Opinion: Public Perceptions Of Youth Who Commit Sexual Offense Is Skewed, Our Research Shows

Few crimes stimulate such visceral reactions and deep-seated fears as sexual offenses. Accordingly, societal responses to sexual offending such as registration and notification laws tend to be quite punitive and highly stigmatizing for the offender. Yet these social control practices are widely considered by the public to be essential for community safety. 

However, given lessons learned about the linkages between moral panic and legislation in other justice contexts (e.g., juvenile “superpredators” and waiver/transfer laws), we question the degree to which public perceptions about the characteristics of persons who commit sexual offenses are accurate — particularly of juveniles who commit these types of offenses.

Kristan N. Russell

Specifically, we ask: If public sentiment drives public policy in a democracy, how accurate is the information they are basing their perceptions/attitudes on that ultimately frame legal responses to these juveniles? We propose here that the larger societal understanding of and reaction to youth who have committed a sexual offense has been disproportionately severe in comparison to the risk posed by these youth and what we understand about youth development and resiliency. 

Our findings from a pilot study exploring public perceptions of these youth suggest practice and policy reform efforts should continue to incorporate a substantial public education and prevention component.

Current responses

Over 200,000 individuals on a sexual offense registry are there as a result of sexual offenses they committed as a youth. Many of these registrants have been incarcerated or placed on probation due to their offense and are trying to re-enter and function successfully in society. Registration requirements often include limitations on where one can live, restrictions on computer and internet access, participation in mandatory treatment and following various reporting and notification procedures (e.g., local law enforcement, neighbors). 

While these responses are often presented in the spirit of accountability and community safety, they have a substantial stigmatizing effect and potentially disrupt protective factors (e.g., introducing challenges to securing employment). These collateral consequences have been a major focus of research and efforts to reform and better design responses to this category of offense.

Offending trajectories and interventions

Youth tend to follow adolescent-limited sexual offending trajectories, meaning they no longer offend with little or even no intervention as they age and mature into adulthood. Longitudinal research concerning this population demonstrates that around 5% or less commit another sexual offense and juvenile offending is not predictive of adult offending. Further, paraphilia (e.g., highly deviant and persistent sexual attraction to very young children) is rare in juveniles. 

For more information on juvenile justice issues and reform trends, go to JJIE Resource Hub

Thus, fears that most juveniles who commit sexual offenses are doomed to be dangerous/predatory, persistent and lifelong offenders are unfounded. When intervention is required for sexual offending, research strongly suggests that community-based, education-focused and developmentally informed wraparound programs are preferred strategies for youth.

Our pilot study

We surveyed 159 adults 18 years or older recruited via Amazon MTurk in February 2018 as part of a larger research project exploring how various groups perceive the characteristics of youth who commit sexual offenses. The respondents were primarily male (63.9%), identified their race to be white/Caucasian (65.4%) and had a mean age of 32.63 years (range = 20-61 years). Consistent with our hypothesis and prior work in this area, we did find that on average, public knowledge about juveniles who commit sexual offenses is inaccurate. Based on a series of one-sample t-tests (which compare the means of the groups for statistical difference), respondents significantly overestimated the percentage of juvenile arrests that sexual offenses account for (mean estimate: 26.17%, actual: 1.03%), likelihood of reoffending as a juvenile (mean estimate: 41.91%, actual: 9.9%) and likelihood of reoffending as an adult (mean estimate: 49.56%, actual: 6.5%). 

Juvenile sexual offending rates have been consistently declining in recent decades. However, approximately half the respondents (50.95%) in our pilot study believed that juvenile sexual offending rates were on the rise. Only a small portion (13.38%) believed juvenile sexual offending rates were on the decline, while the rest of the sample (35.67%) believed they have remained the same across the last decade. 

We also found that respondents differed in their estimates based upon political affiliation. Early evidence suggests that those who self-report as Democrats or independents may have more conservative estimates of juvenile sexual offending and reoffending rates in comparison to those self-reporting as Republicans though these results need to be further explicated using a more robust sample. Though exploratory, this initial data suggests a disconnect between public perception of juvenile sexual offending and reality. If it’s harder to successfully reintegrate juveniles who commit sexual offenses due to the public’s stigmatized attitudes and behavior, it is imperative that we identify and better understand the factors that contribute to misperceptions.

Future research

Although a small pilot study sample, our findings do hint at the value of future research efforts to better understand the interplay between public perception and policy realities. These efforts should aim to validate the form and function of disconnects between data and practice to allow for evidence-based tailoring of public education and persuasion (i.e., attitude change) campaigns. Factors such as political beliefs and justice orientation may be particularly productive to explore in this context. We are currently developing a more in-depth study to explain the relationships between these and other important variables.

If we assume public policy is indeed “public” in that it is not only designed to benefit our larger society, but is driven by that larger society, then as scientists and evidence-based practitioners we should be eager to ensure the public has correct information on which to base their perceptions. Even though the primary sources for much of juvenile sexual offending are immaturity, lack of understanding around sexual consent and other social deficits, current responses are often punitive in nature and fail to address the educational and therapeutic needs of these youth. This disconnect arises in part from misperceptions of their openness to treatment and likelihood of recidivism, which can lead to harsher sentencing and discriminatory treatment. We must also focus on destigmatizing youth by avoiding the use of labels (e.g., “sex offender”) and diverting youth from public registry requirements when possible and appropriate.

Ultimately, we propose better long-term outcomes can be achieved if we focus on rehabilitative approaches (e.g., therapy, social skills training) and prevention efforts (e.g., comprehensive sex education, early identification) to address sexual offenses in youth in lieu of current retributive practices (e.g., detention, registration). We join myriad others in our call to meaningfully engage society, practitioners and justice professionals in efforts to address the misperceptions around juvenile offending, given their likely contribution to the stigmatization and use of overly punitive justice responses with low-risk youth. 

We believe that so far the field has paid too little attention to the negative collateral consequences this population has incurred as a result of these problematic offender registration practices and other related responses.

Kristan N. Russell, Ph.D., is assistant professor of justice studies and research scientist in the Texas Juvenile Crime Prevention Center at Prairie View A&M. 

Shawn C. Marsh, Ph.D., is director of judicial studies and associate professor of judicial studies, communication studies and social psychology at the University of Nevada, Reno.