1 Myths & Misperceptions: Commonly Accepted, Through Unfounded or Disproved Beliefs, About Sexual Offenders Paul Dudek, Ph.D. Hemisha Patel Urgola, Psy.D. Special Treatment Unit Department of Human Services January 6, 2017

2 Why Do We Need To Talk About This?

3 Growing Public Attention…On any given day, when you access media sources, whether it be through print, social media, or electronic format, you will find some type of story on sex offenders. And more often than not, it is often a sensationalized account…

4 Media Focus… Frequency of “Sexual Predator” and “Sex Offender” in Headlines, Lead Paragraphs, or Terms of U.S. Newspapers (1991 to 2006) Horowitz (2007) Between 1991 and 2006, there was a seven-fold increases in news stories with the terms “sex offender” or “sexual predator” in the title. Look at the year 2000…any hypotheses?? This table would make sense if sexual offense rates were increasing in the same proportion over these years. But, they aren’t….

5 Rates of Sex Offenses Rates of Sex Offenses in the United States(1991 to 2005) Horowitz (2007) In an analysis conducted by Horowitz, “rates of rape, according to both official and self-report data, declined between 1990 and 2005 (self-report and incident-based data for rape is only available through 2005). Self-reports of rape decreased from 1.7 per 1000 individuals 12 and over to .5 per 1000 (a decrease of over 30%), and reported instances of forcible rape decreased from 41.2 per 100,000 individuals of all ages to 31.7 (a decrease of over 25%). Column 3 shows that rates of child sexual abuse decreased from 2.3 per 1000 children to 1.2 (a decrease of almost 50%) between 1991 and 2003.”

6 So, What is Really Happening Then?High Profile Cases Increased Media Coverage Increased Legislative Policies If we look at the numbers, things do not add up Increase in the frequency of news stories on “sexual offenders” and “sexual predators,” but a decrease in the actual rates of sexual offenses. What seems to be happening is a combination of things. In recent years, we have had high profile cases (some of which we will talk about in a second). That, in turn, has naturally increased the media coverage of not only those cases, but also more general cases regarding sexual offenders. That increase in media coverage causes the public to take notice. And when the public takes notice, political and legislative attention increases. That then goes back to increase media coverage. And then we just ping pong back and forth between these factors. The effect of this trickles down not only to public policy, but also in terms of supervision of sex offenders, but also the assessment and treatment of sex offenders.

7 Public Policy/ Legislation:

8 The Wetterling Act 11-year-old who was kidnapped at gunpoint by a masked stranger from Minnesota September 2016 – Remains found Jacob Wetterling– October 1989 Requires all states to keep a registry of individuals who have committed a sexual offense against children Minimum of 10 years Sexually violent offenders = Lifetime Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children & Sexually Violent Offender Tier 2 exceptions = juveniles, incest cases, statutory rape that was “consensual” (minus the ages)

9 Megan’s Law 7-year old who was raped and strangled by Jesse Timmendequas, a neighbor who lived across the street in New Jersey Timmendequas – had prior convictions for sexual offenses against children Megan Kanka – July 1994 Registration Community Notification Tier 1 – Registration Not listed in the New Jersey Sex Offender Internet Registry unless found to be repetitive and compulsive Tier 2 – Registration + Community Agencies Possibility of being listed in the Internet Registry Tier 3 – Registration + Community Agencies + Neighborhood Mandatory listing in Internet Registry Megan’s Law – October 31, 1994 (New Jersey) Megan’s Law went federal in January 1996. Megan’s Law Build’s upon Jacob’s Law by requiring that registries be made public in certain circumstances. Tier 2 exceptions = juveniles, incest cases, statutory rape that was “consensual” (minus the ages)

10 What Has Been the Impact on Recidivism Rates?Some states have a compulsory system based on merely having a conviction - level of risk is immaterial. Other states have a tier-based system based on level of risk. And others are based judicially. An offender registered in one state may be tiered differently in another state. The addition of residency restrictions has only served to complicate matters.

11 What Has Been the Impact on Recidivism Rates?Public View Levinson et al (2007) found that the public views recidivism rates to be very high and offenders are a homogenous group based on risk. Also, the public viewed registry systems as helpful in protecting their children and themselves and widely endorsed the policy. Policy People View The Office of Justice Program’s SMART Office says that registries have been implemented and maintained in the empirical absence of evidence of effectiveness. Offender’s View Offenders complain of difficulties in relationships, employment, housing, harassment, maintaining parental and family roles.

12 What Has Been the Impact on Recidivism Rates?The hypothesis that registration and notification would deter offending, increase awareness, improve apprehension, and improve monitoring was never tested before implementation. The majority of research results do not find a statistically significant shift in sex offense trends following the implementation of registration and notification regimes.

13 What Has Been the Impact on Recidivism Rates?Prescott et al (2011) suggest that police-only registration laws decrease frequency of sex crimes with large registries, but public notification appears to backfire. An average sized registry decreased crime 1.21 sex offenses per 10,000 people (13%). The benefit appears to have been very localized as there was no effect on crimes against strangers. Making a registry public increased the number of sex offenses by 1.6%, possibly because being offense free seemed less desirable. Agan (2011) found little difference in offense rates between offenders required to register and those who were not. Blocks where offenders lived did not have higher rates of sexual or non-sexual offenses. And knowing where offenders live did not reveal where crimes occurred.

14 What Has Been the Impact on Recidivism Rates?Walker et al (2006) outlines research that shows: Using UCR data on rape reports in Idaho, Hawaii, and Ohio had statistically significant reductions. Arkansas, Connecticut, Nebraska, Nevada, Oklahoma, and West Virginia saw no change in reports of rape. California saw a statistical increase in reported rapes Sex offender registration had no systematic influence on reported rape rates.

15 Public Perception of sexual offenders:

16 Fortney, Levenson, Brannon, & Baker (2007)Conducted a study examining the knowledge of both the public and actual sexual offenders on common perceptions of sex offenders Brevard County, Florida 192 community members 125 sexual offenders who were attending outpatient treatment

17 Results “What Percent of Sexual Assaults of Adults Do You Believe were Committed by Strangers?” Community Sample = 49% Offender Sample = 32% Published Data: Department of Justice – 27% of sexual assaults against adults are committed by people they do not know So, both community sample and offender sample significantly overestimated the number of assaults carried out by strangers.

18 Results “What Percentage of Sex OffendersDo You Believe Come to the Attention of Authorities?” Community Sample = 46% Offender Sample = 43% Published Data: Department of Justice – 36% of all rapes and sexual assaults of victims over the age of 12 are known to law enforcement authorities So, both community sample and offender sample significantly overestimated the number of assaults carried out by strangers.

19 “What Percent of Rapists Do You Believe Re-Offend in a Sexual Manner?”Results “What Percent of Convicted Sex Offenders Do You Believe Will Commit Another Sexual Offense?”: Community Sample = 74% Offender Sample = 21% “What Percent of Rapists Do You Believe Re-Offend in a Sexual Manner?” Offender Sample = 34% “What Percent of Child Molesters Do You Believe Re-Offend in a Sexual Manner?” Community Sample = 76% Offender Sample = 27% Published Data: Hanson & Bussiere (1998) and Hanson & Morton-Bourgon (2005) – “reported a remarkably consistent average sexual recidivism rate of about 14%” So, both community sample and offender sample significantly overestimated the number of assaults carried out by strangers.

20 Results Rate the Truthfulness of the Following Statement: “Sex Offenders Who Receive Specialized Treatment Will Commit Another Sexual Offense” Ratings of completely false, somewhat false, neutral, somewhat true, and completely true Community Sample = 51% thought it was somewhat or completely true Offender Sample = 13% thought it was somewhat or completely true So, both community sample and offender sample significantly overestimated the number of assaults carried out by strangers.

21 Assessment of sexual offenders:

22 Background InformationKNOWN FACTS: 52 sex offense related charges with 45 resulting in conviction 10 known victims All male victims (8-12 years old) Over 20 instances with some victims 72 years old Offended over at least a 15 year period ( ) Engaged in oral and anal sex Reports of other potential victims from the 1960’s and 1970’s Reports of sending child pornography online and trafficking Found to be SVP

23 Static 99R Scoring Item Score Age -3 Lived with PartnerIndex Non Sexual Violence Prior Non Sexual Violence Prior Sexual Offenses Prior Sentencing Dates Non-Contact Offenses Unrelated Victim 1 Stranger Victim Male Victims Total Score -1

24 Who Is He?....

25 Assessment – Not All Dynamic Risk Factors are Created EqualFor a characteristic to be considered a risk factor, meaningful definitions of lower and higher risk must be established and these must predict with some probability an outcome. Sex offender risk is multiply determined. Structured assessments of risk are better than unstructured. Beech and Ward (2004) suggest that static factors are the past operation of dynamic risk factors (ie: prior offense against boys is a marker for the causal factor of deviant arousal). Hanson et al (2007) found six months of ACUTE scores more meaningful than any one month because acute factors were fairly steady and ongoing expression of long term problems.

26 Assessment – Not All Dynamic Risk Factors are Created EqualEmpirically Supported Risk Factors: Those where at least three studies, when meta-analytically integrated, show the construct to have significant predictive value for sexual recidivism Sexual Preoccupation Sexual preference for pre-and/or peri-pubescent children Sexual Violence Multiple Paraphilias Offense Supportive Attitudes Emotional Congruence with Children Lack of Emotionally Intimate Relationships with Adults Impulsivity Poor Cognitive Problem Solving Rejection of Supervision Grievance/Hostility Negative Social Influences

27 Assessment – Not All Dynamic Risk Factors are Created EqualPromising Risk Factors: At least one study has shown construct to have significant predictive value and where there are other kinds of relevant supporting evidence. Hostile Beliefs About Women Machiavellianism Lack of Concern for Others/Callousness Dysfunctional Coping Sexualized Coping Externalized Coping

28 Assessment – Not All Dynamic Risk Factors are Created EqualUnsupported Overall, But With Interesting Exceptions: Overall effect in meta-analysis is small and the confidence interval included zero but has one credible study with significant effect or significant effect seen in one sub-group. Denial Low Self Esteem Major Mental Illness Loneliness

29 Assessment – Not All Dynamic Risk Factors are Created EqualRisk Factors Worth Exploring: No or at best inconclusive prediction studies but maybe some supporting evidence. Adversarial Sexual Orientation Fragile Narcissism Sexual Entitlement

30 Assessment – Not All Dynamic Risk Factors are Created EqualVariables with Little or No Support: Investigated in at least five studies and the upper end of the 95% CI for the d statistic should be less than 0.15. Depression Social Skills Deficits Poor Victim Empathy Lack of Motivation for Treatment as Assessed Pretreatment

31 Assessment – Not All Dynamic Risk Factors are Created EqualWhat about Personal Victimization? Sex offenders do have higher rates of sexual abuse in their histories than expected of the general population, but the majority were not abused themselves. Among offenders, approximately 30% have been abused sexually. Offenders with male victims appear to have an even higher rate of personal victimization. While abuse can increase the likelihood of sexual aggression, most children who have been abused do not become abusers.

32 Assessment – Not All Dynamic Risk Factors are Created EqualWhat About Sexual Sadism? Doesn’t that Predict Increased Risk? Rapists use violence to enforce cooperation and/or to express aggression. Sadists use violence, domination, pain, and humiliation as the preferred or even necessary precondition for sexual arousal. Sadism is commonly perceived of as highly indicative of higher risk for violent reoffending. Sadism though does have markedly more intense level of victim impact. Inferring sadistic motivation from even detailed descriptions of an offense is a formidable task.

33 Assessment Several studies have found links between sadism and psychopathy as well as to impulsivity and anti-sociality. These relationships were small in effect size magnitude This suggests a substantial difference between these constructs. The association between sexual sadism and violence is unique and not simply explained by confounding through psychopathy. Sadists likely account for about 5-10% of convicted rapists, 3% of child offenders, and between 2.4 – 6% of SVP’s.

34 Assessment Inter-rater reliability of sadism diagnosis has ranged from weak to substantial across six separate studies. No phallometric link clearly established between sadism and arousal. But, self-reported sadists did show more subjective and genital response to consenting sexual violence than to consenting non-violent sex even though they showed no difference to controls when it came to non-consent. Behavioral indicators of sadism, but not a diagnosis of sadism, was correlated with re-offense. Phallometric assessment, sexual intrusiveness, level of violence incrementally added to prediction of violent but not sexual recidivism.

35 Assessment This next statement is more personal opinion than an empirical piece of data. It is well reasoned and insightful, but an opinion either way. An executive summary of two different schools of thought on science, including Karl Popper’s Conjectures and Refutations and Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions would say: “Your one journal article showing whatever it is you say it shows, is just that…one journal article.”

36 Myth: Immediate and Strong Confrontation is a Necessary Component of Effective TreatmentStatistics show that sex offender therapist confrontation is strongly negatively correlated with therapeutic change (Marshall, 2001, as cited in Jennings & Sawyer, 2003). When challenging is needed, it should be done in a way that avoids or softens the possibly of humiliation and shame and does not shut down the open communication of the client’s internal experience (Jennings & Sawyer, 2003). Strong confrontation is going to elicit defensiveness. For instance, if the client is using an offense label or word, instead of saying “Don’t use that word,” the therapist can try to point out how those words/labels affect others. Or the therapist can ask the client to express the feelings behind those words/labels in other terms.

37 Treatment of sexual offenders:

38 Myth: We Need to Eliminate Their Deviant ArousalThis myth is based on the idea that, in order to help the sexual offenders we work with, we need to help them eliminate their deviant arousal patterns and replace it solely with healthy arousal patterns. We all have had urges or impulses that we do not ever act upon or, if we have, we are not locked into a pattern of acting upon them over and over again. Truth = Help the offenders we work with manage their deviant arousal patterns, while also simultaneously trying to develop their healthy arousal patterns as well Whether these urges or impulses are unhealthy, criminal, immoral, etc…

39 Myth: To Fantasize Without Permission is to OffendOur Client Celebrities If anyone has reviewed arousal logs with a client, we know that it is not uncommon for them to have fantasies about celebrities. In my experience, these are common names that tend to come up….

40 Myth: To Fantasize Without Permission is to OffendEven if it is a healthy fantasy, some clinicians believe that the notion of consent is missing from this fantasy Thereby, it becomes unhealthy and/or deviant For some clinicians, the idea of their clients fantasizing and/or masturbating to celebrities can make them uncomfortable

41 Myth: To Fantasize Without Permission is to OffendCelebrities Our Client Would we still be concerned with the idea of consent if the situation was flipped? Is it offensive if Beyonce or Nikki Minaj fantasized about one of us? Since we didn’t give them permission to do so?

42 Myth: Immediate and Strong Confrontation is a Necessary Component of Effective TreatmentConsidering the nature of the work, many clinicians (especially newer ones) believe that a high level of confrontation is needed in order to effect any change The sex offenders we work with can present with some rigid, inflexible, and ingrained cognitive distortions, right? So, we need to match that rigidity with some swift and heavy challenging of our own, right?

43 Myth: Immediate and Strong Confrontation is a Necessary Component of Effective TreatmentMany clinicians believe that they need to begin confronting a client’s distortions as soon as these distortions are presented. Emphasis in early treatment should be on engaging the client in treatment – pulling them into the process (Jennings & Sawyer, 2003) Helps establish trust and rapport This does not mean that clinicians should ignore or delay responses to significant thinking errors. “Cognitive distortions can, and should be, identified and labeled as such when they occur early in the treatment process and will be clearly confronted later in treatment.” (Jennings & Sawyer, 2003) For the therapists out there, we didn’t decide upon our careers because we wanted to yell at people all day. We are some of the helpers that exist in the world. We got into this field because we wanted to help others. That should not change just because we are working with a forensic/criminal population.

44 Myth: Sex Offenders are Difficult to LikeMore anecdotal than a research-based idea In order to do this work, sometimes it is easier to approach it with a sense of detachment. That detachment, however, can lead to black-and-white thinking on the part of the therapist Seeing the client as all “good” or all “bad” The reality of the situation is that we are working with individuals who have made some “bad” decisions in their life, but can still be likeable

45 The Sexually Violent Predator:

46 The Sexually Violent Predator (SVP)SVP is only legal if there is treatment “…we have never held that the Constitution prevents a State from civilly detaining those for whom no treatment is available, but who nevertheless pose a danger to others.” Kansas v Hendricks

47 Polygraph:

48 Myth: The Polygraph is a Lie DetectorPolygraph testing is designed to analyze the physiological reactions of subjects. However, research has indicated that there is no specific physiological reaction associated with lying and that the brain activity and mechanisms associated with lying are unknown, making it difficult to identify factors that separate liars from truth tellers. -Iacono, W. G. (2008)

49 Myth: The Polygraph is a Lie DetectorIn the 1998 US Supreme Court case United States v. Scheffer, the majority stated that, "There is simply no consensus that polygraph evidence is reliable" and "Unlike other expert witnesses who testify about factual matters outside the jurors' knowledge, such as the analysis of fingerprints, ballistics, or DNA found at a crime scene, a polygraph expert can supply the jury only with another opinion." The Supreme Court summarized their findings by stating that the use of polygraph was "no more accurate than coin flip."

50 Myth: The Polygraph is a Lie DetectorThe accuracy of the polygraph has been contested almost since the introduction of the device. In 2003, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued a report entitled, "The Polygraph and Lie Detection.” The NAS found that the majority of polygraph research was "unreliable, unscientific and biased," concluding that 57 of the approximately 80 research studies that the American Polygraph Association relies on to come to their conclusions were significantly flawed.

51 Myth: The Polygraph is a Lie Detector

52 Myth: The Polygraph Encourages DisclosureSelf report and official records may reflect a profound level of inadequacy to describe a sexual offense history for many offenders. Ahlmeyer et al (2000) used the post-conviction polygraph to encourage disclosures for treatment in incarcerated SOs and found that fewer than one percent of victims were identified using official record data. Ahlmeyer et al found in their sample of prisoners in treatment that each had committed, on average, 528 sex offenses in their lifetime against 184 victims.

53 English et al (2000) for the National Institute of Justice:Polygraph English et al (2000) for the National Institute of Justice: 58% of subjects admitted to engaging in a high risk behavior prior to polygraph and treatment process. After, this increased to 93%. 27% admitted to committing more than one type of high risk behavior. This went to 80% after the polygraph and treatment process. Of 180 offenders, 28 had adult female victims and 15 of these had minor victims of one or both genders. After treatment/polygraph, 71 of 180 offenders had adult female victims and 89% of these had minor victims as well.

54 Juvenile sexual offenders:

55 Recidivism in this population is actually quite infrequent…Myth: Juvenile Sexual Offenders Will Grow Up to Become Adult Sexual Offenders Recidivism in this population is actually quite infrequent… In more than 90% of cases where juvenile sex offenders are arrested, that represents a singular event that will not occur again. “The National Center on Sexual Behavior (NCSBY) reports that only 5% to 14% of juvenile sex offenders re-offend (compared to approximately 40% of adults, as reported by the Bureau of Justice). The re-offense rate for sex offenses is substantially lower than are the recidivism rates for other adolescent delinquent behavior, which range from 8% to 58%.” Campaign for Youth Justice (Date Unknown)

56 There are significant developmental differences…Myth: The Behavior of Juvenile Sexual Offenders Should Be Interpreted the Same As Adult Sexual Offenders There are significant developmental differences… Frontal lobes are not fully developed → judgement and risk assessment Unable to fully comprehend and appreciate the consequences of their behaviors More emotionally-based decisions In other words, looking for immediate gratification in the present moment; lack of impulse control; looking for peer approval Justice Policy Institute (Date Unknown); National Juvenile Justice Network (2014); National League of Cities - Institute for Youth, Education, & Families (2016)

57 Female sexual offenders:

58 Statistics on Female Offenders“In 1994, less than 1% of all incarcerated rape and sexual assault offenders were female (fewer than 800 women) (Greenfield, 1997). By 1997, however, 6,292 females had been arrested for forcible rape or other sex offenses, constituting approximately 8% of all rape and sexual assault arrests for that year (FBI, 1997). Additionally, studies indicate that females commit approximately 20% of sex offenses against children (ATSA, 1996)…” Center for Sex Offender Management (2000)

59 Very little research on these female sexual offenders But….. Very little research on these female sexual offenders Anecdotal discussion?

60 Questions?

61 References Campaign for Youth Justice (Date Unknown). Fact Sheet: Youth Sex Offenders. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ah UKEwj8- Zzm5KPRAhUm7oMKHQDeCnQQFggaMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.campaignfor youthjustice.org%2FDownloads%2FKeyResearch%2FFactSheetYouthSexOffenders.d oc&usg=AFQjCNE_d8Zk4Av7gkseAw1L6BDyvJXd4g&sig2=JgQOReOjJF2cUVLF6xj_i g Center for Sex Offender Management (2000, August). Myths Facts About Sex Offenders. Retrieved from Horowitz, E. (2007). Growing Media and Legal Attention to Sex Offenders: More Safety or More Injustice. The Journal of the Institute of Justice & International Studies, 7, Fortney, T., Levenson, J., Brannon, Y., & Baker, J.N. (2007). Myths and Facts about Sexual Offenders: Implications for Treatment and Public Policy. Sexual Offender Treatment, 2. Retrieved from treatment.org/55.html

62 References Jennings, J.L. & Sawyer, S. (2003). Principles and Techniques for Maximizing the Effectiveness of Group Therapy with Sex Offenders. Sexual Abuse, 15, Justice Policy Institute (Date Unknown). The Negative Impact of Registries on Youth: Why are Youth Different from Adults? Retrieved from 08_fac_sornakidsaredifferent_jj.pdf Justice Policy Institute (Date Unknown). Youth Who Commit Sex Offenses: Facts and Fiction. Retrieved from documents/08-08_fac_sornafactfiction_jj.pdf

63 References National Juvenile Justice Network (2014, October). Youth Who Commit Sex Offenses: Research Update. Retrieved from Commit-Sex-Offenses_Nov2014.pdf National League of Cities – Institute for Youth, Education, and Families (2016, April). Research to Practice Memo: How City Leaders Can Draw Upon Adolescent Development Research Findings to Provide a Framework for Juvenile Justice Reform. Retrieved from