1. Juveniles Who Sexually Offend Gretchen Kubnick Ray Woodruff Wisconsin Department of Corrections Division of Juvenile Corrections High Risk Juvenile Sex Offender Reentry Program

2. Division of Juvenile Corrections MISSION  To promote a juvenile justice system that balances public protection, youth accountability and competency building for responsible and productive community living.

3. Division of Juvenile Corrections VISION  We will reduce delinquent behavior and restore a sense of safety to victims and the community. - youth accountability - partnerships with community - public protection

4. Juvenile Sex Offenders  23% of all sexual assaults are committed by juveniles  16% of these juvenile sex offenders were under the age of 12  96% of all sex offenders (adult and juvenile) are male (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000)

5. Juvenile Sex Offender Myths  Stranger Danger  More Sex Offenders than ever!  They’re all Pedophiles  Residency Restrictions keep us safe  Most will commit more sex offenses

6. Myth: “Stranger Danger”  93% of child sexual abuse victims know their abuser - 34% of offenders were family members - 59% of offenders were acquaintances  77% of sexual assaults of children occurs in a residence (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000)

7. Myth: “More sex offenders than ever”  Arrest rates for all sex offenses across the U.S. (including forcible rape and excluding prostitution) have slightly decreased in recent years Year # of sex offense arrests 1997133,960 2002123,354 2007107,286 (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States)

8. Myth: “They’re all Pedophiles”  Pedophilia is characterized by “recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children”  An individual must be at least 16 years of age to be diagnosed as a pedophile  Some juvenile offenders display pedophiliac behaviors, however…  Majority of juvenile sex offenders are not pedophiles  Access and convenience are factors  HOWEVER, preoccupation (and sexual interest) with children can increase the risk for recidivism (Miner, 2002)(Worling, & Curwen, 2000) (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4 th Edition)

9. Myth: “Residency Restrictions will keep us safe”  Research does not support a correlation between sex offender residency restrictions and a reduction in sexual violence  Virtual complete lack of evidence to support residence restrictions  Residency restrictions may cause instability, pushing offenders away from treatment, social services, and stable employment; all which could lead to re-offending  Minnesota – 224 recidivists returned to prison, 0 established contact with child victim near school, daycare, park, etc. within 10 miles of offender’s residence  Iowa – sex offense charges and convictions involving children slightly increased in the 2 years following residence restrictions being implemented (Levenson, & Hern, 2007) (Levenson, Zgoba, & Tewksbury, 2007) (Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2007) (Duwe, Donnay, & Tewksbury, 2008) (Iowa Department of Human Rights, 2008) (Kruttschnitt, Uggen, & Shelton, 2000)

10. Residency Restrictions and Juvenile Registration, cont’d  Restrictions could undermine the Registry - Within 6 months, Iowa’s non-compliance rate doubled - 27 cases for non-compliance in Brown County (9/22/09)  Research on juvenile SO registration provides no support for a deterrent effect on juvenile sex offending  National Alliance to End Sexual Violence opposes residency restrictions  93% of all child sexual abuse victims already know their abuser (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000) (Letourneau et al., 2009) (Smith, T., Personal Communication 2009) (Levenson, Zgoba, & Tewksbury, 2007)

11. Myth: “They will just re-offend”  Most studies show that juvenile sexual recidivism rates vary from 4-14% Sex Offense Study Follow-up Recidivism Rate Caldwell (2007) 5 years 6.8% Worling (2000) 2-10 years 5.17% Letourneau (2009) 9 years 2.5 – 7.5% Rasmussen (1999) 5 years 14.1% Vandiver (2006) 3-6 years 4.3% Hendriks (2008) 9 years 11% Kahn (1991) 20 months 7.5% Sample & Bray (2003) 5 years 6.5% Parks & Bard (2006) ≤ 134 months 6.4%

12. Juvenile Sex Offender Recidivism Studies  Higher rates of non-sexual re-offending StudyRate Worling, & Curwen (2000)39.6% Hendriks (2008)59% Caldwell (2007)73.9% Kahn, & Chambers (1991)44.8% Parks, & Bard (2006)30.1%  Problems with studies: - Detection difficulties - Small or skewed samples - Inadequate procedures - Evaluator Error

13. Risk Factors for Sexual Recidivism  Higher rates of sexual re-offending is seen in some specific populations - Prior sexual offending (#, duration) - Stranger victims - Two or more victims - Deviant sexual arousal (fantasies, preoccupations, behaviors, etc.) (Långström, 2002)(Worling & Curwen, 2000)

14. Juveniles Who Persist into Adulthood  Low Social Competence  High Rates of Antisocial Behavior  High Rates of Impulsivity (Knight & Prentky, 1993)

15. Juvenile Sex Offender Characteristics  Vast majority are male (~95%)  Many have suffered some form of abuse (physical or otherwise)  Large portion are actually very similar to juvenile non-sexual offenders (general delinquent behavior, truancy, poor social skills, etc.)  Points to importance of J-SOAP-II (Kahn, & Chambers, 1991) (Miner, 2002) (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000)

16. J-SOAP II  Empirically-informed assessment guide  Used to identify risk & needs  Non-sexual offending as well as sexual offending  To assist with short-term risk assessment  To assist with finding appropriate treatment and case planning  No “cut-off” scores or probability estimates

17. Description of J-SOAP II (Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol)  Tool consists of 28 items grouped into four domains or scales 1. Sexual Drive/Sexual Preoccupation 2. Impulse/Antisocial Behavior 3. Intervention 4. Community Stability/Adjustment Scale

18. J-SOAP II Scales  Static / Historical Scales  Sexual Drive/Preoccupation Scale  Impulsive-Antisocial Behavior Scale  Dynamic Scales  Intervention Scale  Community Stability Scale

19. J-SOAP – II SUMMARY FORM  STATIC / HISTORICAL SCALES  Sexual Drive/Preoccupation Scale Score: __ /16 = __ Add Items 1-8 (range: 0-16)]  Impulsive-Antisocial Behavior Scale Score: __/16 = __ [Add Items 9-16 (range: 0-16)]  DYNAMIC SCALES  Intervention Scale Score: __/14 = __ [Add Items 17 - 23 (range 0-14)]  Community Stability Scale Score: __/10 = __ [Add Items 24 – 28 (range: 0-10)]

20. When is the J-SOAP II Scored in DJC?  At intake as part of a comprehensive assessment  Post treatment / pre-release from JCI, RCC etc  Follow-up Treatment and supervision in community (every 90 days)

21. Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment in the Division of Juvenile Corrections  Assessment – MAYSI-2 and J-SOAP II, Clinical Evaluation, Psychosexual Assessments, Psychological Evaluations

22. Factors to Reduce Juvenile Sexual Recidivism  Treatment - Cooperation with Treatment Process - Guilt & Remorse - Cognitive Distortions - Motivation for Change (Worling & Curwen, 2000) (Epperson, Personal Communication, 2008)

23. Sex Offender Program (SOAR)  Enhanced Thinking Skills – Juvenile (ETS-J) - cognitive skills program (4-6 months)  CORE Component - specifically address sexual offending (6-9 months)

24. Transition to the Community  Transition Phase begins 90 days prior to release  Team consists of Reintegration Social Worker, Inst. Treatment Provider, Field Agent, Community Care Providers, Youth, Parent or Family, Others as appropriate  Develop a Transition Case Plan (TCP)

25. Community Supervision  Post-Release Supervision - Aftercare (state or county) - Interstate Compact  Corrective Sanctions Program - §938.533 - Electronic monitoring and daily contacts  Serious Juvenile Offender Program - §938.538  Sex Offender Supervision

26. Community Supervision/Management  Re-Assess often (risk & needs of youth)  Community programs & Availability to youth/families  Work with families (when appropriate)  Appropriate levels of supervision with community safety

27. Sex Offender Registration (As of 9/24/09)  91% of registrants are adults  Adult Conviction = 19,194 - Active = 4,846 - Terminated = 8,656 - Incarcerated = 5,692  Juvenile Adjudication = 1,851 - Active = 287 - Terminated = 1,324 - Incarcerated = 240  www.widocoffenders.org

28. 2005 Wisconsin ACT 5  Authorizes a police chief or sheriff to provide information from the sex offender registry concerning: - A registrant who is a child, or a juvenile proceeding in which the registrant (any age) was involved  Before ACT 5, this information was always confidential

29. ACT 5  Information from the sex offender registry may be released to: - an organization (including schools, day care providers, government agencies, etc.) - an individual - the general public -IF-  The police chief or sheriff determines that doing so is necessary to protect the public

30. ACT 5  § 301.46(2)(e)  Effective date: May 17, 2005  Dr. Anna Salter and DOC developed guidelines for law enforcement when deciding on notification  Law enforcement is Not Required to release any information about a juvenile on the SOR

31. Things to think about…  Juvenile sex offenders have lower sexual recidivism rates than adults  Treatment has been shown to have a significant impact  Research does not support a correlation between sex offender residency restrictions and a reduction in sexual violence  We can provide support to juveniles who have sexually offended, while also maintaining community safety (Caldwell, 2007) (Letourneau et al., 2009) (Borduin, 2009)

32. Questions?  Division of Juvenile Corrections  Gretchen: 608-240-5915  Ray: 608-240-5919  Gretchen.Kubnick@wisconsin.gov  Ray.Woodruff@wisconsin.gov