RECIDIVISM OF SEXUAL OFFENDERS: A RE-APPRAISAL
The comparatively short follow-up (ie, up to five years) favored by most criminologists tends to be seriously misleading with respect to the recidivism of certain sex offenders. When longer term follow-ups have been attempted, simply considering the total reconvicted by the end of the observation pe...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of criminology 1978-07, Vol.18 (3), p.267-276 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The comparatively short follow-up (ie, up to five years) favored by most criminologists tends to be seriously misleading with respect to the recidivism of certain sex offenders. When longer term follow-ups have been attempted, simply considering the total reconvicted by the end of the observation period & the apparent failure to consider carefully the actual periods at risk have meant that the reconviction figures of sexual offenders have in the past been underestimated. All adult Ms appearing in the higher courts of England & Wales in either 1951 or 1961 for having or attempting sexual intercourse with girls under age 13 were identified & 174 Ms with a determinate sentence were followed up for possible reconvictions to the end of March 1974. The life-table method was used to overcome the problem of differential periods at risk. By this method it is evident that 48% of the sample would be reconvicted by the end of the twenty-second year at risk; similarly, 23% would be reconvicted for a sex or violence offence by the end of this period. Comparing the offences committed within the familiar five-year follow-up period with those committed at a later time, there is no evidence of a decline in the seriousness of the type of offences committed. The value of a long-term follow-up & of a carefully calculated measure of periods at risk is stressed. 2 Tables. AA. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0007-0955 1464-3529 |
DOI: | 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a046912 |