Loading...
O-654-05 ORDINANCE NO. 654-05 AN ORDINANCE OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE FLORIDA AMENDING CHAPTER 15 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, ENTITLED "OFFENSES" TO ESTABLISH SECTION 15-12 ENTITLED "SEXUAL VIOLATOR RESIDENCY PROHIBITION,"TO PROHIBIT CONVICTED SEXUAL VIOLATORS FROM RESIDING WITHIN 2500 FEET OF SPECIFIED LOCATIONS WITHIN MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; FURTHER,PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, recent horrific attacks on children by registered sex offenders within the State of Florida and the nation have demonstrated that there is a need to afford greater protection to children from the risks posed by registered sex offenders; and WHEREAS, the Village Council of Miami Shores Village is deeply concerned about the health, safety and protection of Miami Shores' children; and WHEREAS, the Village Council of Miami Shores Village believes it is of the utmost importance to provide the Village's children safe areas in which to live and play, and therefore, the Village Council desires to adopt a law that will provide greater protection to children against the dangers posed by convicted sex offenders; and WHEREAS, Article VIII, Section 2(b) of the Florida Constitution and §166.021, Florida Statutes, grant the City authority to adopt such provisions in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of its residents; and WHEREAS, the 8th Circuit United States Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion in the case of Doe v. Miller, 2005 WL 991635 (8th Cir. April 29, 2005) in which the Court upheld similar residency restrictions adopted by the State of Iowa,and found the restrictions to be valid; and WHEREAS, Florida Statutes §§794.065 and 947.1405 provide for one thousand(1000) foot residency prohibitions from specified locations for certain sexual offenders and sexual predators; while Florida Statutes §847.0134 provides that certain adult entertainment venues may not be located within twenty five hundred (2,500) fee of the location of a public or private elementary school,middle school, or secondary school; and WHEREAS, Florida's sex offender registration/notification scheme has recently been upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, in the face of several constitutional challenges, in Doe v. Moore, 2005 WL 1324592(11th Circuit,June 6,2005); and WHEREAS, the Village Council finds that the creation of a sexual offender residency prohibition section in the Village Code of Ordinances to prohibit convicted sex offenders from living within two thousand five hundred (2,500) feet of specified locations in Miami Shores Village is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the residents and citizens of Miami Shores Village; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF NIIANH SHORES VILLAGE,FLORIDA: Section 1. Chapter 15 of the Code of Ordinances of Miami Shores Village shall be amended to create Section 15-12 to read as follows: 1 Sec. 15-12. Sexual Violator Residency Prohibition. a) Findings and Intent (i) Repeat sexual offenders, sexual offenders who use physical violence, and sexual offenders who prey on children are sexual predators who present an extreme threat to the public safety. Sexual offenders are likely to use physical violence and to repeat their offenses, and most sexual offenders commit many offenses, have many more victims than are ever reported, and are prosecuted for only a fraction of their crimes. This makes the cost of sexual offenders victimization to society at large,while incalculable,clearly exorbitant. (ii) It is the intent of this Section to serve the Village's compelling interest to promote, protect and improve the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the Village by creating areas around certain locations where children regularly congregate in concentrated numbers wherein certain sexual offenders and sexual predators are prohibited from establishing residence. b) It is unlawful for any "Sexual Violator", as the term is defined below, to reside within 2,500 feet of any school, day care center, park or playground. The term "reside" shall not include any temporary stay in any residential unit or any other facility as long as the temporary stay does not exceed fifteen(15)days in any one(1) calendar year. C) A person who violates Section 15-12(b) shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $500.00 or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding 60 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. d) For purposes of this section, a"Sexual Violator"is any person who has been convicted of any felony sexual offense(as that term was applied and used by the state in which the person was convicted) in any state in the United States at any time,regardless of whether adjudication has been withheld, in which the victim of the offense was less than 16 years of age at the time of the offense. e) Exceptions. A person residing within 2,500 feet of any school,day care center,park,or playground,does not commit a violation of this Section if any of the following apply: (i) The person lawfully established the residence and reported and registered the residence pursuant to §§775.21, 943.0435 or 944.607, Florida Statute, prior to enactment of this Section 15-12. (ii) The person was a minor when he/she committed the offense and was not convicted as an adult. (iii) The person is a minor. (iv) The only school, day care center, park or playground within 2,500 feet of the person's residence was opened after the person lawfully established the residence and reported and registered the residence pursuant to §§775.21, 943.0435 or 944.607,Florida Statute. f. It shall be a violation of the Village Code of Ordinances for a landlord or owner of residential property in the Village to knowingly rent or lease a residence to a Sexual Violator,if the Sexual Violator intends to reside at the property and if the property is located within 2,500 2 feet of a school, day care center, park or playground. Any person violating this provision is subject to the code enforcement procedures set forth in Chapter 2, Article N of the Miami Shores Village Code of Ordinances. Section 2. That, except as amended above, all other provisions of the Code of Ordinances of Miami Shores Village,Florida, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances and all resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are repealed. Section 4. That if any section, clause, sentence or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, the holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Section 5. That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately at the time of its passage and adoption. PASSED on first reading on July 5, ,2005. PASSED AND ADOPTED on second reading on 2 ,2005. Al Davis,Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: aw cm(— CBarbBarbara ara Estep,CMC 7 Richard Sarafan Village Clerk Village Attorney 3 Center For Sex Offender Management Recidivism of Sex Offenders May 2001 Introduction The study of recidivism—the commission of a subsequent offense—is important to the The criminal justice system manages most criminal justice response to sexual offending. convicted sex offenders with some If sex offenders commit a wide variety of combination of incarceration, community offenses, responses from both a public supervision, and specialized treatment policy and treatment perspective may be no (Knopp, Freeman-Longo, and Stevenson, different than is appropriate for the general 1992). While the likelihood and length of criminal population (Quinsey, 1984). incarceration for sex offenders has increased However, a more specialized response is in recent years,' the majority are released at appropriate if sex offenders tend to commit some point on probation or parole (either principally sex offenses. immediately following sentencing or after a period of incarceration in prison or jail). The purpose of this paper is to examine the About 60 percent of all sex offenders critical issues in defining recidivism and managed by the U.S. correctional system provide a synthesis of the current research are under some form of conditional on the reoffense rates of sex offenders. The supervision in the community (Greenfeld, following sections summarize and discuss 1997). research findings on sex offenders, factors and conditions that appear to be associated While any offender's subsequent reoffending with reduced sexual offending, and the is of public concern, the prevention of implications that these findings have for sex sexual violence is particularly important, offender management. Although studies on given the irrefutable harm that these juvenile sex offender response to treatment offenses cause victims and the fear they exist, the vast majority of research has generate in the community. With this in concentrated on adult males. Thus, this mind, practitioners making decisions about paper focuses primarily on adult male sex how to manage sex offenders must ask offenders. themselves the following questions: ■ What is the likelihood that a specific Issues in the Measurement of Sex offender will commit subsequent sex Offender Recidivism crimes? ■ Under what circumstances is this Research on recidivism can be used to offender least likely to reoffend? inform intervention strategies with sex ■ What can be done to reduce the offenders. However, the way in which likelihood of reoffense? recidivism is measured can have a marked difference in study results and applicability to the day-to-day management of this ' Since 1980, the number of imprisoned sex offenders has criminal population. The following section grown by more than 7 percent per year(Greenfeld, 1997). In 1994, nearly one in ten state prisoners were incarcerated for explores variables such as the population(s) committing a sex offense (Greenfeld, 1997). of sex offenders studied, the criteria used to Bstabimed in June 1997 CSOML goal is to enhance public safety by preventing further victimization through improving the management of adult and juvenile sex ofiendem who are in the community. A collaborative effort of the Office ofJustice Programs;the National Institute of Corrections,and the State Justice Institute, CSOMis administered by the Center for Effective Public Policy and the American Probation and Parole Association. measure recidivism, the types of offenses each measures something different. While studied, and the length of time a study the differences may appear minor, they will follows a sample. Practitioners must lead to widely varied outcomes. understand how these and other study variables can affect conclusions about sex Subsequent Arrest—Using new charges offender recidivism, as well as decisions or arrests as the determining criteria for regarding individual cases. "recidivism" will result in a higher recidivism rate, because many individuals Defining the Sex Offender Population are arrested but for a variety of reasons, Studied are not convicted. Sex offenders are a highly heterogeneous Subsequent Conviction-Measuring new mixture of individuals who have committed convictions is a more restrictive criterion than new arrests, resulting in a lower violent sexual assaults on strangers, recidivism rate. Generally, more offenders who have had inappropriate sexual confidence is placed in reconviction, contact with family members, individuals since this involves a process through who have molested children, and those who which the individual has been found have engaged in a wide range of other guilty. However, given the process inappropriate and criminal sexual behaviors. If we group various types of offenders and involved in reporting, prosecution, and offenses into an ostensibly homogenous conviction in sex offense cases, a category of"sex offenders," distinctions in number of researchers favor the use of the factors related to recidivism will be more inclusive criteria (e.g., arrests or masked and differential results obtained charges). from studies of reoffense patterns. Thus, Subsequent Incarceration Some studies one of the first issues to consider in utilize return to prison as the criterion for reviewing any study of sex offender determining recidivism. There are two recidivism is how "sex offender" is defined; ways in which individuals may be who is included in this category, and, as returned to a correctional institution. important, who is not. One is through the commission of a new offense and return to prison on a new Sex offenders are a highly heterogeneous mixture sentence and the other is through a of individuals who have committed violent sexual technical violation of parole. The former assaults on strangers, offenders who have had is b far the more restrictive criterion, inappropriate sexual contact with family y members, individuals who have molested since an offender has to have been found children, and those who have engaged in a wide guilty and sentenced to prison. range of other inappropriate and criminal sexual Technical violations typically involve behaviors. violations of conditions of release, such as being alone with minor children or consuming alcohol. Thus, the use of this Defining Recidivism definition will result in the inclusion of individuals who may not have committed Although there is common acceptance that a subsequent criminal offense as recidivism is the commission of a recidivists. When one encounters the subsequent offense, there are many use of return to prison as the criterion for operational definitions for this term. For recidivism, it is imperative to determine if example, recidivism may occur when there this includes those with new convictions, is a new arrest, new conviction, or new technical violations, or both. commitment to custody. Each of these criteria is a valid measure of recidivism, but 2 Underestimating Recidivism assault victims, and, for many, a desire to put a tragic experience behind them. Incest Reliance on measures of recidivism as victims who have experienced criminal reflected through official criminal justice justice involvement are particularly reluctant system data obviously omit offenses that to report new incest crimes because of the are not cleared through an arrest or those disruption caused to their family. This that are never reported to the police. This complex of reasons makes it unlikely that distinction is critical in the measurement of reporting figures will change dramatically in recidivism of sex offenders. For a variety of the near future and bring recidivism rates reasons, sexual assault is a vastly closer to actual reoffense rates. underreported crime. The Several studies support the hypothesis that Several studies support the hypothesis that National Crime sexual offense recidivism rates are sexual offense recidivism Victimization underreported. Marshall and Barbaree rates are underreported. Surveys (Bureau of (1990) compared official records of a sample Justice Statistics) of sex offenders with "unofficial" sources of conducted in data. They found that the number of 1994, 1995, and 1998 indicate that only 32 subsequent sex offenses revealed through percent (one out of three) of sexual assaults unofficial sources was 2.4 times higher than against persons 12 or older are reported to the number that was recorded in official law enforcement. A three-year longitudinal reports. In addition, research using study (Kilpatrick, Edmunds, and Seymour, information generated through polygraph 1992) of 4,008 adult women found that 84 examinations on a sample of imprisoned sex percent of respondents who identified offenders with fewer than two known themselves as rape victims did not report victims (on average), found that these the crime to authorities. (No current studies offenders actually had an average of 110 indicate the rate of reporting for child sexual victims and 318 offenses (Ahlmeyer, Heil, assault, although it is generally assumed McKee, and English, 2000). Another that these assaults are equally polygraph study found a sample of underreported.) Many victims are afraid to imprisoned sex offenders to have extensive report sexual assault to the police. They criminal histories, committing sex crimes for may fear that reporting will lead to the an average of 16 years before being caught following: (Ahlmeyer, English, and Simons, 1999). ■ further victimization by the offender; Offense Type ■ other forms of retribution by the offender or by the offender's friends or family; For the purpose of their studies, researchers ■ arrest, prosecution, and incarceration of must determine what specific behaviors an offender who may be a family qualify sex offenders as recidivists. They member or friend and on whom the must decide if only sex offenses will be victim or others may depend; considered, or if the commission of any ■ others finding out about the sexual crime is sufficient to be classified as a assault (including friends, family recidivating offense. If recidivism is members, media, and the public); determined only through the commission of ■ not being believed; and a subsequent sex offense, researchers must ■ being traumatized by the criminal justice consider if this includes felonies and system response. misdemeanors. Answers to these fundamental questions will influence the These factors are compounded by the level of observed recidivism in each study. shame and guilt experienced by sexual 3 likelihood that recidivism rates are Length of Follow-Up underestimated. Studies often vary in the length of time they "follow-up" on a group of sex offenders in Factors Associated with Sex the community. There are two issues of Offender Recidivism concern with follow-up periods. Ideally, all individuals in any given study should have the same length of time "at risk"—time at In many instances, policies and procedures large in the community—and, thus, equal for the management of sex offenders have opportunity to commit subsequent offenses. been driven by public outcry over highly In practice, however, this almost never publicized sex offenses. However, criminal happens. For instance, in a 10-year follow- justice practitioners must avoid reactionary up study, some subjects will have been in responses that are based on public fear of the community for eight, nine, or 10 years this population. Instead, they must strive to while others may have been out for only two make management decisions that are based years. This problem is addressed by using on the careful assessment of the likelihood survival analysis, a methodology that takes of recidivism. The identification of risk into account the amount of time every factors that may be associated with subject has been in the community, rather recidivism of sex offenders can aid than a simple percentage. practitioners in devising management strategies that best protect the community Additionally, when researchers compare and reduce the likelihood of further results across studies, similar time at risk victimization. should be used in each of the studies. It is crucial to keep in mind, however, that Obviously, the longer the follow-up period, there are no absolutes or "magic bullets" in the more likely reoffense will occur and a the process of identifying these risk factors. higher rate of recidivism will be observed. Rather, this process is an exercise in Many researchers believe that recidivism isolating factors that tend to be associated studies should ideally include a follow-up period of five years or more. with specific behaviors. While this association reflects a likelihood, it does not Effect on Recidivism Outcomes indicate that all individuals who possess certain characteristics will behave in a What are we to make of these caveats certain manner. Some sex offenders will regarding recidivism—do they render inevitably commit subsequent sex offenses, recidivism a meaningless concept? On the in spite of our best efforts to identify risk contrary, from a public policy perspective, factors and institute management and recidivism is an invaluable measure of the treatment processes aimed at minimizing performance of various sanctions and these conditions. Likewise, not all sex interventions with criminal offenders. offenders who have reoffense risk However, there is often much ambiguity characteristics will recidivate. surrounding what appears to be a simple statement of outcomes regarding recidivism. The identification of risk factors that may be In comparing the results of various associated with recidivism of sex offenders can aid practitioners in devising management recidivism studies, one should not lose sight strategies that best protect the community and of the issues of comparable study samples, reduce the likelihood of further victimization. criteria for recidivism, the length of the follow-up period, information sources utilized to estimate risk of reoffense, and the 4 This section explores several important instruments designed to predict recidivism aspects in the study of recidivism and among the general offender population identification of risk factors associated with (Bonta and Hanson, 1995). sex offenders' commission of subsequent crimes. Identification of Static and Dynamic Factors Application of Studies of General Criminal Characteristics of offenders can be grouped Recidivism into two general categories. First, there are historical characteristics, such as age, prior The identification of factors associated with offense history, and age at first sex offense criminal recidivism has been an area of arrest or conviction. Because these items significant research over the past 20 years. typically cannot be altered, they are often This work has fueled the development of referred to as static factors. Second are countless policies and instruments to guide those characteristics, circumstances, and sentencing and release decisions throughout attitudes that can change throughout one's the criminal justice system. If one assumes life, generally referred to as dynamic factors. that sex offenders are similar to other Examples of dynamic characteristics include criminal offenders, then the preponderance drug or alcohol use, poor attitude (e.g., low of research should assist practitioners in remorse and victim blaming), and intimacy identifying risk factors in this population as problems. The identification of dynamic well. Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) argued factors that are associated with reduced that there is little specialization among recidivism holds particular promise in criminal offenders. In this view, robbers effectively managing sex offenders because also commit burglary and those who commit the strengthening of these factors can be assaults also may be drug offenders. The encouraged through various supervision and extensive research on recidivism among the treatment strategies. general criminal population has identified a set of factors that are consistently Dynamic factors can further be divided into associated with subsequent criminal stable and acute categories (Hanson and behavior. These factors include being Harris, 1998). Stable dynamic factors are young, having an unstable employment those characteristics that can change over history, abusing alcohol and drugs, holding time, but are relatively lasting qualities. pro-criminal attitudes, and associating with Examples of these characteristics include other criminals (Gendreau, Little, and deviant sexual preferences or alcohol or drug Goggin, 1996). abuse. On the other hand, Hanson and Harris (1998) suggest that acute dynamic However, there is some evidence that factors are conditions that can change over suggests that sexual offending may differ a short period of time. Examples include from other criminal behavior (Hanson and sexual arousal or intoxication that may Bussiere, 1998). Although sex offenders immediately precede a reoffense. may commit other types of offenses, other types of offenders rarely commit sex Understanding Base Rates offenses (Bonta and Hanson, 1995; Hanson, Steffy, and Gauthier, 1995). If this is the Understanding the concept of"base rates" is case, then a different set of factors may be also essential when studying sex offender associated with the recidivism of sex recidivism. A base rate is simply the overall offenders than for the general offender rate of recidivism of an entire group of population. This statement is reinforced by offenders. If the base rate for an entire the finding that many persistent sex group is known (e.g., 40 percent), then, offenders receive low risk scores on without other information, practitioners 5 would predict that any individual in this summary of sex offender recidivism studies, group has approximately a 40 percent as have many other authors who have chance of recidivating. If static or dynamic attempted to synthesize this research. factors related to recidivism are identified, There is wide variation in results, in both the error rates can be improved and this amount of measured recidivism and the information can be used to make more factors associated with these outcomes. To accurate assessments of the likelihood of a large degree, differences can be explained rearrest or reconviction. However, if the by variations in the sample of sex offenders base rate is at one extreme or the other, involved in the studies. Although this is a additional information may not significantly simple and somewhat obvious point, this improve accuracy. For instance, if the base basic fact is "responsible for the rate were 10 percent, then practitioners disagreements and much of the confusion in would predict that 90 percent of the the literature" on the recidivism of sex individuals in this group would not be offenders (Quinsey, 1984). arrested for a new crime. The error rate would be difficult to improve, regardless of Furthermore, results from some studies what additional information may be available indicate that there may be higher base rates about individual offenders. In other words, among certain categories of sex offenders if we simply predicted that no one would be (Quinsey, Laumiere, Rice, and Harris, 1995; rearrested, we would be wrong only 10 Quinsey, Rice, and Harris, 1995). For percent of the time. example, in their follow-up study of sex A base rate is simply It is quite difficult to offenders released from a psychiatric facility, the overall rate of make accurate Quinsey, Rice, and Harris (1995) found that recidivism of an entire individual rapists had a considerably higher rate of group of offenders. predictions in such rearrest/reconviction than did child extreme situations. molesters. What has come to be termed as "the low Conversely, Prentky, Lee, Knight, and Cerce base rate problem" has traditionally plagued (1997) found that over a 25-year period, sex offender recidivism studies (Quinsey, child molesters had higher rates of reoffense 1980). As noted previously, lack of than rapists. In this study, recidivism was reporting, or underreporting, is higher in operationalized as a failure rate and crimes of sexual violence than general calculated as the proportion of individuals criminal violence and may contribute to the who were rearrested using survival analysis low base rate problem. The following (which takes into account the amount of studies have found low base rates for sex time each offender has been at risk in the offender populations: community). Results show that over longer ■ Hanson and Bussiere (1998) reported an 60% New Sex Offense Charges(Failure Rate) overall recidivism rate of 13 percent. Prentky,Lee,Knight,and Cerce(1997) 52% ■ Grumfeld and Noreik (1986) found a 10 50°% percent recidivism rate for rapists. EChild M(Nsters 39% ■ Gibbens, Soothill, and Way (1978) a0°% ■Child Molesters(N=115) reported a 4 percent recidivism rate for 30°,° zs°° 30%incest offenders. 20/° 19% 19% 0 o Samples of sex offenders used in some10% 90°_6°� studies may have higher base rates of reoffense than other studies. Quinsey 0°,° (1984) found this to be the case in his 1 Year 5 Years 10 Years 25 Years 6 periods of time, child molesters have a Similarly, West, Roy, and Nichols (1978) higher failure rate—thus, a higher rate of noted that recidivism rates in studies of sex rearrest—than rapists (52 percent versus 39 offenders vary by the characteristics of the percent over 25 years). offender sample. Such a situation makes the results from follow-up studies of Making Sense of Contradictory Findings undifferentiated sex offenders difficult to interpret (Quinsey, 1998). Studies on sex offender recidivism vary widely in the quality and rigor of the One method of dealing with this problem is research design, the sample of sex offenders to examine recidivism studies of specific and behaviors included in the study, the types of sex offenders. This approach is length of follow-up, and the criteria for warranted, given the established base rate success or failure. Due to these and other differences across types of sex offenders.2 differences, there is often a perceived lack Marshall and Barbaree (1990) found in their of consistency across studies of sex review of studies that the recidivism rate for offender recidivism. For example, there specific types of offenders varied: have been varied results regarding whether the age of the offender at the time of ■ Incest offenders ranged between 4 and institutional release is associated with 10 percent. subsequent criminal sexual behavior. While ■ Rapists ranged between 7 and 35 Beck and Shipley (1987) found that there percent. was no relationship between these variables, ■ Child molesters with female victims Clark and Crum (1985) and Marshall and ranged between 10 and 29 percent. Barbaree (1990) suggested that younger ■ Child molesters with male victims ranged offenders were more likely to commit future between 13 and 40 percent. crimes. However, Grunfeld and Noreik ■ Exhibitionists ranged between 41 and 71 (1986) argued that older sex offenders are percent. more likely to have a more developed fixation and thus are more likely to reoffend. In summary, practitioners should recognize A study by the Delaware Statistical Analysis several key points related to research Center (1984) found that those serving studies on sex offender recidivism. First, longer periods of incarceration had a lower since sexual offending may differ from other recidivism rate—while Roundtree, Edwards, criminal behavior, research specific to sex and Parker (1984) found just the opposite. offender recidivism is needed to inform interventions with sex offenders. Second, To a large degree, the variation across researchers seek to identify static and individual studies can be explained by the dynamic factors associated with recidivism differences in study populations. Schwartz of sex offenders. In particular, the and Cellini (1997) indicated that the use of a identification of, and support of, "positive" heterogeneous group of sex offenders in the dynamic factors may help reduce the risk of analysis of recidivism might be responsible for this confusion: 2 Recent research suggests that many offenders have "Mixing an antisocial rapist with a histories of assaulting across genders and age groups, rather 9 P than against only one specific victim population. Researchers socially skilled fixated pedophile in a 1999 study(Ahlmeyer, English, and Simons)found that, with a developmentally disabled through polygraph examinations,the number offenders who "crossed over"age groups of victims is extremely high. The exhibitionist may indeed produce a study revealed that before polygraph examinations, 6 percent hodgepodge of results." of a sample of incarcerated sex offenders had both child and adult victims, compared to 71 percent after polygraph exams. Thus,caution must be taken in placing sex offenders in exclusive categories. 7 recidivism. Third, although research studies any offense (Romero and Williams, 1985). on recidivism of sex offenders often appear Rice, Harris, and Quinsey (1990) conducted to have contradictory findings, variations in a more recent study of 54 rapists who were outcomes can typically be explained by the released from prison before 1983. After differences in the study populations. Finally, four years, 28 percent had a reconviction for since base rate differences have been a sex offense and 43 percent had a identified across types of sex offenses, it conviction for a violent offense. makes sense to study recidivism of sex offenders b offense type. 50% 54 Sex Offenders Released Before 1883 Y Yp 45/o o Rice,Harris,and Quinsey, 1990 43% 40% Review of Studies 35% 30% 28% 25% The following sections present findings from 20% various studies of the recidivism of sex 15% offenders within offense categories of 10% rapists and child molesters.s Overall 5% recidivism findings are presented, along with 0% results concerning the factors and Reconvicted for Sex Offense Reconvicted for Violent Offense characteristics associated with recidivism. In their summary of the research on the Rapists recidivism of rapists, Quinsey, Lalumiere, Rice, and Harris (1995) noted that the There has been considerable research on the significant variation in recidivism across recidivism of rapists across various studies of rapists is likely due to differences institutional and community-based settings in the types of offenders involved (e.g., and with varying periods of follow-up. A institutionalized offenders, mentally follow-up study of sex offenders released disordered offenders, or probationers) or in from a maximum-security psychiatric the length of the follow-up period. They institution in California found that 10 of the further noted that throughout these studies, 57 rapists (19 percent) studied were the proportion of offenders who had a prior reconvicted of a rape within five years, most sex offense was similar to the proportion of which occurred during the first year of that had a subsequent sex offense. In the follow-up period (Sturgeon and Taylor, addition, the rates of reoffending decreased 1980). These same authors reported that with the seriousness of the offense. That is, among 68 sex offenders not found to be the occurrence of officially recorded mentally disordered who were paroled in recidivism for a nonviolent nonsexual 1973, 19 (28 percent) were reconvicted for offense was the most likely and the a sex offense within five years. incidence of violent sex offenses was the least likely. In a study of 231 sex offenders placed on probation in Philadelphia between 1966 and Child Molesters 1969, 11 percent were rearrested for a sex offense and 57 percent were rearrested for Studies of the recidivism of child molesters reveal specific patterns of reoffending across victim types and offender 3 The studies included in this paper do not represent a characteristics. A study involving mentally comprehensive overview of the research on sex offender disordered sex offenders compared same- recidivism. The studies included represent a sampling of sex and opposite-sex child molesters and available research on these populations and are drawn from to highlight key points. incest offenders. Results of this five-year 8 follow-up study found that same-sex child assessment.' In contrast to other studies of molesters had the highest rate of previous child molesters, this study found no sex offenses (53 percent), as well as the difference in recidivism between opposite- highest reconviction rate for sex crimes (30 sex and same-sex offenders. percent). In comparison, 43 percent of opposite-sex child molesters had prior sex In a more recent study (Rice, Quinsey, and offenses and a reconviction rate for sex Harris, 1991), extra-familial child molesters crimes of 25 percent, and incest offenders were followed for an average of six years. had prior convictions at a rate of 11 percent During that time, 31 percent had a and a reconviction rate of 6 percent reconviction for a second sexual offense. (Sturgeon and Taylor, 1980). Interestingly, Those who committed subsequent sex the recidivism rate for same-sex child offenses were more likely to have been molesters for other crimes against persons married, have a personality disorder, and was also quite high, with 26 percent having have a more serious sex offense history than reconvictions for these offenses. Similarly, those who did not recidivate sexually. In a number of other studies have found that addition, recidivists were more likely to have child molesters have relatively high rates of deviant phallometrically measured sexual nonsexual offenses (Quinsey, 1984). preferences (Quinsey, Lalumiere, Rice, and 60/o ° A Comparison of Offense Rates for Incest Harris, 1995). Offenders and Child Molesters 53% 50% Sturgeon and Taylor, 1980 Those who committed subsequent sex offenses 43% were more likely to have been married, have a 40% personality disorder, and have a more serious sex MReoffense 30% offense history than those who did not recidivate 30% 0Previous Offense—25% sexually. c 20% In a study utilizing a 24-year follow-up "°'° period, victim differences (e.g., gender of 10% 6% n the victim) were not found to be associated 0% with the recidivism (defined as those Incest Offenders Opposite Sex Child Some Sex Child charged with a subsequent sexual offense) Molesters Molesters of child molesters. This study of 111 extra- Several studies have involved follow-up of familial child molesters found that the extra-familial child molesters. One such number of prior sex offenses and sexual study (Barbaree and Marshall, 1988) preoccupation with children were related to included both official and unofficial sex offense recidivism (Prentky, Knight, and measures of recidivism (reconviction, new Lee, 1997). However, the authors of this charge, or unofficial record). Using both study noted that the finding of no victim types of measures, researchers found that differences may have been due to the fact 43 percent of these offenders (convicted of that the offenders in this study had an sex offenses involving victims under the age average of three prior sex offenses before of 16 years) sexually reoffended within a their prison release. Thus, this sample may four-year follow-up period. Those who had have had a higher base rate of reoffense a subsequent sex offense differed from than child molesters from the general prison those who did not by their use of force in population, the offense, the number of previous sexual assault victims, and their score on a sexual index that included a phallometric °Also referred to as plethysmography: adevice used to measure sexual arousal(erectile response)to both appropriate(age appropriate and consenting)and deviant sexual stimulus material. 9 Probationers Meta-analyses have certain advantages over more traditional summaries in that through Research reviewed to this point has almost the inclusion of multiple studies, a reliable exclusively focused upon institutional or estimation of effects can be obtained that is prison populations and therefore, presumably generalizable across studies and samples. a more serious offender population. An As noted earlier, the results obtained from important recent study concerns recidivism individual studies of sex offenders are among a group of sex offenders placed on heavily influenced by the sample of probation (Kruttschnitt, Uggen, and Shelton, offenders included in the research. 2000). Although the factors that were Therefore, there is much to be gained related to various types of reoffending were through the use of meta-analysis in somewhat similar with regard to subsequent summarizing sex offender recidivism (see sex offenses, the only factor associated with Quinsey, Harris, Rice, and Lalumiere, 1993). reducing reoffending in this study was the combination of stable employment and sex As has also previously been observed, it is offender treatment. Such findings imperative to distinguish between sex emphasize the importance of both formal offense recidivism and the commission of and informal social controls in holding other subsequent criminal behavior, as well offenders accountable for their criminal as the type of current sex offense. One of behavior. The findings also provide support the most widely recognized meta-analyses for treatment services that focus on coping of sexual offender recidivism (Hanson and with inappropriate sexual impulses, Bussiere, 1998) was structured around fantasies, and behaviors through specific sex these dimensions. offender treatment. Meta-Analysis Studies Synthesis of Recidivism Studies In Hanson and Bussiere's meta-analysis, 61 research studies met the criteria for There have been several notable efforts at inclusion, with all utilizing a longitudinal conducting a qualitative or narrative design and a comparison group. Across all synthesis of studies of the recidivism of sex studies, the average sex offense recidivism offenders (Quinsey, 1984; Furby, Weinrott, rate (as evidenced by rearrest or and Blackshaw, 1989; Quinsey, Lalumiere, reconviction) was 18.9 percent for rapists Rice, and Harris, 1995; Schwartz and and 12.7 percent for child molesters over a Cellini, 1997). Such an approach attempts four to five year period. The rate of to summarize findings across various studies recidivism for nonsexual violent offenses by comparing results and searching for was 22.1 percent for rapists and 9.9 patterns or trends. Another technique, percent for child molesters, while the known as meta-analysis, relies upon a recidivism rate for any reoffense for rapists quantitative approach to synthesizing was 46.2 percent and 36.9 percent for child research results from similar studies. Meta- molesters over a four to five year period. analysis involves a statistically sophisticated However, as has been noted previously and approach to estimating the combined effects as these authors warn, one should be of various studies that meet certain cautious in the interpretation of the data as methodological criteria and is far from a these studies involved a range of methods simple lumping together of disparate studies and follow-up periods. to obtain average effects. Perhaps the greatest advantage of the meta- analysis approach is in determining the relative importance of various factors across 10 studies. Using this technique, one can child was not related to repeat sexual estimate how strongly certain offender and offending. offense characteristics are related to recidivism because they show up Studies that Focus on Dynamic Factors consistently across different studies. 50% Meta-Analysis of 61 Studies As noted earlier, the detection of dynamic Hanson and Bussiere, 1999 46.2%— factors that are associated with sexual 45% offending behavior is significant, because 40% 36.9% these characteristics can serve as the focus 35/° ®Child Molesters of intervention. However, many recidivism ao% ■Rapists studies (including most of those previously 25% 22.1%� discussed) have focused almost exclusively 20% 18.9% r 15% 127,/° on static factors, since they are most readily available from case files. Static, or 10% historical, factors help us to understand (r � ' etiology and permit predictions of relative Sexual Reoffense Nonsexual Violent Any Reoffense likelihood of reoffending. Dynamic factors Reoffense take into account changes over time that In the 1998 Hanson and Bussiere study, adjust static risk and informs us about the these characteristics were grouped into types of interventions that are most useful in demographics, criminal lifestyle, sexual lowering risk. criminal history, sexual deviancy, and various clinical characteristics. Regarding In a study focused on dynamic factors, demographics, being young and single were Hanson and Harris (1998) collected data on consistently found to be related, albeit over 400 sex offenders under community weakly, to subsequent sexual offending. supervision, approximately one-half of whom With regard to sex offense history, sex were recidivists.5 The recidivists had offenders were more likely to recidivate if committed a new sexual offense while on they had prior sex offenses, male victims, community supervision during a five-year victimized strangers or extra-familial victims, period (1992-1997). A number of begun sexually offending at an early age, significant differences in stable dynamic and/or engaged in diverse sex crimes. factors were discovered between recidivists and non-recidivists. Those who committed Sexual interest in children The factors that subsequent sex offenses were more likely to was the strongest were found be unemployed (more so for rapists) and predictor of recidivism through this have substance abuse problems. The non- across all studies. analysis to have recidivists tended to have positive social the strongest influences and were more likely to have relationship with sexual offense recidivism intimacy problems. There also were were those in the sexual deviance category: considerable attitudinal differences between sexual interest in children, deviant sexual the recidivists and non-recidivists. Those preferences, and sexual interest in boys. who committed subsequent sex offenses Failure to complete treatment was also were less likely to show remorse or concern found to be a moderate predictor of sexual for the victim. In addition, recidivists tended recidivism. Having general psychological to see themselves as being at little risk for problems was not related to sexual offense recidivism, but having a personality disorder 5 For the purposes of this study, recidivism was defined as a was related. Being sexually abused as a conviction or charge for a new sexual offense, a non-sexual criminal charge that appeared to be sexually motivated, a violation of supervision conditions for sexual reasons, and self-disclosure by the offender. 11 committing new offenses, were less likely to Impact of Interventions on Sex avoid high-risk situations and were more Offender Recidivism likely to report engaging in deviant sexual activities. In general, the recidivists were Although not the primary purpose of this described as having more chaotic, antisocial document, a few words regarding sex lifestyles compared to the non-recidivists (Hanson and Harris, 1998). offender treatment and supervision are in order. Factors that are linked to sex The researchers concluded that sex offender recidivism are of direct relevance offenders are: for sex offender management. If the characteristics of offenders most likely to "...at most risk of reoffending when they recidivate can be isolated, they can serve to become sexually preoccupied, have access identify those who have the highest to victims, fail to acknowledge their likelihood of committing subsequent sex recidivism risk, and show sharp mood offenses. They can also help identify increases, particularly anger." offender populations that are appropriate for participation in treatment and specialized In sum, because meta-analysis findings can supervision and what the components of be generalized across studies and samples, those interventions must include. they offer the most reliable estimation of Treatment factors associated with the recidivism of sex offenders. Most meta-analysis studies, When assessing the efficacy of sex offender however, have focused on static factors. It treatment, it is vital to recognize that the is critical that more research be conducted delivery of treatment occurs within different These[dynamic]factors will to identify settings.dynamic Those offenders who receive assuredly provide a foundation treatment in a community setting are for developing more effective factors generally assumed to be a different intervention strategies for sex associated population than those who are treated in offenders. with sex institutions. Thus, base rates of recidivating offender behavior will differ for these groups prior to recidivism. These factors will assuredly provide a foundation for developing more treatment participation. effective intervention strategies for sex offenders. Sex offender treatment typically consists of three principal approaches: Characteristics* of recidivists include: the cognitive-behavioral approach, which • multiple victims; emphasizes changing patterns of thinking • diverse victims; that are related to sexual offending and • stranger victims; changing deviant patterns of arousal; • juvenile sexual offenses; • multiple paraphilias; the psycho-educational approach, which • history of abuse and neglect; stresses increasing the offender's • long-term separations from parents; concern for the victim and recognition of • negative relationships with their mothers; responsibility for their offense; and • diagnosed antisocial personality disorder; the pharmacological approach, which is • unemployed; based upon the use of medication to • substance abuse problems; and reduce sexual arousal. • chaotic, antisocial lifestyles. "It should be noted that these are not necessarily risk factors. In practice, these approaches are not mutually exclusive and treatment programs 12 are increasingly utilizing a combination of an institutional setting (Hanson, Steffy, and these techniques. Gauthier, 1993). Although there has been a considerable On the other hand, an evaluation of a amount of writing on the relative merits of cognitive-behavioral program that employs these approaches and about sex offender an experimental design presented preliminary treatment in general, there is a paucity of findings that suggest that participation in evaluative research regarding treatment this form of treatment may have a modest outcomes. There have been very few (though not statistically significant) effect in studies of sufficient rigor (e.g., employing an reducing recidivism. After a follow-up experimental or quasi-experimental design) period of 34 months, 8 percent of the to compare the effects of various treatment offenders in the treatment program had a approaches or comparing treated to subsequent sex offense, compared with 13 untreated sex offenders (Quinsey, 1998). percent of the control group, who had also volunteered for the program, but were not Using less rigorous evaluation strategies, selected through the random assignment several studies have evaluated the outcomes process (Marques, Day, Nelson, and West, of offenders receiving sex offender 1994). treatment, compared to a group of offenders not receiving treatment. The results of Some studies present optimistic conclusions these studies are mixed. For example, about the effectiveness of programs that are Barbaree and Marshall (1988) found a empirically based, offense-specific, and substantial difference in the recidivism rates comprehensive. A 1995 meta-analysis of extra-familial child molesters who study on sex offender treatment outcome participated in a community based cognitive- studies found a small, yet significant, behavioral treatment program, compared to treatment effect (Hall, 1995). This meta- a group of similar offenders who did not analysis included 12 studies with some form receive treatment. Those who participated of control group. Despite the small number in treatment had a recidivism rate of 18 of subjects (1,313), the results indicated an percent over a four-year follow-up period, 8 percent reduction in the recidivism rate for compared to a 43 percent recidivism rate for sex offenders in the treatment group.' the nonparticipating group of offenders. 50% Comparison of Recidivism Rates of Treated and Recently, Alexander (1999) conducted an Untreated Child Molesters ° analysis of a large group of treatment 45% Barbaree and Marshall, 1988 43% outcome studies, encompassing nearly 40% 11,000 sex offenders. In this study, data 35% from 79 sex offender treatment studies were 30% combined and reviewed. Results indicated 25% that sex offenders who participated in 20°,° 18% relapse prevention treatment programs had a 15% combined rearrest rate of 7.2 percent, 10°x° compared to 17.6 percent for untreated 5% offenders. The overall rearrest rate for 0% Treated Child Molesters Untreated Child Molesters However, no positive effect of treatment was found in several other quasi- experiments involving an institutional s For the purposes of this study, recidivism was measured by behavioral program (Rice, Quinsey, and additional sexually aggressive behavior, including official legal Harris, 1991 or a milieu therapy approach in charges as well as, in some studies, unofficial data such as pY pP self-report. 13 treated sex offenders in this analysis was offender's criminal and sex offense history, 13.2 percent.7 the degree of self-selection (whether they o Rearrest Rates of Treated and chose to participate in treatment or were 20% 18% Untreated Sex Offenders 17.8% placed in a program), and the dropout rate of 18% Alexander. 1999 offenders from treatment. 14% 13.2% 12% Juvenile Treatment Research 10% 8% 7.2% Research on juvenile sex offender recidivism 6% is particularly lacking. Some studies have 4% examined the effectiveness of treatment in 2% reducing subsequent sexual offending °°% behavior in youth. Key findings from these Relapse Prevention All Treated Offenders Untreated Offenders i ll f studies include the following: g' The Association for the Treatment of Sexual Program evaluation data suggest that the Abusers (ATSA) has established a sexual recidivism rate for juveniles Collaborative Data Research Project with the treated in specialized programs ranges goals of defining standards for research on from approximately 7 to 13 percent over treatment, summarizing existing research, follow-up periods of two to five years and promoting high quality evaluations. As (Becker, 1990). part of this project, researchers are conducting a meta-analysis of treatment Juveniles appear to respond well to studies. Included in the meta-analysis are cognitive-behavioral and/or relapse studies that compare treatment groups with prevention treatment, with rearrest rates some form of a control group. Preliminary of approximately 7 percent through findings indicate that the overall effect of follow-up periods of more than five years treatment shows reductions in both sexual (Alexander, 1999). recidivism, 10 percent of the treatment Studies suggest that rates of nonsexual subjects to 17 percent of the control group recidivism are generally higher than subjects, and general recidivism, 32 percent sexual recidivism rates, ranging from 25 of the treatment subjects to 51 percent of the control group subjects (Hanson, 2000).8 to 50 percent (Becker, 1990, Kahn and Chambers, 1991, Schram, Milloy, and Just as it is difficult to arrive at definitive Rowe, 1991). conclusions regarding factors that are In a recently conducted study, Hunter and related to sex offender recidivism, there are Figueredo (1999) found that as many as 50 similarly no definitive results regarding the percent of youths entering a community- effect of interventions with these offenders. based treatment program were expelled Sex offender treatment programs and the during the first year of their participation. results of treatment outcome studies may Those who failed the program had higher vary not only due to their therapeutic overall levels of sexual maladjustment, as approach, but also by the location of the measured on assessment instruments, and treatment (e.g., community, prison, or were at greater long-term risk for sexual psychiatric facility), the seriousness of the recidivism. Lengthof follow-up in this analysis varied from less than Supervision one year to more than five years. Most studies in this analysis indicated a three to five year follow-up period. There has been little research on the a Average length of follow-up in these studies was four to five years. effectiveness of community supervision 14 programs (exclusively) in reducing reoffense Implications for Sex Offender behavior in sex offenders. The majority of Management supervision programs for sex offenders involve treatment and other interventions to This paper presented a range of issues that contain offenders' deviant behaviors. are critical in defining the recidivism of sex Therefore, it is difficult to measure the offenders. Although there are certainly large effects of supervision alone on reoffending behavior—to date, no such studies have gaps in criminal justice knowledge regarding been conducted. the determinants of recidivism and the characteristics of effective interventions, Evaluating the Effects of Interventions what is known has significant implications for policy and intervention. Identification of factors associated with The heterogeneity of sex offenders must be recidivism of sex offenders can play an acknowledged. Although sex offenders are important role in determining intervention often referred to as a "type" of offender, strategies with this population. Yet, the there are a wide variety of behaviors and effectiveness of interventions themselves on offender backgrounds that fall into this reducing recidivism must be evaluated if the classification of criminals (Knight and criminal justice system is to control these prentky, 1990). As mentioned earlier, many offenders and prevent further victimization. sex offenders have histories of assaulting However, not only have there been few studies of sufficient rigor on treatment across sex and age groups—recent research outcomes, less rigorous study results thus (Ahlmeyer, Heil, McKee, and English, 2000)found that these offenders may be even far have been mixed. Although one study more heterogeneous than previously may find a substantial difference in recidivism rates for offenders who believed. participated in a specific type of treatment, Criminal justice professionals must continue another may find only a modest positive to expand their understanding of how sex treatment effect, and still other studies may offenders are different from the general reveal no positive effects. There has been criminal population. Although some sex even less research conducted to evaluate offenders are unique from the general the impact of community supervision programs in reducing recidivism. More criminal population (e.g., many extrafamilial studies measuring the effects of both child molesters), others (e.g., many rapists) treatment and supervision are necessary to possess many of the same characteristics truly advance efforts in the field of sex that are associated with recidivism of offender management. general criminal behavior. As criminal justice understanding of these offenders and the factors associated with their behavior More studies measuring the effects of both increases, more refined classification needs treatment and supervision are necessary to truly to be developed and treatment programs advance efforts in the field of sex offender management. need to be redesigned to accommodate these differences. Interventions should be based on the growing body of knowledge about sex offender and general criminal recidivism. Research demonstrates that while sex offenders are much more likely to commit subsequent sexual offenses than the general 15 criminal population, they do not exclusively about this particular group of offenders. A commit sexual offenses. Therefore, some number of characteristics that are typically aspects of intervention with the general associated with the recidivism of sex criminal population may have implications offenders were identified in this document, for effective management of sex offenders, including: victim age, gender, and Quinsey (1998) has recommended that in relationship to the offender; impulsive, the absence of definitive knowledge about antisocial behavior; the seriousness of the effective sex offender treatment, the best offense; and the number of previous sex approach would be to structure interventions offenses. Also, an influential factor in sex around what is known about the treatment offender recidivism is the nature of the of offenders in general. offender's sexual preferences and sexually deviant interests. The discovery and In the realm of interventions with general measurement of these interests can serve as criminal offenders, there is a growing body of literature that suggests that the cognitive- a focus for treatment intervention. behavioral approach holds considerable promise. Dynamic factors should influence individualized interventions. In addition, In the realm of interventions with general dynamic factors associated with recidivism criminal offenders, there is a growing body should inform the structure of treatment and of literature that suggests that the cognitive- supervision, as these are characteristics that behavioral approach holds considerable can be altered. These factors include the promise (Gendreau and Andrews, 1990). formation of positive relationships with Cognitive-behavioral treatment involves a peers, stable employment, avoidance of comprehensive, structured approach based alcohol and drugs, prevention of depression, on sexual learning theory using cognitive reduction of deviant sexual arousal, and restructuring methods and behavioral increase in appropriate sexual preferences, techniques. Behavioral methods are when they exist. primarily directed at reducing arousal and increasing pro-social skills. The cognitive Interventions that ...dynamic factors behavioral approach employs peer groups strive to facilitate and educational classes, and uses a varietyassociated with recidivism development of eveo should inform the structure p of counseling theories. This approach of treatment and positive dynamic suggests that interventions are most supervision... factors in sex effective when they address the offenders are criminogenic needs of high-risk offenders consistent with cognitive-behavioral or social (Andrews, 1982). The characteristics of learning approaches to treatment. Such programs that are more likely to be effective approaches determine interventions based with this population include skill-based upon an individualized planning process, training, modeling of pro-social behaviors utilizing standard assessment instruments to and attitudes, a directive but non-punitive determine an appropriate intervention orientation, a focus on modification of strategy. As Quinsey (1998: 419) noted precursors to criminal behavior, and a "with the exception of antiandrogenic supervised community component (Quinsey, medication or castration, this model is 1998). currently the only approach that enjoys any evidence of effectiveness in reducing sexual Although these program characteristics may recidivism." be instructive in forming the basis for interventions with sex offenders, treatment approaches must incorporate what is known 16 Conclusion behavior that can serve as the focus for intervention. This information can be Although there have been many noteworthy utilized to categorize the level of risk posed research studies on sex offender recidivism by offenders, and help determine whether a in the last 15 to 20 years, there remains particular offender is appropriate for much to be learned about the factors treatment and specialized supervision. associated with the likelihood of reoffense. However, in order to make objective and Ongoing dialogue between researchers and empirically based decisions about the type of practitioners supervising and treating sex treatment and conditions of supervision that offenders is essential to identifying research would best control the offender and protect needs, gathering information about offenders the public, more rigorous research is needed and the events leading up to offenses, and to study the effects of various treatment ensuring that research activity can be approaches and community supervision on translated into strategies to more effectively recidivism. manage sex offenders in the community. Ultimately, research on sex offender recidivism must be designed and applied to Acknowledgements practice with the goals of preventing further victimization and creating safer Tim Bynum, Ph.D., Michigan State communities. University, School of Criminal Justice, was the principal author of this paper, with Practitioners must continue to look to the contributions by Madeline Carter, Scott most up-to-date research studies on sex Matson, and Charles Onley. The Center for offender recidivism to inform their Sex Offender Management would like to intervention strategies with individual thank David D'Amora, Kim English, Robert offenders. Researchers can minimize Prentky, and Lloyd Sinclair for their ambiguity in study results by clearly defining assistance and contributions to this article. measures of recidivism, comparing distinct Kristin Littel and Scott Matson edited the categories of sex offenders, considering document. reoffense rates for both sex crimes and all other offenses, and utilizing consistent follow-up periods (preferably five years of Contact follow-up or more). In order to reduce underestimations of the risk of recidivism, Center for Sex Offender Management they also must strive to gather information 8403 Colesville Road, Suite 720 about offenders' criminal histories from Silver Spring, MD 20910 multiple sources, beyond official criminal Phone: (301) 589-9383 justice data. In comparing results of various Fax: (301) 589-3505 studies, practitioners should not lose sight of E-mail: askcsom9csom.org how these issues impact research outcomes. Internet: www.csom.org Researchers must also continue to accumulate evidence about the relationship References of static and dynamic factors to recidivism— such data can assist practitioners in making Alexander, M.A. (1999). Sexual offender more accurate assessments of the likelihood treatment efficacy revisited. Sexual Abuse: of reoffending. In particular, researchers A Journal of Research and Treatment, 11 must strive to identify dynamic characteristics associated with sex offending (2), 101-117. 17 Ahlmeyer, S., English, K., & Simons, D. English, K., Pullen, S., & Jones, L. (Eds.) (1999). The impact of polygraphy on (1996). Managing adult sex offenders: A admissions of crossover offending behavior containment approach. Lexington, KY: in adult sexual offenders. Presentation at American Probation and Parole Association. the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Furby, L., Weinrott, M.R., & Blackshaw, L. Abusers 18 Annual Research and Treatment Conference, Lake Buena Vista, (1989). Sex offender recidivism: A review. FL. Psychological Bulletin, 105 (1), 3-30. Ahlmeyer, S., Heil, P., McKee, B., and Gottfredson, M.R. & Hirschi, T. (1990). A English, K. (2000). The impact of general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: polygraphy raPhY on admissions of victims and Stanford University Press. offenses in adult sexual offenders. Sexual Gendreau, P. & Andrews, D.A. (1990). Abuse:A Journal of Research and What the meta-analysis of the offender Treatment, 12 (2), 123-138. treatment literature tell us about what Andrews, D. A. (1982). The supervision of works. Canadian Journal of Criminology, offenders: Identifying and gaining control 32, 173-184. over the factors which make a difference. Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. Program Branch User Report. Ottawa: (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of Solicitor General of Canada. adult criminal recidivism: What works. Barbaree, H.E. & Marshall, W.L. (1988). Criminology, 34, 575-607. Deviant sexual arousal, offense history, and Gibbens, T.C.N., Soothill, K.L., & Way, C.K. demographic variables as predictors of (1978). Sibling and parent-child incest reoffense among child molesters. Behavioral offenders. British Journal of Criminology, Sciences and the Law, 6 (2), 267-280. 18, 40-52. Beck, A.J. & Shipley, B.E. (1989). Greenfeld, L.A. (1997). Sex offenses and Recidivism of prisoners released in 1983. offenders: An analysis of data on rape and Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of sexual assault. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Becker, J.V. (1990). Treating adolescent Statistics. sexual offenders. Professional Psychology: Grunfeld, B. & Noreik, K. (1986). Research, and Practice, 21, 362-365. Recidivism among sex offenders: A follow- Bonta, J. & Hanson, R.K. (1995). Violent up study of 541 Norwegian sex offenders. recidivism of men released from prison. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, Paper presented at the 1031d Annual 9, 95-102. Convention of the American Psychological Hall, G.C.N. (1995). Sex offender Association, New York. recidivism revisited: A meta-analysis of Clarke, S.H. & Crum, L. (1985). Returns to recent treatment studies. Journal of prison in North Carolina. Chapel Hill, NC: Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63 (5), Institute of Government, University of North 802-809. Carolina. Hanson, R.K. (2000). The effectiveness of Delaware Statistical Analysis Center. treatment for sexual offenders: Report of the (1984). Recidivism in Delaware after release Association for the Treatment of Sexual from incarceration. Dover, DE: Author. Abusers Collaborative Data Research Committee. Presentation at the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers 19`" Annual Research and Treatment Conference, San Diego, CA. 18 Hanson, R.K. & Bussiere, M. (1998). Kruttschnitt, C., Uggen, C., & Shelton, K. Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual (2000). Predictors of desistance among sex offender recidivism studies. Journal of offenders: The interactions of formal and Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66 (2), informal social controls. Justice Quarterly, 348-362. 17 (1), 61-87. Hanson, R.K. & Harris, A. (1998). Dynamic Marques, J.K., Day, D.M., Nelson, C., & predictors of sexual recidivism. Ottawa: West, M.A. (1994). Effects of cognitive- Solicitor General of Canada. behavioral treatment on sex offenders' recidivism: Preliminary results of a Hanson, R.K., Scott, H., & Steffy, R.A. (1995). A comparison of child molesters longitudinal study. Criminal Justice and and nonsexual criminals: Risk predictors and Behavior, 21, 28-54. long-term recidivism. Journal of Research in Marshall, W.L. & Barbaree, H.E. (1990). Crime and Delinquency, 32 (3), 325-337. Outcomes of comprehensive cognitive- Hanson, R.K., Steffy, R.A., & Gauthier, R. behavioral treatment programs. In W.L. (1993). Long-term recidivism of child Marshall, D.R. Laws, and H.E. Barbaree molesters. Journal of Consulting and (Eds.), Handbook of sexual assault: Issues, Criminal Psychology, 61 (4), 646-652. theories, and treatment of the offender(pp. 363-385). New York: Plenum. Hunter, J.A. & Figueredo, A.J. (1999). Factors associated with treatment Prentky, R., Knight, R., & Lee, A. (1997). Risk factors associated with recidivism compliance in a population of juvenile sexual among extra-familial child molesters. offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 11, 49-68. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65 (1), 141-149. Kahn, T.J. & Chambers, H.J. (1991). Assessing reoffense risk with juvenile sexual Prentky, R., Lee, A., Knight, R., & Cerce, D. offenders. Child Welfare, 19, 333-345. (1997). Recidivism rates among child molesters and rapists: A methodological Kilpatrick, D.G., Edmunds, C.N., & Seymour, analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 21, A. (1992). Rape in America: A report to the 635-659. nation. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Victims of Crime and Crime Victims Quinsey, V.L. (1980). The base-rate Research and Treatment Center. problem and the prediction of dangerousness: A reappraisal. Journal of Knight, R.A. & Prentky, R.A. (1990). Psychiatry and the Law, 8, 329-340. Classifying sexual offenders: The Quinsey, V.L. (1984). Sexual aggression: development and corroboration of taxonomic Studies of offenders against women. In models. In W.L. Marshall, D.R. Laws, and H.E. Barbaree (Eds.), Handbook of sexual D.N. Weisstub(Ed.). Law and Mental assault: Issues, theories, and treatment of Health: International Perspectives (pp. 140- 172), Vol. 2. New York: Pergamon. the offender(pp. 23-52). New York: Plenum. Quinsey, V.L. (1998). Treatment of sex Knopp, F.A., Freeman-Longo, R., & offenders. In M. Tonry (Ed.), The handbook Stevenson, W.F. (1992). Nationwide survey of crime and punishment(pp. 403-425). ofjuvenile and adult sex offender treatment New York: Oxford University Press. programs and models. Orwell, VT: Safer Quinsey, V.L., Harris, G.T., Rice, M.E., & Society Press. Lalumiere, M. (1993). Assessing treatment efficacy in outcome studies of sex offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8, 512-523. 19 Quinsey, V.L., Lalumiere, M.L., Rice, M.E., Roundtree, G.A., Edwards, D.W., & Parker, & Harris, G.T. (1995). Predicting sexual J.B. (1984). A study of personal offenses. In J.C. Campbell (Ed.), Assessing characteristics of probationers as related to dangerousness: Violence by sexual recidivism. Journal of Offender Counseling, offenders, batterers, and child abusers (pp. 8, 53-61. 114-137). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schram, D.D., Milloy, C.D., & Rowe, W.E. Quinsey, V.L., Rice, M.E., & Harris, G.T. (1991). Juvenile sex offenders: A follow-up (1995). Actuarial prediction of sexual study of reoffense behavior. Olympia, WA: recidivism. Journal of Interpersonal Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Violence, 10 (1), 85-105. Schwartz, B.K. & Cellini, H.R. (1997). Sex Rice, M.E., Harris, G.T., & Quinsey, V.L. offender recidivism and risk factors in the (1990). A follow-up of rapists assessed in a involuntary commitment process. maximum security psychiatric facility. Albuquerque, NM: Training and Research Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5 (4), Institute Inc. 435-448. Sturgeon, V.H. & Taylor, J. (1980). Report Rice, M.E., Quinsey, V.L., & Harris, G.T. of a five-year follow-up study of mentally (1991). Sexual recidivism among child disordered sex offenders released from molesters released from a maximum security Atascadero State Hospital in 1973. Criminal institution. Journal of Consulting and Justice Journal, 4, 31-63. Clinical Psychology, 59, 381-386. West, D.J., Roy, C., & Nichols, F.L. (1978). Romero, J. & Williams, L. (1985). Understanding sexual attacks: A study Recidivism among convicted sex offenders: based upon a group of rapists undergoing A 10-year follow-up study. Federal psychotherapy. London: Heinemann. Probation, 49, 58-64. This project was supported by Grant No. 97-WT-VX-K007, awarded by the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.