Polygraph Testing Juveniles

About 43.9% of sex offenders identified both male and female perpetrators as opposed to 9.6% of nonsexual offenders. These individuals were exposed to more severe forms of victimization with a longer duration. Sex offenders endured an average of 5.6 years of abuse while nonsexual offenders experienced 3.9 years. Through the use of logistic regression analyses, Burton, Miller, and Shill (2002) concluded that method of operation and gender of abuser accurately predicts whether an individual will sexually offend. The analysis correctly predicted and placed 78.3% of the sex-offending males into their correct groups.

In this study, a group of juveniles were evaluated by completing a self- reported assessment, being interviewed by a psychologist, and having their caretaker/guardian interviewed. The authors took this information and used demographics, substance abuse, psychiatric diagnosis, interviews, standardized measures, legal history, and history of childhood sexual abuse to determine recidivism rates among juveniles. The participants were monitored and after 12 months the authors gathered the data to determine what factors were key among those who had reoffended compared to those that did not.

Assessing an adult for sexual recidivism can be a different type of work than evaluating a juvenile, and requires a different set of risk assessment tools. That being said, adult risk assessment tools initially, and continue to inform juvenile risk assessment tools, therefore, a foundational introduction to adult risk assessment is beneficial to better understand juvenile risk assessment (Christiansen & Vincent, 2013; Collie, Ward, & Vess, 2008; Prescott, 2004). Recognizing this need for some foundational understanding of risk assessment, The Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) has set forth some guidelines for adult risk assessment.

Intro / Problem: Sexual Minority youth (SMY) involved with the Juvenile Justice System (JJS) have a culture that require sensitivity treatment . Many youth that identify as or question their sexuality have experience prejudice attitudes from the initial point of entry( arrest). Navigating through the JJS has been a harsh and unwarranted experience with many fearing their safety from other inmates and staff. Many staff lack the knowledge of the societal realities that SMY struggle with. In addition, differential treatment have been acknowledge by SMY. SMY youth are not invisible humans although their needs appear such.

Sex offender treatment programs target factors for sexual reoffending they include cognitive distortions and schemas, emotion dysregulation, deviant sexual behaivor, and deficities of interpersonal skills and empathy (Schaffer, Jeglic, Moster, & Wnuk, 2010).

In the United States, there are 747,000 register sex offenders. Only 33% are in correction facilities. “An estimated 24% of those serving time for rape and 19% of those serving time for sexual assault had been on probation or parole at the time of their repeat offenses. Offenders with a previous sex offense conviction have a 37% re-offense rate. Rapists repeat their offenses at rates up to 35%” (HFR). These offenders have violated another

In 2013, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, BJS, published a special report entitled “Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities Reported by Youth, 2012”. It was the result of surveys of 8,707 youth in facilities owned or operated by a state juvenile correctional authority and adjudicated youth held under state contract in locally or privately- operated juvenile facilities. The data collected reaffirms the need for a structured response to sexual assault upon juveniles in these facilities. Specifically, BJS reported the following (estimated through weighted sampling): 9.5% of

Sexual assault is one of the fastest growing violent crimes in America. Approximately 20% of all people charged with a sexual offense are juveniles. Among adult sex offenders, almost 50% report that their first offense occurred during their adolescence. (FBI, 1993) There are many different opinions, treatment options and legislation to manage the growing numbers of juvenile sex offenders. In today’s society the psychological and behavioral modification treatments used to manage juvenile sex offenders is also a growing concern. To understand and determine the proposed treatment methods, several related issues will need to be reviewed such as traditional sex offender therapy methods like cognitive therapy and alternative therapies like

Great assessment of the clients needs furthermore clients who have convictions regarding sexual offenses with minors are even more difficult due to resources being limited in the community especially, housing. However in CT probation is a tremendous help when it comes to housing individual with these kind of convictions. We have a few halfway houses which are group setting and shelters specifically used for sex offenders in different towns. Although, you live in Idaho they may have some services that might assist you. Most times they don’t advertise this assistance because it limited however if you can advocate for the client it could help. I have worked as a case manager for last 15 years and we have to find solutions for all types of clients

When working with this specific population mental health professionals are often called on to evaluate and manage sex offender’s behavior. There are also times when individuals may be asked to give an opinion as to if the offender will repeat the behavior. Often times people that work with this population are referred to as (SOSs) Sex Offender Specialists. They have a specific group of diverse training and background. Some of these trainings incIude but are not limited to cognitive-behavioral, psychopharmacological, and therapeutic orientations.

treatment provider to the participant. Once, the participants accepts the recommendations and begins to accept treatment from a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist initiate their own assessment to determine appropriate medication for the sex offender. Thus, begins the integration of pharmacological treatment with psychotherapy to form a comprehensive treatment programs catered for the individual sex offender. Since the psychiatrist uses their own assessment to determine appropriate medication to administer. The present study’s interest lies on the sex offender treatment provider’s assessment procedure to determine the need for pharmacological intervention before the initiation of medication management. The interest is on the assessment tools utilized to identify problematic sexual behavior that may warrant pharmacological treatment. The question is placed on whether there are specific assessment tools (e.g., questionnaire and survey) to score and determine

In order to investigate this phenomenon and address the gap in adolescent sexual offenders having a higher possibility of conduct disorder, the following research study is proposed. The study focuses on the research question: if adolescent sex offenders are more likely to have childhood diagnosis of conduct disorder than that of adult sexual offenders. It is a hypothesis that adolescent sexual offenders have a much lower chance of re-offending if they are not into more types of crimes (Davidson, 2015, p.555). It is also a hypothesis that adolescent sex offenders may have a higher possibility of a childhood diagnosis of a conduct disorder (Morrell & Burton, 2014, p.39).

In addition, actions taken as a result of polygraph readings are moderated by the polygraph operator, the probation officer, and whatever other authority that may be involved. As a result, polygraph results that might seem contradictory to the offender’s previous history or current disposition likely won’t be taken at face value. The inaccuracy of polygraphs would be known at least to the “polygrapher trained specifically in the use of the polygraph for the monitoring of sex offenders,” and that human and professional element is what would prevent unjust actions from being taken due to incorrect interpretations of the polygraph (J.B. v. New Jersey State Parole Board). The fundamental misassumption that Ben-Shakhar and even Grubin at times make is ignoring the human, ignoring the leniency and judgement exercised by informed professionals. Because polygraph results aren’t taken literally or without knowledge of the potential shortcomings of it by trained professionals,

Many questions go unanswered when questioning the Criminal Justice System’s tactics to apprehending criminals in the past, present, and future. For a while the Criminal Justice system thought polygraph tests were the answer to minimizing all around crime becoming a controversial solution to a rising problem. Recently, forensic investigations have revolutionized their methods to better DNA fingerprinting to detain criminals; This becoming the next best thing other than local police and first responders using Mini Drones as an extra tool in stopping offenders who are in pursue. According to Liberty Pen, “Mini Drones would be for specific missions such as finding a lost person, monitoring traffic, or for crowd control becoming a tool for mass surveillance by the government”.

They found out through a data study that sexual offender as stated were psychological motivated to have sex 54 percent of the time and 29 were just being an opportunist, 11 were vindictive, and 6 pervasively angry (62). Lawson (2003) reviewed 13 qualitative studies published between 1982 and 2001 that detailed how 453 sex offenders manifested the drives and justifications for their offenses. Her research found three basic themes that fall under the ‘‘motivation’’ heading: isolation, gratification, and justification. Anechiarico (1998) suggested that most sex offenders had low self esteem and experienced and linked to a motivation paradigm. Paradigm when broken down is as follow stress, fantasy, entitlement, plan and action. Schneider (1997) found in his research that offenders also may use their powerful position to not only intimidate the victim into silence, but also possibly maneuver the entire family into placing pressure on the victim. The results of a study suggested that most offenders do not have a disability (76.1%) or a sexual abuse history (67.5%), but a large percentage have abuse histories (43.6%). Community offenders after research were shown to have used alcohol before proceeding to commit their sexual acts. The mean age of those victimized