Untitled

Abstract

Assessments of juvenile sexual offenders that are intended to aid in dispositional decisions occur at a multitude of decision points within the juvenile justice system. Despite the ubiquity of decisions that include considerations of risk, relatively little empirical work has been done on the development and validation of a risk assessment procedure for these young offenders. In this article, we discuss our initial efforts in developing and validating an actuarial risk assessment protocol for juvenile sex offenders using a sample of 96 adolescents that had been admitted, treated, and discharged from the Joseph J. Peters Institute. We conclude with a critical discussion of problems associated with evaluating risk in this population, and of deficiencies and revision requirements in the present protocol.

Testing the validity of criminal risk assessment tools in sexually abusive youth.

“…Two well-established JSO risk assessment tools that have received major scientific interest (Hempel et al, 2013;Miccio-Fonseca, 2016;Rettenberger, Klein, Martin, & Briken, 2014;Ryan, 2016) are the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol II (J-SOAP II; Prentky & Righthand, 2003) and the Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR; Worling & Curwen, 2001). The J-SOAP II (or, more exactly, its precursor J-SOAP (Prentky, Harris, Frizzell, & Righthand, 2000)) has been considered the "pioneer of risk assessment tools" for JSOs (Rasmussen, 2013, p. 124). First introduced in 1994 (Prentky et al, 2000), the instrument underwent a series of studies on its factor structure, reliability, and predictive validity, and was published in its current 28-item format in 2003 (Prentky & Righthand, 2003).…”

“…The J-SOAP II (or, more exactly, its precursor J-SOAP (Prentky, Harris, Frizzell, & Righthand, 2000)) has been considered the "pioneer of risk assessment tools" for JSOs (Rasmussen, 2013, p. 124). First introduced in 1994 (Prentky et al, 2000), the instrument underwent a series of studies on its factor structure, reliability, and predictive validity, and was published in its current 28-item format in 2003 (Prentky & Righthand, 2003). The J-SOAP II is applicable to JSOs (with contact-offenses) between 12 RISK ASSESSMENT TOOLS IN JSOs 4…”

Treatment Impact of an Integrated Sex Offender Program as Measured by J-SOAP-II

“…In a study conducted in the Netherlands, recidivism was found to be higher in a population of male adolescent sex offenders (n ¼ 114) who were in a residential program for an average of 2 years and 4 months (Hendriks & Bijleveld, 2008). Researchers scored several variables from the files, including static variables (i.e., background, personality, environmental factors, criminal career, and offense) and the dynamic factors from the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol (J-SOAP; Prentky, Harris, Frizzell, & Righthand, 2000). These dynamic factors are measured on subscale 3 of the J-SOAP-II, which is comprised of evaluations on seven factors: (1) accepting responsibility for offenses; (2) internal motivation for change; (3) understands risk factors and applies risk management strategies; (4) empathy; (5) remorse and guilt; (6) cognitive distortions; and (7) quality of peer relationships (Prentky & Righthand, 2003).…”

An Examination of Two Sexual Recidivism Risk Measures in Adolescent Offenders

“…T he assessment of adolescent risk for sexual recidivism is an area of growing interest for mental health professionals, legal professionals, policy makers, and the public at large. The purpose of risk assessment is to assist in decision making in the areas of treatment, sentencing, and supervision in the community (Hanson, 2000;Prentky, Harris, Frizzell, & Righthand, 2000;Worling, 2004). Currently, a challenge to the field of adolescent sex offender risk assessment is to establish the validity of risk assessment measures that are being used.…”