Treatment of Sex Offenders

294
P. Lussier
impact or a limited impact on decreasing the probabilities of reoffending. This
group of individuals, characterized by an increase of offending after the adolescence–adulthood
transition, not well documented in the criminological literature,
may not benefit from the same turning points that others benefit from (Lussier,
Corrado & McCuish, 2015 ).
There has been even more limited theoretical and empirical research on the sexual
offending trajectories of adolescent and adult offenders (Lussier et al., 2012 ; Lussier
& Davies, 2011 ; Tewksbury & Jennings, 2010 ). The scientific literature suggests the
presence of much discontinuity, albeit some continuity, in sexual offending over time
(e.g., Lussier & Blokland, 2014 ). Discussing specifically the presence of sexual
offending trajectories among youth, Becker ( 1998 ) suggested the presence of three
groups: (a) an abstainer group (i.e., nonrecidivist) who do not sexually reoffend; (b)
an antisocial group whose sexual offense is part of a general tendency to engage in
crime and delinquency), and (c) a sexual group who is more at risk of persistence in
sexual offense. The model is clinically intuitive but has not been empirically tested.
It does suggest, however, that the sexual group will never desist from sexual offending,
which is not supported by the empirical literature. This hypothesis also implicitly
states that the antisocial group is not at risk of sexually reoffending, which is counterintuitive
with the fact that adolescents whose sexual offending persists in adulthood
are more involved in nonsexual offending than those who do not persist (Lussier
& Blokland, 2014 ; Zimring, Piquero, & Jennings, 2007 ). Furthermore, Becker’s
( 1998 ) focus on recidivism informs neither about other developmental aspects of
offending such as desistance nor about offending trajectories. With the advent of
longitudinal studies and the emergence of statistical techniques allowing the modelization
of longitudinal patterns of development, researcher have been able to examine
and uncover the presence of sexual offending trajectories. The current state of theoretical
and empirical knowledge highlight the presence of at least three distinct sexual
offending trajectories: (a) the adolescent- limited, (b) the high-rate/slow-desisters,
and (c) the adult-onset (e.g., Lussier, 2015 ; Lussier et al., 2012 ). It is hypothesized
that these trajectories can be distinguished on a series of developmental indicators.
Adolescence-Limited Sexual Offending
The adolescent-limited group are hypothesized to represent the vast majority of
adolescents involved in sexual offenses. Their prevalence, however, might not be as
important in clinical settings or in the juvenile justice system. This group may share
some similarities with the young male syndrome described by Lalumière, Harris,
Quinsey, and Rice ( 2005 ). This group is unlikely to show sexual behavior problems
during childhood and is hypothesized to be characterized by a relatively normal
sexual development up to puberty. Their offending is suggested to start between the
period of early and mid-adolescence. It is also argued that the growth of their sexual
offending will be very limited given that these young persons may offend only once
although some of them may repeat their behavior. Persistence, therefore, is possible
if the associated risk factors are present and the protective factors are limited. In the
context where there is persistence of sexual offending over time, it is argued that the