|
RESEARCH
The study’s introduction provided a valuable historical view of the pioneering research in the 1940-1950s which established that the risk of sexual recidivism among adolescents was relatively low. This behavior was explained as an expression of difficult emotional adjustments, difficult or traumatic family backgrounds and later tied to attachment theories of sex offending. However, in the 1970-1980s researchers noticed that a significant number of adults convicted of a sex offense reported struggling with deviant sexual behaviors that started in their adolescent years. This shift in the public dialogue and public policy raised the notion the problematic sexual behaviors (PSB) of adolescents were not being taken seriously enough. The primary concept of viewing these adolescents as maladjusted youth was replaced with the idea of this group representing future sexual predators. The authors argue that presenting a singular base rate for sexual recidivism gives the impression of a much simpler picture than reality. Furthermore, it does not take into account concerns about macro-level factors particular to a time period (e.g., culture, access to pornographic materials, etc.) or the impact of place (e.g., policy changes, access to drugs, etc.)
This meta-analysis explored general, violent, and sexual recidivism rate for adolescents who had engaged in a sexual offense for nearly 80 years (1940-2019). The analysis included 158 studies examining statistics for 30,396 adolescent males. The study echoes previous analysis which found that the risk for general recidivism is much higher than either violent or sexual recidivism. This also echoes the fact that sexual recidivism for adolescents has not been declining, but rather is low and has remained low for decades.
Furthermore, the authors note that recidivism rates are very sensitive to variables such as who is conducting the study, what context and setting and with what population. This raises significant concern about equating only individual level characteristics of adolescents with any probability of recidivism in any risk assessment tool.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PROFESSIONALS
First, these findings and the discussion highlight general trends that practitioners have observed: crime rates (including the base rate of sexual recidivism) fluctuate over time. Further, youth who have sexually abused are typically at higher risk for non-sexual crimes in those instances when they do break the law again. Each of these points argues on behalf of a comprehensive, “whole-person” approach to assessment and treatment. Further, the paper provides an excellent review of the macro-level factors (mentioned above) that all professionals should consider when working to prevent re-offense. Just as adolescents change over time, the contexts in which they live change, as well.
Professionals conducting risk assessments will want to read this paper closely. The best assessments anchor themselves in known base rates. In recent years, the meta-analysis by Michael Caldwell has been the go-to data set, because it considers the most recent studies. Lussier et al. argue (correctly, in our opinion) that there are confounding aspects of research that should make professionals cautious in accepting any one base rate as the absolute truth. Context matters and methods matter. Just the same, professionals have long known that base rates of re-offense are likely underestimates.
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FIELD
The studies reviewed for this newsletter have long argued that sexual abuse by adolescents requires more than a criminal-justice perspective. This paper certainly adds weight to that argument. It further illustrates how using public-safety strategies based on adult approaches are too often misguided and may also explain the higher general recidivism rates among youth who sexually abuse.
The changing face of public responses to sexually abusive behaviors by youth is itself a fascinating area of study, and one that can help shape our treatment and research agendas. Ultimately, however, this study, with its low rates, shows that the future can be brighter than most realize, and we have reason for hope when it comes to working with these youths!
CITATION:
Lussier, P., McCuish, E., Chouinard Thivierge, S., & Frechette, J. (2023). A meta-analysis of trends in general, sexual, and violent recidivism among youth with histories of sex offending. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 15248380221137653..
ABSTRACT:
Recent research suggests that sexual recidivism rates have been declining, which contrasts with observations regarding general recidivism rates as well as perceptions of sexual reoffending risk. If sexual recidivism rates are in decline, it raises fundamental policy questions about the youth justice system’s tendency to operate on the assumption that juvenile sexual offending is a risk marker for sexual reoffending in adulthood. A systematic review and a quantitative meta-analysis were conducted to determine the general, violent, and sexual recidivism rates of adolescent perpetrators of sexual offenses with data stemming from studies published worldwide between 1940 and 2019. A total of 158 empirical studies including 30,396 adolescent perpetrators of sexual offenses were retrieved to examine estimates of general, violent, and sexual recidivism. The study findings highlight that the risk of general recidivism (weighted pooled mean = .44) is substantially higher than violent (weighted pooled mean = .18) and sexual recidivism (weighted pooled mean = .08). The study did not observe convincing evidence that sexual recidivism rates for adolescent perpetrators are declining, but rather that these rates have been consistently low over the years. There was strong evidence that multiple study characteristics moderate the recidivism rates observed. Given the low weighted pooled sexual recidivism rate reported in the study, the use of adult-like strategies to increase public safety and prevent sexual recidivism seems misguided, not only because sexual recidivism is unlikely, but also because such strategies are not developed to address general criminogenic needs that may explain general recidivism rates observed.
| 
