Cale, J., Smallbone, S., Rayment-McHugh, S.,
& Dowling, C. (2015). Offense Trajectories, the Unfolding of Sexual and
Non-Sexual Criminal Activity, and Sex Offense Characteristics of Adolescent Sex
Offenders. Sexual Abuse: A journal of
Research and Treatment.
Abstract
The current study examines offending trajectories
of adolescent sexual offenders (ASOs). Until recently, classification
frameworks have not been designed to account for the heterogeneity of offending
patterns in adolescence, how these are associated with the unfolding of sexual
and non-sexual criminal activity, and whether and to what extent they are
related to the characteristics of sex offenses in adolescence. The current
study takes a longitudinal view of offending in adolescence by examining
retrospective longitudinal data of 217 ASOs referred for treatment to a
clinical service between 2001 and 2009 in Australia. General offending
trajectories in adolescence were examined using semi-parametric group-based
modeling, and compared according to non-violent non-sexual, violent-non-sexual,
and sex offending criminal activity parameters (e.g., participation, onset,
frequency, specialization/versatility) and the characteristics of the referral
sexual offense. The results show distinct differences in the unfolding of
sexual and non-sexual criminal activity along different offending trajectories
of ASOs, and further, that these trajectories were differentially associated
with the characteristics of the sexual offenses they committed.
Could you
talk us through where the idea for the research came from?
After
completing my PhD in criminology in Canada, I pursued a Post Doc working as a
research fellow in a clinic that delivers treatment for Juvenile Sex Offenders
in Australia. During my time there I worked very closely with the clinicians on
several projects. In the office, over lunches, etc., I found it fascinating to
speak with clinicians who have been working with specific clients over time. Not
surprisingly, they have very detailed knowledge of their life histories and
circumstances and behaviours. Two things stuck in my mind, the first was: where
these youth begin, and where they end up (i.e, in the criminal justice system),
and the basis for what they do, is overwhelmingly complex. The second, was that
over the years I worked with the clinicians, I kept hearing similar stories,
not identical but similar. I wanted to find a way to articulate the complexity
of these youths’ pathways over time. In effect, I wanted to find an effective
way to translate clinical impressions into empirical evidence.
What kinds
of challenges did you face throughout the process?
Really it
was such an amazing process of discovery. Being in a clinic where you can
bounce ideas off clinicians on a day-to-day basis was a crucial dimension of
the process. I think one of the biggest challenges was learning the main
methodological technique used in this study which took considerable time. In
addition, while working in a clinical setting as a researcher was a very
enriching experience, the other thing I realized was just how much clinicians
have on their plates in terms of caseloads and management. So it definitely was
challenging to coordinate schedules.
What kinds
of things did you learn about co-authorship as a result of producing this
article?
Through this
experience more broadly, I think the biggest take-away for me was that integrating
clinicians and researchers in these settings to a much greater extent is the
way forward to produce the highest quality of research in the field. This is
not to say this does not happen, but clinicians and researchers bring unique
perspectives, skills and experience to bear on the problem. Skilled researchers
provide context to clinical observations and can also help to make clinical
data viable for high quality research if they are involved from the
‘data-collection’ stage. On the other hand, clinicians can make enormous
contributions to inform research directions and make meaning of data.
What do you
believe to be to be the main things that you have learnt about juvenile sexual
offending based upon your research?
I think that
there are a few key things I have learned from the research. From a
methodological point of view is the importance and benefit to using repeated
measurements over time to understand offending/behaviour. I think the main
discovery this allowed for was to see that different types of sex offences are uniquely
embedded in offending trajectories that are characterized by different crime
types and offending patterns. In other words, individual offending patterns are
related to the nature/characteristics of specific sex offences, and here we
have identified quite specific offending patterns. Again, this really speaks to
the complexity, but I don’t see a way around it, behaviour is inherently
complex!
Now that you’ve
published the article, what are some implications for practitioners?
I think the
main practical take-away is a framework to:
a) explore how individual differences and risk factors are related to
individual offending patterns; and, b) provide insight into the onset and
nature of sexual offenses committed by youth. The utility from a clinical
perspective is tailoring innovative and individualized treatment strategies
based on an understanding of how sexual and non-sexual criminal activity are
related to each other and unfold over time.
No comments:
Post a Comment