Treatment of Sex Offenders

298
P. Lussier
the role of social factors, life events and turning points, as well as the impact of
formal and informal sanctions (e.g., threats, victimization, arrest, incarceration). It
is possible to organize the current state of knowledge around three dimensions
(Table 13.2 ): (a) individual characteristics and the role of internal changes; (b) external
factors, pressure and contingencies; and (c) developmental life course perspective.
The first dimension emphasizes the person and individual characteristics as key factors
promoting desistance. The second dimension puts more emphasis on the role and
importance of the social environment to explain the mechanisms of desistance from
crime. The final dimension emphasizes the role and importance of person–environment
interactions and the sociodevelopmental context in which such interactions take
place. These three dimensions and associated issues are presented below.
Individual Characteristics and Internal Changes
Maturation and Aging Out of Crime
The maturation hypothesis is probably one of the first and most widely held view
about the causal mechanisms of desistance from crime and delinquency. This
hypothesis was initially proposed following observations about the age–crime
curve, that is, while delinquency involvement peaks during mid-adolescence, it
gradually drops with age, especially past the adolescence–adulthood transition
(Glueck & Glueck, 1940 ). The maturational hypothesis is based broadly on the idea
that adolescents typically becoming more emotionally stable, interpersonally more
sophisticated and skilled, and intellectually more knowledgeable and more futureoriented
with age. These changes, in turn, increases moral reasoning, reduce impulsivity
and facilitate more future-oriented goals and planning. Were probably among
the first to examine offending as part of a longitudinal cohort study of a large sample
of juvenile delinquents. They noticed that participation in crime dropped as youth
reach their 20s and 30s and suggested that this age effect was the result of a maturation
effect. They argued that, desistance occurs naturally with age and aging, as a
result of physical, moral, intellectual and mental changes characterizing a maturation
process. This process was the result of a changing environment but reflected
internal changes whereby youth became less impulsive, more future-oriented. As a
result of this maturation process, crime became less attractive and acceptable. They
also argued that this maturation effect was part of a normal process of aging unless
youth had been exposed to severe neuropsychological or environmental problems.
The maturational hypothesis has regain attention in recent years with emerging
research from the field of neuroscience. Research has convincingly shown that the
adolescent’s brain is different than the child and the adult’s brain and part of a natural
brain developmental process than influence the person’s ability to regulate cognitions,
emotions and behavior (Steinberg, 2010 ). Relatedly, longitudinal research
has been able to identify patterns of development with respect to personality characteristics,
impulse control, and future-oriented perspective that mirrors that are
associated with desistance from offending (e.g., Monahan, Steinberg, Cauffman, &