Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment
Risk assessment with juvenile offenders mirrors that of adult offenders in some ways, and is different from adult offenders in other ways, much like the tools used to assess for risk, there is a lot of overlap between adult and juvenile populations. Much like their adult offender counterparts, a juvenile offender may face severe consequences as a result of their sexual misbehavior.
Potential consequences for juvenile offenders
Juvenile consequences for a sexual offense reflect the same type of risk management ideals presented in adult offender consequences, mainly jail time and registration tend to be the more severe consequences, however, with juvenile offenders there seems to be more emphasis on treatment …show more content…
Just like the adult population, there are several tools available to clinician’s to aid them in making a risk determination. It should be noted that some studies of adolescent sexual offenders reveal consistently low rates of sexual re-offense in adolescence or adulthood, as measured by subsequent arrests, charges, or convictions (Caldwell & Dickinson, 2009; Parks & Bard, 2006). One study reported the re-offense rate for their sample was 4.20 percent re-offense, and only .60 percent sexually reoffended one or more times. This study was conducted by Christensen & Vincent (2013) and specifically sought to examine juvenile re-offense (recidivism) rates in Maricopa County. Working with the National Juvenile Court Data Archive, they were able to build a participant pool of 43,906 juvenile offenders, 695 of who were convicted of at least one sexually based offense. The participants were born sometime between 1978 and 1982, and were convicted in Maricopa County, Arizona of at least one offense, sexual or non-sexual. Cumulatively, their sample had 86,584 offenses, 797 of which were sexual in nature (Christiansen & Vincent, 2013). Of those charged with a sexual offense, 25 were charged with two sexual offenses and 4 were charged with three sexual offenses (Christiansen & Vincent, 2013). In addition to this large sample size, Christensen & Vincent (2013) had access to longitudinal data, which was gathered until the juvenile turned 18. The participants ages ranged from 7 to 18; 14.02 was the average age of onset of offending behavior (Christiansen & Vincent, 2013). 54% of the population was Caucasian, the remaining participants ethnicities broke down as follows: 33.38% were Hispanic, 8.64% African American, 2.62% Native American, .6% were Asian, and .4 % Other (Christiansen & Vincent, 2013). In