pattern into adulthood may perform 380 sexually abusive acts during his lifetime” (p. 2).
Righthand and Welch (2001) mention that some factors can increase recidivism rates for JSOs. “…[A]dolescent sex offenders were probably more likely to reoffend if one or more of the following factors were present: initial offending was pleasurable, consequences for the offense were minimal, the deviant sexual behavior was reinforced through masturbation or fantasy, and/or the offender had social skills deficits” (Righthand and Welch, 2001, p. 32).
Brown and Kolko (1998) state, “…the younger the offender is, the greater the likelihood is of criminal reoffense. In addition, male JSAs who had committed at least one recent sexual offense against boys were somewhat more likely to reoffend than were those who had victimized only girls” (p. 7).
Hunter (2000) states, “fewer than 10 percent of either group of juvenile sexual offenders were under the influence of alcohol or other drugs at the time of the offense” (p. 2) when sexual homicides were committed. Hunter (2000) further indicates that of juvenile sexual killers studied, 28.6 percent of offenders “intentionally tortured their victims,” 42.9 took items from the victim’s house, 14.3 percent involved penis/anal rape, penis/vaginal rape occurred in 42.9 percent of the cases, in 28.6 percent of the offenses, penetration with a foreign object occurred, and a staggering 42.9 of the cases involved post-mortem rape (p. 2). These activities appear very similar to many of the activities of serial adult offenders, with profilers noting many of these same activities when creating a profile.
Treatment and Rehabilitation methods
Researchers have found that parents are losing control of their children, and as they do, the public becomes more in favor of trying violent juvenile offenders as adults. Hunter and Lexier (1998) state, “public disenchantment with the seemingly intractable problem of juvenile violence has led to a “’more punitive, just-desserts juvenile justice model’”(p. 2).
Juvenile sex offenses are increasing. In 1986 there were less than 350 treatment programs for juvenile sex offenders. By 1992, the number had more than doubled to 750 (Hunter and Lexier, 1998). Over the last decade, laws and regulations surrounding the juvenile justice system have dramatically changed. Many states now try juveniles as adults. Hunter and Lexier (1998) state that “[t]he number of delinquency cases waived to the adult criminal courts increased by 71% between 1985 and 1994” (p. 1). Almost half of the states have no minimum age requirements for trying juvenile offenses in adult courts, and some states will permit juveniles to serve sentences in adult facilities. In addition, many states now require juvenile sex offenders to register just the same as adult sex offenders (Hunter and Lexier, 1998).
The Ethan Allen School has a group therapy approach to the rehabilitation of juvenile sex offenders. The offenders work closely with counselors and have writing-intensive assignments. Other segments of the program include “survivors’ group, fathers’ group, “’errors in thinking’” group, men’s work, and video group (Millard and Hagan, (1996).
The Ethan Allen School was developed in 1984, and between 1984 and 1996, participants in the program have been monitored and tracked. The program boasts approximately 20 “graduates” each year. Of graduates of the program, recidivism rates for new sexual offenses are under 10 percent (Millard and Hagan, 1996).
Brown and Kolko, (1998) cite the study of a single subject, an 11-year old male sexual abuser with a “history” of sexual offenses. Treatment was “[b]ased on a functional analysis of problematic social behaviors, [and] social-cognitive skills… (p. 2).” The treatment program had target behaviors in which the offender received treatment, including “use of each skill, modeling, role-playing, feedback, coaching, and didactic discussion” (p. 2). The subject displayed improvements in the areas targeted, as witnessed by staff and peers. It is further cited that the subject’s foster mother, “reported he had not participated in any deviant sexual behaviors.” Brown and Kolko, (1998) further cite the “success” of this single case as raising the question of whether treatment needs to be “sexual abuser specific.”
Here is a question. If adult serial sexual offenders admit to engaging in deviant thoughts and behaviors during adolescence, and this 11-year old child had a “history” of sexual offenses, has he really been effectively treated? The literature states that at a one-year follow-up, his foster mother stated that he had not engaged in deviant behavior. If this child is in the early development of becoming a serial or predatory sexual offender, wouldn’t he have a desire to continue his activities for gratification, and would he willingly confess to his foster mother that he was continuing to offend? This is not to say that the child will develop into an adult serial or predatory sex offender, but due to the lack of research into juvenile sex offenders, and the lack of long-term studies surrounding JSOs, can we dismiss the idea of “sexual abuser specific” treatment, especially when so little long-term research has been done into the adult activities of JSOs.
Conclusion
Much of the research about juvenile sex offenders is relatively new, and often times redundant. It is to be applauded that attention is being given to this growing class of offenders; however, because research into this area is fairly new, long-term studies are not provided. Other areas that should be studied are the types of juvenile sex offenders, any possible parallels between juvenile and adult sex offenders, the various treatment methods and the success or failure of those methods, and long-term recidivism rates for subsequent sex offenses.
Much of the current literature states that juvenile sex offenders are not as likely to commit future sex offenses once they have been brought into “view;” however, due to the lack of long-term studies, can we adequately make that statement? This is especially concerning when the literature states that many juvenile sex offenders, like adult sex offenders, have multiple victims prior to being caught. The more times a person does something, whether it is drugs, traveling a path, cooking a meal, or working on a car, the more proficient they become at it, and the more ingrained it becomes. There is not enough research into long-term recidivism rates of juvenile sex offenders.
The Massachusetts Treatment Center for Sexually Dangerous Persons (MTC) (adult offenders) conducted a 25-year study on recidivism rates of 251 sex offenders. Recidivism rates for these offenders peaked at the 5-10-year mark, but even at 15-25 years following release, recidivism rates for the MTC offenders were higher than the recidivism rates for these same offenders during the first five years following release (National Institute of Justice, 1997). Perhaps if we had an equivalent study with juvenile sex offenders, the data would be different.
Sex offenders, like other criminals are not usually going to confess to additional sex offenses, and it is secrecy that breeds sex crimes like child molestation. A sex offender is even less likely to admit deviant sexual thoughts or behaviors if he/she has previously been convicted for a sex offense.
The current research into the study of juvenile sex offenders is a positive thing; however, because children are not adults and usually don’t have the same mental or reasoning capacities as adults, it would be unfair to treat them as adults, especially those children that are far from the legal age. Nevertheless, they need to be monitored and tracked to 1) adequately develop methods of treatment and rehabilitation, 2) monitor recidivism rates, even as late as 25+ years following release, and 3) to see if there are any parallels between child and adult sex offenses, especially offenses like rape or sexual killings. After all, it is the serial crimes that are the most difficult for investigators to solve, and it would seem that if we really researched the childhood and adolescent years of serial offenders, there would probably be early indicators leading to the serial behaviors.
References
Berlinger, L. (1998). Juvenile Sex Offenders: Should They Be Treated Differently? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13:5, 645-646. |
Brown, E. and Kolko, D. (1998). Treatment Efficacy and Program Evaluation With Juvenile Sexual Abusers: A Critique With Directions For Service Delivery and Research. Child Maltreatment, 3:4, 362(12). |
Empey, L., Stafford, M. and Hay, C. (1999). American Delinquency: Its Meaning and Construction. (4th Ed.). New York: Wadsworth. |
Hunter, J. (2000). Juvenile Sexual Homicide. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 69:3, 1(7). |
Hunter, J. Jr., and Lexier, L. (1998). Ethical and Legal Issues in the Assessment and Treatment of Juvenile Sex Offenders. Child Maltreatment. 3:4 339(10) |
Millard, D. and Hagan, M. (1996). Ethan Allen School Rehabilitates Juvenile Sex Offenders. Corrections Today. 58:5 92(4)1 |
National Institute of Justice. (1997). Child Sexual Molestation: Research Issues. Retrieved May 28, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/163390.txt. |
Righthand, S. and Welch, C. (2001). Juveniles Who Have Sexually Offended: A Review of the Literature: OJJDP Report. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. |
Ryan, G., et. al. (1996). Trends in a National Trend of Sexually Abusive Youths. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 35:1, 17(9). |
Zolondel, S., et. al. (2001). The Self-Reported Behaviors of Juvenile Sexual Offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 16:1 73-85. |