When the general populace hears the words “sex offender” or “sexually based offense” the image that is almost instantaneously conjured up is negative, typically involving an adult male, and may include images of rape, sex trafficking, “stranger danger,” or other grotesque sexual misbehaviors. The assumptions the general public tends to make regarding sex offenders are often based on highly publicized stories, personal biases, or other assumptions, and not necessarily on statistical information. The general public may often assume that the majority of sexual offenses are perpetrated by an adult stranger, and therefore, they are safer with people they know, however, research indicates that casual acquaintances or immediate family members commit …show more content…
Juvenile offenders are responsible for somewhere between 20% and 30% of rapes, and 30% to 60% of all child molestations (Christiansen & Vincent, 2013; Collie, Ward, & Vess, 2008). Other data, such as that from Finkelhor, Ormrod & Chaffin (2009) and the U.S. Department of Justice, suggest that juveniles’ account for at least 26% of all known sexual offenders, and juveniles commit approximately 35.6% of all sexual offenses committed against minors. Juveniles whom commit sexual offenses are more likely to target younger children, specifically those living with them (Finkelhor et al., 2009). Additionally, juveniles are more likely to offend against same-age peers or schoolmates in comparison to adults (Finkelhor et al., 2009). There is also a subset of juvenile offenders, who despite having had some sort of formal consequence to sexual offending behavior, continue to sexually offend and reoffend (Righthand et al., …show more content…
Harris & Hanson (2010) assert that the rise of actuarial risk assessment began with a seminal work by Hanson & Bussiere (1998). This article was a meta-analysis that summarized over 60 differing data sets on sexual offenses and offenders (Harris & Hanson, 2010; Hanson & Bussiere, 1998). From the analysis, Hanson & Bussiere (1998) identified 70 factors that had a significant correlation with risk for sexual recidivism. According to Hanson & Bussire (1998) there were only two demographic variables that increased risk to recidivate: age of the offender, and whether or not they were single. Additionally, their research yielded criminal lifestyle was a predictor of recidivism (Hanson & Bussiere, 1998). They then identified some other factors that could potentially have a moderate increase in potential for recidivism, pending future research, which included prior sexual offending, stranger victim, male victim, and participation in diverse sexual offense behaviors (Hanson & Bussiere, 1998). Hanson & Bussiere (1998) further assert that the strongest variable they found related to risk for sexual recidivism was having a sexual interest in children. They note, however, that other factors such as an offender’s relationship with his or her
In the event that a prisoner (particularly a sex offender) does complete rehabilitation, he carries with him a stigma upon reentering society. People often fear living near a prior drug addict or convicted murderer and the sensational media hype surrounding released felons can ruin a newly released convict’s life before it beings. What with resident notifications, media scare tactics and general concern for safety, a sex offender’s ability to readapt into society is severely hindered (554). This warrants life-skills rehabilitation applied to him useless, as he will be unable to even attempt to make the right decision regarding further crime opportunities.
...aker, J. (2007). Public perceptions about sex offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 7(1), 1-25.
The Recidivism Rate of Juvenile Sex Offenders between Uses of Legal Sentencing as Adults or Utilizing Psychological Treatment
The United States Bureau of Justice Statistics (2011) reveals an estimated 747,408 sex offenders were registered in the United States as of 2010. This number shows an increase of over seven thousand from the previous year. According to Vivian-Bryne (2004), therapeutic treatment for sex offenders is one approach to address the issue of sexual offense and reduce numbers. Although the idea of therapeutic treatment for sex offenders can raise skepticism, a myriad of therapeutic treatment models are available (Polizzi, MacKenzie & Hickman, 1999). This paper will establish the important complexities surrounding therapeutic treatment of sex offenders, including treatment effectiveness, challenges of treatment schemas, and recidivism. Peer reviewed articles regarding therapeutic treatment for sex offenders will be reviewed and the validity of these sources will be discussed.
The sex offender’s registry plays on parent’s emotional instincts to protect their children instead of really protect them. It gives parents a false sense of protection. The regis...
Sex offender legislation has been encouraged and written to protect the community and the people at large against recidivism and or to help with the reintegration of those released from prison. Nevertheless, a big question has occurred as to if the tough laws created help the community especially to prevent recidivism or make the situation even worse than it already is. Sex offenders are categorized into three levels for example in the case of the state of Massachusetts; in level one the person is not considered dangerous, and chances of him repeating a sexual offense are low thus his details are not made available to the public (Robbers, 2009). In level two chances of reoccurrence are average thus public have access to this level offenders through local police departments in level three risk of reoffense is high, and a substantial public safety interest is served to protect the public from such individuals.
Sex offender legislation has become a controversial topic in the recent years. There have been numerous laws enacted in response to sex offender crime. Do these laws really work to help minimize re-offending, or do they give the public a false sense of security and cause recidivism? In a several studies researchers found no evidence of sex offender registries being effective in increasing public safety. Some studies have found that requiring sex offenders to register with law enforcement may significantly may reduce chances of recidivism. However, the research also found that making registry information available to the public may back fire and lead to higher levels of overall sex crimes
In today’s society, juveniles that commit a sexual assault have become the subject of society. It’s become a problem in the United States due to the rise of sexual offenses committed by juveniles. The general public attitude towards sex offenders appears to be highly negative (Valliant, Furac, & Antonowicz, 1994). The public reactions in the past years have shaped policy on legal approaches to managing sexual offenses. The policies have included severe sentencing laws, sex offender registry, and civil commitment as a sexually violent predator (Quinn, Forsyth, & Mullen-Quinn, 2004). This is despite recidivism data suggesting that a relatively small group of juvenile offenders commit repeat sexual assaults after a response to their sexual offending (Righthand &Welch, 2004).
Ryan, G., Leversee, T. and Lane, S. 2014. Juvenile Sexual Offending: Causes, Consequences, and Correction. [online] Available at: http://books.google.ca/books?isbn=0470646942 [Accessed: 14 Mar 2014].
In a study more than one half of all responding registrants reported having lost a friend as a result of public knowledge of their sexual offending. There is also evidence that family members of registered sex offenders experience persecution and threats when the information is public. Consequently, the offender might lose support from both friends and family, which further hinders their ability to rehabilitate into
The adult system’s shifts leaked into the juvenile system, causing an increase in incarcerations even when delinquency rates were declining at the time. Juvenile reform legislations prompted more compulsory sentencing and more determinate sentences for juveniles, lowering of the upper age of juvenile jurisdiction, considerable ease in obtaining waivers to adult court for juvenile prosecution, and made it easier to gain access to juvenile records as well. Furthermore, it led to greater preoccupation with chronic, violent offenders, which in turn led to a redirection of resources for their confinement. Thereby, the absence of reliable criteria for identifying such offenders tends to stereotype all delinquents and is more likely to raise the level of precautionary confinements. These three major shifts in juvenile justice policy demonstrate the power and depth of traditional beliefs about the causes and cures of crimes in U.S. society. It also shows how the system can bend for a time in the direction of new approaches to prevention and control. Today, we are presently in a time of conservative responses where the prevailing views about crime express beliefs about prevention, retribution, and incapacitation that are profoundly rooted in our
This R-N-R model will be used to assess the case of Jamie Wilson, focusing on the assessment of his criminogenic needs in relation to his offence, as changing these dynamic factors can reduce the probability of recidivism (Andrew & Bonta, 2010). Furthermore, this essay will consider the risk and responsivity in regards to Jamie Wilson’s case. Jamie aged 27, has been convicted of a rape of a child and sentenced to eight years custody. The victim aged 12, was approached by Jamie on the way home from school and sexually assaulted. Jamie has no previous convictions of this type; however he has convictions for shop-theft, drinking and driving with no insurance.
Vandiver, D. M., & Teske, R. (2006). Juvenile female and male sex offenders a comparison of offender, victim, and judicial processing characteristics. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50(2), 148-165.
Many resources go into the prevention and management of sex offenders. However, very few effective programs exist that decrease the likelihood of reoffending. Through the use of meta-analyses, Seto and Lalumiere (2010) evaluated multiple studies that examined sex offenders. Emphasis was put on etiological explanations in the hopes of identifying factors associated with sex offending. Seto and Lalumiere’s (2010) findings help in creating effective programs to decrease recidivism rates.
Sex offenders have been a serious problem for our legal system at all levels, not to mention those who have been their victims. There are 43,000 inmates in prison for sexual offenses while each year in this country over 510,000 children are sexually assaulted(Oakes 99). The latter statistic, in its context, does not convey the severity of the situation. Each year 510,000 children have their childhood's destroyed, possibly on more than one occasion, and are faced with dealing with the assault for the rest of their lives. Sadly, many of those assaults are perpetrated by people who have already been through the correctional system only to victimize again. Sex offenders, as a class of criminals, are nine times more likely to repeat their crimes(Oakes 99). This presents a