Advertisement

The ‘Butner Study’ Redux: A Report of the Incidence of Hands-on Child Victimization by Child Pornography Offenders

  • Michael L. BourkeEmail author
  • Andres E. Hernandez
Original Article

Abstract

This study compared two groups of child pornography offenders participating in a voluntary treatment program: men whose known sexual offense history at the time of judicial sentencing involved the possession, receipt, or distribution of child abuse images, but did not include any “hands-on” sexual abuse; and men convicted of similar offenses who had documented histories of hands-on sexual offending against at least one child victim. The goal was to determine whether the former group of offenders were “merely” collectors of child pornography at little risk for engaging in hands-on sexual offenses, or if they were contact sex offenders whose criminal sexual behavior involving children, with the exception of Internet crimes, went undetected. Our findings show that the Internet offenders in our sample were significantly more likely than not to have sexually abused a child via a hands-on act. They also indicate that the offenders who abused children were likely to have offended against multiple victims, and that the incidence of “crossover” by gender and age is high.

Keywords

Child pornography Internet offender Online offender Butner Study Hands-on abuse 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank R. Harmon for his assistance with data collection and data entry.

References

  1. Abel, G. G., Becker, J. V., Mittleman, M. S., Cunningham-Rathner, J., Rouleau, J. L., & Murphy, W. D. (1987). Self-reported sex crimes of nonincarcerated paraphiliacs. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abel G. G., & Harlow, N. (2001). The stop child molestation book. Xlibris: www.xlibris.com.
  3. Abel, G. G., Gore, D. K., Holland, C. L., Camp, N., Becker, J. V., & Cunningham-Rathner, J. (1989). The measurement of cognitive distortions of child molesters. Annals of Sex Research, 2, 135–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abel, G. G., Mittleman, M. S., & Becker, J. V. (1985). Sex offenders: Results of assessment and recommendations for treatment. In M. H. Ben-Aron, S. I. Hucker, & C. D. Webster (Eds.), Clinical criminology: The assessment and treatment of criminal behavior (pp. 191–205). Toronto: M & M Graphics.Google Scholar
  5. Ahlmeyer, S., Heil, P., McKee, B., & English, K. (2000). The impact of polygraphy on admissions of victims in adult sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 12, 123–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bumby, K. M. (1996). Assessing the cognitive distortions of child molesters and rapists: Development and validation of the MOLEST and RAPE scales. Sexual Abuse, 8, 37–54.Google Scholar
  7. Carich, M. S., & Calder, M. C. (2003). Contemporary treatment of adult male sex offenders. Lyme Regis, Dorset: Russell House.Google Scholar
  8. Cooper, A., Delmonico, D. L., & Burg, R. (2000). Cybersex. Users, abusers and compulsives: new findings and implications. Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity, 7, 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Delmonico, D. L., Griffin, E. J., & Carnes, P. J. (2002). Treating online compulsive sexual behavior: When cybersex becomes the drug of choice. In A. Cooper (Ed.), Sex & the Internet: A guidebook for clinicians (pp. 147–167). New York: Brunner-Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Durkin, K. (1997). Misuse of the Internet by paedophiles: implications for law enforcement and probation practice. Federal Probation, 61, 14–18.Google Scholar
  11. Durkin, K., & Bryant, C. (1999). Propagandizing pederasty: a thematic analysis of the online exculpatory accounts of unrepentant paedophiles. Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 20, 103–127.Google Scholar
  12. English, K., Jones, L., Pasini-Hill, D., Patrick, D., & Cooley-Towell, S. (2000). The value of polygraph testing in sex offender management: Research report submitted to the National Institute of Justice. Obtained on August 15, 2006 from http://www.ncjrs.gov.
  13. Federal Bureau of Investigation (January 24, 2006). Online pornography/child sexual exploitation investigations: Innocent Images National Initiative. Obtained on June 12, 2006 from http://www.fbi.gov.
  14. Galbreath, N. W., Berlin, F. S., & Sawyer, D. (2002). Paraphilias and the Internet. In A. Cooper (Ed.), Sex & the internet: A guidebook for clinicians (pp. 187–205). New York: Brunner-Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Heil, P., Ahlmeyer, S., & Simons, D. (2003). Crossover sexual offenses. Sexual Abuse:Journal of Research and Treatment, 15, 221–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hanson, R. K., & Bussiere, M. T. (1998). Predicting relapse: a meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348–363.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hernandez, A. (2000). Self-reported contact sexual offenses by participants in the federal bureau of prisons’ sex offender treatment program: implications for internet sex offenders. San Diego, CA: Poster session presented at the 19th Annual Research and Treatment Conference of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers November.Google Scholar
  18. Kaplan, M. S. (1985). The impact of parolees’ perceptions of confidentiality on the reporting of their urges to interact sexually with children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University, New York City.Google Scholar
  19. Lanning, K., & Burgess, A. W. (1989). Child pornography and sex rings. In D. Zillman, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Pornography: Research advances and policy considerations. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. McCabe, K. (2000). Child pornography and the Internet. Social Science Computer Review, 18, 73–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Quinsey, V. L. (1986). Men who have sex with children. In D. N. Weisstub (Ed.), Law and mental health: International perspectives: Vol. 2 (pp. 140–172). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  22. Sexual exploitation of children over the internet: What parents, kids, and congress need to know about child predators: Hearings before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, 109th Cong., 2d Sess. (2006) (testimony of Ernie Allen).Google Scholar
  23. Seto, M., Cantor, J., & Blanchard, R. (2006). Child pornography offenses are a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115(3), 610–615.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schneider, J. P. (1994). Sex addiction: controversy within mainstream addiction medicine, diagnosis based on DSM-III-R and physician case histories. Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity: Journal of Treatment and Prevention, 1, 19–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Taylor, M., & Quayle, E. (2003). Child pornography: An Internet crime. New York: Brunner-Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Ward, T., Hudson, S. M., & Marshall, W. L. (1995). Cognitive distortions and affective deficits in sex offenders: a cognitive deconstructionist interpretation. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 7, 67–83.Google Scholar
  27. Wolak, J. D., Finkelhor, D., & Mitchell, K. (2004). Internet-initiated sex crimes against minors: implications for prevention based on findings from a national study. Journal of Adolescent Health, 35, 424 e11–424.e20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., & Mitchell, K. J. (2005). Child-pornography possessors arrested in Internet-related crimes. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Obtained on July 31, 2006 from http://www.missingkids.com.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.US Marshals ServiceWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Psychology ServicesFederal Correctional InstitutionButnerUSA

Personalised recommendations