ADOLESCENT VRS ADULT SEX OFFENDERS The Adolescent Brain
ADOLESCENT VRS ADULT SEX OFFENDERS
The Adolescent Brain • We once thought the brain was fully formed by the end of childhood but recent research has shown that adolescence is a time of profound grain growth and change.
a n d r e g u l a t i n g e m o t i o n. The frontal cortex is often referred to as the CEO of the brain, because it is responsible for Planning, organizing, strategizing, delaying gratification and regulating emotions.
The amygdala, part of the liimbic system, is the part of the brain associated with emotions. The nuclear accumbens in this region is the pleasure/reward center of the brain and is most active in the teenage years.
Brain Changes During Adolescence • While 95% of the human brain has developed by the age of six, scientists have discovered that the greatest growth spurts after infancy occur during adolescence.
Time lapse MRI images of brain development over time from 5 to 20. . The blue represents more efficient neural connections and move from the back of the brain to the front.
Adolescent Brain Developing in Two Ways • Wealth of growth in synapses allowing for maximal learning • Pruning of the synapses along with myelination which increases the efficiency of the brain
The Pruning Process • The pruning of synapses (neuronal connections) begins in the back of the brain and moves forward so that the prefrontal cortex is the last to be trimmed and tuned. This will not be completed until age 25.
Decision Making – Teen vrs Adults • Brain imaging (f. MRIs) show that most of the mental energy that teenagers use in making decisions is located in the back of the brain whereas adults do most of their processing in the frontal lobes.
Better Thinking Through Better Wiring Adult brains are better wired to notice errors in decision making. For instance when adults performed tasks that require quick responses to pushing buttons, their brains send out a signal when a mistake was made in 80 milleseconds but teen brains usually didn’t notice the mistakes at all. Dr. Jay Gould - NIMH
The Pleasure/Reward Center A well-developed and active area of the teen brain is the area of the limbic system known as the nucleus accumbens that seeks pleasure and rewards. When receiving rewards, adolescents exhibit an exaggerated response compared to adults.
The Brakes The Prefrontal Cortex acts as the braking system on the reward/risk taking of the limbic system. Until this region is fully developed and properly connected to other brain regions, the emotional and pleasure seeking areas of the brain will predominate.
REWARD CENTER EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONING CENTER
I WANT WHAT I WANT WHEN I WANT IT AND I WANT IT NOW! Delaying gratification is more difficult in the teenage brain than in the adult brain again because of the immature PFC.
“The prefrontal cortex is the part of the brain that is helping organization, planning and strategizing. It’s unfair to expect adolescents to have adult levels of organization skills or decision making before their brains are finished being built. ” Jay Gould – NIMH Researcher
TESTOSTERONE AND ADOLESCENT MEN
TESTOSTERONE LEVELS IN MEN • Immediately after birth an infant boy may have slightly elevated levels of testosterone. • In six months, this level drops to an almost undetectable 20 ng/d. L of blood. • During puberty, levels can rise to 1, 000 ng/d. L
Decreases in Testosterone Levels Over Time
Some Facts About Testosterone • Increases in testosterone is associated with increases in sexual desire, arousal and sexual activity. • Increases in testosterone is associated with aggression. Highest testosterone levels at age 19 correlates with highest levels of criminal aggression at 19. • Watching a sexually explicit movie increases testosterone levels 35% peaking 1 hr. after the movie.
Testosterone might be likened then to the gas that fuels the revving engine (the brain) that is driving the teenage boy to seek sexual pleasure and excitement that needs to be controlled by the brakes (prefrontal cortex) which are not yet fully operational.
SOME OTHER DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ADOLESCENT AND ADULT OFFENDERS
DEVIANT SEXUAL AROUSAL • Most adolescents do not have deviant sexual arousal preferences or fantasies. • Most adolescent sex offenders are not sexual predators nor do they meet the accepted criteria for pedophilia. • Sexual arousal and attraction in adolescence is more generalized often to sexual body parts. • Choice of children (33% of all sex crimes against children are by adolescents) but this is not usually a sexually preference – more related to opportunity, access and impulsivity.
STATUS OFFENSES Juveniles are held accountable ( arrested, prosecuted and adjudicated) for offenses they would not be if committed as adults. • • • Age of consent in Minnesota is 16 If partner is under 16 and more than 24 mos. younger and offender engages in penetration it is CSC regardless of consent If the partner is under 16 and more than 36 mos. younger and offender engages in sexual touch it is CSC regardless of consent.
Pedophilia in the DSM-IV-R “Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing relationship with a twelve or thirteen year old girl”
Juvenile Sexual Offender Recidivism
Juvenile Sexual Offender Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool (J Sorrat-II) • Large sample size (n= 636) • All 12 -17 yr. olds adjudicated for sex offense in Utah from 1990 -1992 • Full spectrum of sexual offending behaviors
Findings – 14 Year Follow-up • Sexual Recidivism as Juvenile = 13. 2% (84) • Sexual Recidivism as Adult = 9. 1 % (58)
Prior Treatment Status • Never entered treatment 9. 1 % • Entered/never failed tx 46. 2% • Failed at least one treatment 73. 1%
Risk Categories Based on Recidivism • Low to Moderately Low Risk 70% • Moderate to High Risk 30 %
Resources Question Should we allocate most of our resources – law enforcement, judicial, corrections and treatment - to the more significant risk group, the 30%, rather than to the lower risk group, the 70%?
CONCLUSION The Juvenile Justice System was founded on the basic premise that youth are different from adults and need to be help accountable in developmentally appropriate ways.
RISK – NEEDS – RESPONSIVITY MODEL
MYTHS ABOUT ADOLESCENT SEX OFFENDERS Old Myths: • Few sex crimes are committed by juveniles. • Adolescents who behave in inappropriate sexual behaviors are merely exploring their newfound sexuality. • No specialized intervention or treatment is needed as the behavior is developmentally specific and will go away on its own.
FACTS DISPELLING OLD MYTHS • Adolescents account for 17% of all arrests for sex crimes. • Adolescents account for 1/3 of all sex offenses against children. • The majority of sex crimes against young children are committed by boy ages 12 to 15. (from National Center on Sexual Behavior of Youth, 2003)
THE NEW MYTHS ABOUT ASO’S • Adolescent sex offenders are like adult sex offenders and need to be treated similarly. • Adolescents who offend sexually will go on to commit sexual offenses as adults. • Adolescent sex offenders are no different than other juvenile delinquents.
EVIDENCE DISPELLING THESE MYTHS • Adolescent sex offenders are distinctly different from adult offenders in significant ways. • Most adolescent sex offenders (90%) will not be adjudicated on a subsequent adult sex offense. • ASO’s, while sharing some characteristics, are significantly different than adolescents who commit only non-sexual crimes.
TWENTY YR TRENDS IN RESPONSES TO ASO’S 71% increase in waivers to adult courts 50% of states lowered the age to try as adults 50% of states allow public access to ASO records 90% of states call for registration of ASO’s 25% of ASO’s placed in long-term residential tx vrs 10% in previous twenty years • Increase in ASO’s not allowed in mainstream schools even after completion of treatment • • •
DATA FROM JSORRAT -II • Dave Flowers and John De. Witt of the Utah Juvenile Justice System developed only empirically based risk assessment tool for ASOS. • Research for the instrument based on study of large sample of 636 adolescent(12 -17 yr. olds) adjudicated for sex offenses in Utah 1990 -92 • Subjects committed full spectrum of sexual offending behaviors
SEXUAL RECIDIVISM FINDINGS 14 YEAR FOLLOW-UP TO 2004 Ø Juvenile Sexual Recidivism 13. 2% Ø Adult Sexual Recidivism 9. 1 % Ø Anytime Sexual Recidivism 19. 8%
PRIOR TREATMENT STATUS § Never Entered Treatment % 9. 1 § Entered and Completed 46. 2% § Failed One or More Treatments 73. 1%
RISK CATEGORIES BASED ON RECIDVISM FINDINGS RISK LEVEL • • • Low Moderately High % RECIDIVISM 1. 0 % 6. 6 % 24. 3 % 43. 1 % 81. 8 %
% OF SAMPLE IN RISK CATEGORIES v LOW AND MODERATELY LOW 70% v MODERATE TO HIGH RISK 30%
POLICY QUESTIONS Should we allocate so much of our resources to the lower risk groups? Shouldn’t we put more focus on intervention, supervision and treatment on the higher risk groups?
COMPARISON OF JSO’S TO YOUTH ADJUDICATED FOR NON-SEX CRIMES From study titled What Is So Special About Male Adolescent Sexual Offending? A Review and Test of Explanations Through Meta-Analysis. Michael C. Seto and Martin Lalumiere Psychological Bulletin, 2010, No. 4, 526 -575
STUDY DESIGN The authors tested general and special explanations of male adolescent sexual offending by conducting a meta-analysis of 59 independents studies comparing male adolescent sex offenders (n=3, 855) with male adolescent non-sex offenders (n=13, 393)
PRINCIPLE FINDING “The results do not support the notion that adolescent sex offenders can be parsimoniously explained as a simple manifestation of general antisocial tendencies. ”
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO GROUPS • ASO’s had much less extensive criminal histories. • ASO’s had fewer antisocial peers • ASO’s had fewer substance use problems
OTHER MAJOR DIFFERENCES • ASO’s more likely to have been sexually abused. • ASO’s more likely to have been exposed to sexual abuse/violence. • ASO’s more likely to have been socially isolated.
DIFFERENCES CONTINUED • ASO’s experience earlier exposure to sexually explicit media and sex. • ASO’s have more atypical sexual interests. • ASO’s have greater incidence of anxiety disorders • ASO’s have generally lower self esteem
NO DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GROUPS • Attitudes and beliefs about women or sexual offending • Family communication problems • Attachment • Exposure to non-sexual violence • Conventional sexual experiences • Low intelligence
OFFENDERS AGAINST CHILDREN VRS PEERS OR ADULTS There was even greater differences between adolescent offenders who targeted children compared to non-sexual juvenile offenders.
MODELS OF TREATMENT WITH ASO’S
THE OLD MODEL THE MORAL MODEL • In the 1980’s, sex offenders were regarded as morally deficient and fixed in their behavior. • Sex offenders were viewed by treatment professionals as liars and manipulators and were told what to do. • In-your-face confrontations and shaming techniques eg. having them wear diapers, were seen as effective treatment strategies. • Treatment professionals were in total control and greater emphasis was placed on breaking through denial and resistance and confronting assumed beliefs.
CURRENT MODELS q Relapse Prevention Model q Good Lives Model q R-N-R Model
Main Features of RP Model • A model used to develop an understanding of the process by which an offender re-offends and to provide the steps to prevent a relapse • Treatment is based on the offense cycle, identifying high risk and detours. • In treatment, the offender learns strategies to avoid or manage risk situations to prevent a new sexual offense.
Weaknesses of RP Model • Focuses too much on avoidance rather than skill building. • Has good “intuitive appeal” but not well validated before being adopted by the field. • Too narrow – does not very accurately reflect other factors that may be involved in offending.
THE GOOD LIVES MODEL Developed by Ward and Steward, 2003. • Main idea is that sex offenders share the same characteristics as all human beings in that they are motivated to seek what all humans seek. • Offenders will desist from crimes when they develop more adaptive identities and live more fulfilling lives. • Major goal of GLM: Equip offenders with skills, values, attitudes, and resources necessary to lead a “good life” within their own personal context.
Weaknesses of GLM • Seems to focus on general concepts of good clinical practice rather than sex-offender specific practice • Does not take into account differences in offender characteristics such as psychopathy, mental health issues, deviant interests, etc. • Seems to advocate return to therapies to help clients “feel good” and increase their self esteem which has proven ineffective in the past.
THE R-N-R MODEL • Developed by Don Andrews as a rehabilitation model based on social psychology of criminal behavior • Refined over two decades and tested empirically to be effective • Until recently, this model has been largely ignored by sexual offender treatment field
R-N-R MODEL (Andrews and Bonita) General Guiding Philosophy: Offending is viewed as the result of complex interactions of environmental and individual factors that tilts the balance of costs and rewards toward offending behavior. “CRIME PAYS”
THREE PRINCIPLES OF R-N-R Treatment is based on three overarching principles of effective intervention for offenders: • Risk • Need • Responsivity
THE RISK PRINCIPLE • Holds that supervision and treatment levels should match the offenders level of risk. • Higher risk offenders should receive more intensive treatment for a longer duration than lower risk offenders. • Requires objective assessments (empirical or evidenced based) in making decisions.
BENEFITS OF OBJECTIVE RISK INSTRUMENTS • Contributes to public safety by avoiding further victimization through reducing risk • Reduces residential placements of offenders who do not need that level of intervention • Focuses on offender accountability because offenders must address their dynamic risk factors in treatment • Reduces social, economic and family costs associated with inappropriate and counterproductive interventions with low-risk offenders
Unintended Consequences Studies show that often there is an increase in recidivism among low risk offenders when more intensive interventions are employed because of exposure to higher risk offenders with antisocial attitudes and because of the disruptions to prosocial networks and support mechanisms such as family, school and peers.
RISK ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS • Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LSI/CMI) Hoge &Andrews (1994) • Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol–II. (J-SOAP-II) Prentky and Righthand, (2003) • Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Assessment Tool–II (JSORRAT-II) Epperson, Ralston, Fowers and Dewitt (2005) • Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR) Worling and Curwen, 2001
NEEDS PRINCIPLE • Maintains that treatment services should target an offender’s criminogenic needs – those dynamic risk factors most associated with their criminal behavior. • The dynamic risk factors are targeted for treatment because they can be changed.
THE MAJOR CRIMINOGENIC FACTORS FOR GENERAL OFFENDERS 1. Antisocial Personality Pattern -impulsive, pleasure/risk seeking, aggressive, irritable 2. Procriminal Attitudes – rationalizations for crimes, negative attitudes towards authority 3. Social Supports for Crime – criminal peers, isolation from prosocial others 4. Substance Abuse 5. Inappropriate Parenting 6. Poor School Performance 7. Lack of prosocial recreational or leisure activities
Major Dynamic Risk Factors for JSO’s SEXUAL FACTORS: • Deviant sexual interests (young kids, violence) • Obsessive sexual interests/Preoccupation • Attitudes supportive of sexual offending • Unwillingness to alter sexual interests/attitudes • No development or practice of realistic prevention plans or strategies • Incomplete sex offense specific treatment
Dynamic Risk Factors PSYCHOLOGICAL FUNCTIONING: • Antisocial interpersonal orientation • Lack of intimate peer relationships/social isolation • Negative peer associations and influences • Interpersonal aggression • Recent escalation in anger or negative affect • Poor self-regulation of affect and behavior (impulsivity)
Dynamic Risk Factors Family/Environmental Factors • High-stress family environment • Problematic parent-offender relationship/Parental rejection • Parents not supportive of sex-offense-specific assessment or treatment • Environment offers opportunities to re-offend
THE RESPONSIVITY PRINCIPLE • The Responsivity Principle contends that treatment should use cognitive social learning strategies and be tailored to the offenders specific learning style, motivation and strengths. • The choice of treatment modalities should be based on empirical evidence (best practices).
Characteristics of Providers As early as 1980, Andrew identified characteristics of service providers and the quality of therapeutic relationship impacted on recidivism rates: • Ability to convey acceptance, caring and concern • Accurate empathy • Genuineness • Rapport
Support for R-N-R Model • Andrews and Benta (2006) conducted a metaanalysis of 374 statistical tests of the effects of R-N-R and found a 26% reduction in recidivism when R-N-R used. • Hanson et. al. (2009) found that sex offender treatment that adhered to R-N-R model led to the largest reductions in recidivism.
Crime and Justice Institute EBP’s for Effective Intervention with Offenders • Assess research based risk/needs as part of an ongoing assessment plan • Enhance intrinsic motivation to change • Target interventions to the dynamic risk factors of the higher risk offenders • Be responsive to the individual differences in learning style, gender, culture and other characteristics
CJI Best Practices (2009) • Train offenders to use cognitive-behavioral strategies • Increase positive reinforcement – carrots work better than sticks • Engage support in offender’s natural community by recruiting family members and supportive prosocial others • Measure relevant progress for qual. assurance • Use measured information to provide offender feedback about their progress and to provide employees feedback about their performance
- Slides: 77