Exploring Risk: Potential Static, Dynamic, Protective and Treatment Factors in the Clinical Histories of Female Sex Offenders

Abstract

Despite nearly a century of knowledge indicating a significant number of women engaging in sexual activities with children, the phenomenon has not yet been fully acknowledged. Recently, however, there has been a marked increase in research in this area. However, due to the relatively small numbers of detections or convictions there remains a lack of data regarding: (1) the specific clinical characteristics of female sex offenders; and (2) how these clinical factors link to re-offending and treatment need. The following study examines potential risk, protective, and treatment factors that are highlighted through the process of clinical intervention, using an adapted version of the Beech and Ward (2004) risk framework. We describe how female sex offenders typically display clinical deficits in the same risk domains as their male counterparts, while noting the ways in which these deficits manifest in this population. In addition, we compare these vulnerability factors in four established types of female sex offender.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    Based on a version adapted for adult male sexual offenders by James Bickley for the LFF.

References

  1. Allen, C. M. (1991). Women and men who sexually abuse children: A comparative analysis. Orwell: Safer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beech, A. R., Parrett, N., Ward, T., & Fisher, D. (2009). Assessing female sexual offenders’ motivations and cognitions: an exploratory study. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 15, 201–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Beech, A. R., & Ward, T. (2004). The integration of etiology and risk in sex offenders: a theoretical framework. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10, 31–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Carr, A. (1999). The handbook of child and adolescent clinical psychology: a contextual approach. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Christiansen, A., & Thyer, B. (2003). Female sexual offenders: a review of empirical research. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 6, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cortoni, F. & Hanson, R. K. (2007). A review of the recidivism rates of adult female sexual offenders (R-169), Ottawa: Research Branch, Correction Service of Canada. Retrieved July 21, 2009, from http://www.cscscc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/reports/r169/r169_e.pdf.

  7. Denov, M. S. (2001). A culture of denial: exploring professional perspectives on female sex offending. Canadian Journal of Criminology:, 43, 303–329.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Denov, M. S. (2003). The myth of innocence: sexual scripts and the recognition of child sexual abuse by female perpetrators. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 303–314.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Eldridge, H. E., & Saradjian, J. (2000). Replacing the function of abusive behaviors for the offender: Remaking relapse prevention in working with women who sexually abuse children. In D. R. Laws, S. M. Hudson, & T. Ward (Eds.), Remaking relapse prevention with sex offenders: A sourcebook (pp. 402–426). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ford, H. (2006). Women who sexually abuse children. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fromuth, M. E., & Conn, V. E. (1997). Hidden perpetrators: sexual molestation in a nonclinical sample of college women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 456–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gannon, T. A., & Rose, M. R. (2008). Female child sexual offenders: towards integrating theory and practice. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13, 442–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gannon, T. A., & Rose, M. R. (2009). Offense-related interpretative bias in female child molesters: A preliminary study. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research & Treatment, 21, 194–207.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hanson, R. K., & Harris, A. J. R. (2000). Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sexual offence recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 6–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hanson, R. K. & Harris, A. J. R. (2001). The Sex Offender Need Assessment Rating (SONAR): A method for measuring change in risk levels. Retrieved, July 21, 2009, from http://www.sgc.gc.ca/epub/corr/e200001a/e200001b/e200001b.htm. [NB: Please note this is an older version of SONAR and should not be used.]

  16. Lewis, C. F., & Stanley, C. R. (2000). Women accused of sexual offenses. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 18, 73–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Marshall, W. L., & Serran, G. A. (2000). Improving the effectiveness of sexual offender treatment. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 1, 203–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mathews, R., Hunter, J. A., & Vuz, J. (1997). Juvenile female sexual offenders: clinical characteristics and treatment issues. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 9, 187–199.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Matthews, J. K. (1993). Working with female sexual abusers. In M. Elliott (Ed.), Female sexual abuse of children: The ultimate taboo (pp. 61–78). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Matthews, J. K., Mathews, R., & Speltz, K. (1991). Female sexual offenders: a typology. In M. Q. Patton (Ed.), Family sexual abuse: Frontline research and evaluation (pp. 199–219). Newbury Park London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Miccio-Fonseca, L. C. (2000). Adult and adolescent female sex offenders: experiences compared to other female and male sex offenders. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 11, 75–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Nathan, P., & Ward, T. (2002). Female sex offenders: clinical and demographic features. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 8, 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pothast, H. L., & Allen, C. M. (1994). Masculinity and femininity in male and female perpetrators of child sexual abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 18, 763–767.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rallings, M. & Webster, S. D. (2001). The NOTA Intake Protocol: Characteristics of a Large Sample of Sexual Offenders. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the National Organization for the Treatment of Abusers (NOTA U.K.), Cardiff, U.K, October 2007.

  25. Russell, B. L., & Oswald, D. L. (2001). Strategies and dispositional correlates of sexual coercion perpetrated by women: an exploratory investigation. Sex Roles, 45, 103–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Russell, B. L., & Oswald, D. L. (2002). Sexual coercion and victimization of college men: the role of love styles. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17, 273–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Saradjian, J. (1996). Women who sexually abuse children: From research to clinical practice. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Sorbello, L., Eccleston, L., Ward, T., & Jones, R. (2002). Treatment needs of female offenders: a review. Australian Psychologist, 37, 198–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Struckman-Johnson, C. (1988). Forced sex on dates: it happens to men, too. The Journal of Sex Research, 24, 234–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Struckman-Johnson, C., & Struckman-Johnson, D. (1998). The dynamics and impact of sexual coercion of men by women. In P. Anderson & C. Struckman-Johnson (Eds.), Sexually aggressive women: Current perspectives and controversies (pp. 121–143). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Thornton, D. (2002). Constructing and testing a framework for dynamic risk assessment. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14, 139–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Vandiver, D. M., Dial, K. C., & Worley, R. M. (2008). A qualitative assessment of Registered female sex offenders: Judicial processing experiences and perceived effects of a public registry. Criminal Justice Review, 33, 177–198.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ward, T., & Keenan, T. (1999). Child molesters’ implicit theories. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14, 821–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ward, T., & Stewart, C. A. (2003). The treatment of sex offenders: risk management and good lives. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 34, 353–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ward, T., Mann, R. E., & Gannon, T. A. (2007). The good lives model of offender rehabilitation: clinical implications. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12, 87–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ian A. Elliott.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Elliott, I.A., Eldridge, H.J., Ashfield, S. et al. Exploring Risk: Potential Static, Dynamic, Protective and Treatment Factors in the Clinical Histories of Female Sex Offenders. J Fam Viol 25, 595–602 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-010-9322-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Female sexual abuse
  • Risk
  • Treatment
  • Protective factors