Uncovering Female Child Sexual Offenders—Needs and Challenges for Practice and Research

Abstract

This article provides a short literature overview on female child sexual offenders (FCSO) focusing on the discrepancy between prevalence rates from different sources, characteristics of FCSO and their victims, as well as the societal “culture of denial” surrounding these women. FCSO are a powerful social taboo. Even professionals in the healthcare or justice system were shown to respond inappropriately in cases of child sexual abuse committed by women. As a result, offences of FCSO may be underreported and therefore difficult to research. The lack of scientific data on FSCO lowers the quality of child protection and treatment services. We therefore deem it particularly necessary for professionals in health care to break the social taboo that is FCSO and to further stimulate research on the topic of FCSO. We provide some general implications for professionals in health care systems as well as specific recommendations for researchers. We end with an overall conclusion.

Female Sexual Offending: A Neglected Criminal Justice Issue

“…Because of methodological weaknesses in most FSO research, experts question the accuracy of this scholarship since these studies often use small or nonrepresentative convenience samples. Thereby, making it impossible for researchers to generalize and infer from the findings (Saradjian, 2000;Tozdan et al, 2019). This is only one factor that prevents experts and scholars from assessing the total number of incidents and cases that occur each year.…”

“…Despite these concerns, efforts are made to assess the actual number of female sexual offenses that occur. For example, Tozdan, Briken, & Dekker (2019) reported that in the U.S., official crime data from the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS), that focused on female sexual offenses committed by relatives of the victims, revealed from 1991-1996, women offenders committed an estimated 40,804 sexual crimes against children and adolescents between the ages 1 through 17. More specifically, NIBRS data revealed that 8,539 victims were younger than 6; 12,260 victims were ages 6-12; and 20,005 victims were between the ages of 12-17.…”

“…Critics often argue that there is little representative research on female sexual offenders (FSO) (Tozdan, Briken, & Dekker, 2019). This may exist because all major crime indices (e.g., UCR, NCVS, and SRS) show that crime is disproportionately committed by men (Beirne & Messerschmidt, 2011).…”

Hintergründe und psychische Folgen organisierter und ritueller Gewalt – Berichte an die Unabhängige Kommission zur Aufarbeitung sexuellen Kindesmissbrauchs

“…In keinem der vorliegenden Dokumente wurde eine Täterschaft ausschließlich von Frauen angegeben; eher waren sowohl Männer als auch Frauen oder ausschließlich Männer involviert. Von Frauen begangener sexueller Kindesmissbrauch stellt ein gesellschaftliches Tabuthema dar [16,17], was insbesondere im Gesundheitswesen und in der Justiz deutlich wird [18,19]. Betroffene von Täterinnen haben oft Schwierigkeiten, sexuell missbräuchliche Handlungen als solche einzuordnen [16] oder darüber zu sprechen.…”

#HeToo? Men trivialize cases of sexual harassment by a female aggressor toward a male victim, but women do not

“…This phenomenon has been researched in relation to perceptions of working parents (Cuddy et al, 2004;Fuegen & Endicott, 2010;Gaunt, 2013;Rudman & Mescher, 2013), job applications (Phelan et al, 2008;Rudman & Glick, 1999), leadership abilities and skills (Eagly & Karau, 2002), judicial decision-making (Pozzulo et al, 2009;Miller, 2018), or feminine-and masculinelooking robots (Eyssel & Hegel, 2012), among others. It has also been demonstrated in the context of immoral behaviors, such as sexual assault (Davies & Rogers, 2006;Fromuth et al, 2001;Gakhal & Brown, 2011), child sexual abuse (Tozdan et al, 2019;Zack et al, 2018), intimate partner violence (Cormier & Woodworth, 2008;Dutton & White, 2013;Hamby & Jackson, 2010;Jackson Harris & Cook, 1994;Seelau & Seelau, 2003;Seelau & Seelau, 2005), and-as described above-sexual harassment (Bursik & Gefter, 2011;Pina & Gannon, 2010;Studzinska & Hilton, 2017). Frequently, for opposite-gender cases, female victims were viewed as suffering more than male victims, and male perpetrators were regarded as deserving more punishment or being more responsible than female perpetrators.…”