A Study of the Relationships Among Emotional Abuse, Parent and Caregiver Instability,

and Disrupted Attachment on Juvenile Sex Offending Status

A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty

of the School of Human Service Professions

Widener University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

By

Marc V. Felizzi

Center for Social Work Education

August 2011
 UMI Number: 3491559

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI
Dissertation Publishing

UMI 3491559
Copyright 2012 by ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

uest
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
 Copyright by

Marc V. Felizzi

2011
Title of Dissertation: A Study of the Relationships Among Emotional Abuse,

Parent and Caregiver Instability, and Disrupted

Attachment on Juvenile Sex Offending Status

Author: Marc V. Felizzi

Approved by:
Brent Sarterly, PhJX

Chair

David Burton, Ph.D.

Adviso;
Ik4
George Leibowitz,
ibowitz. Ph.
Advisor
Widener

University

Date: August 2011

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Social Work.
 Dedication

This dissertation's completion was driven by a desire to understand the impact

one's family leaves on a child. Scores of papers have been devoted to trying to understand

how a parent's or a caregiver's beliefs and actions affect a child, and how that impact is

actualized throughout one's life.

My life has been a constant whorl of inspecting what I experienced within my

home as a child and an adolescent. Accordingly, I have spent most of my professional and

academic career trying to parse not only what I experienced, but what my clients and my

research subjects were exposed to in their lives.

I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my family: my children, Carter James

(CJ) and Christopher, and my wife, Lisa. My children have spent countless hours waiting

for dad to "get off the computer" and spend time with them. Their patience with this

project cannot be expressed by anything any language provides. I also cannot express the

gratitude I have for them inspiring me to complete this work, but also in allowing me to

look inward and observe how my work was affected, in a positive manner, by our life

together.

My wife, Lisa, supported me in this undertaking, and made tremendous sacrifices

in her personal and professional life in order to allow me to attend classes and to spend

time researching and writing this dissertation. I owe her more than one can imagine, as she

put her dreams on hold while I chased after mine. "Thank you" is not enough for the

support and inspiration she provided me throughout these past few years.

iv
 Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the faculty of the Center for Social Work Education

at Widener University for their support throughout the entire Doctoral process. Paula

Silver, Ph.D., encouraged me to join the first Ph.D. cohort in the program, and I thank her

for considering me as a candidate. Thomas Young, Ph.D., was a constant source of

inspiration, support, and strength for me. He is a superb teacher and a trusted confidant.

Sanjay Nath, Ph.D., provided invaluable support in walking me through the analysis of the

data and helped this once statistically challenged candidate to comprehend the nebulous

analytic process. My committee, George Leibowitz, Ph.D., David Burton, Ph.D., and my

chair, Brent Satterly, Ph.D., guided me with care and concern, and pushed me to write

effectively and professionally. I am indebted to David for his granting me access to the

data set, and for planting the seed of inspiration for the secondary analysis. Were it not for

his contributions, I would still be struggling to determine what, and how, to complete my

studies. Also, an extra "thank you" to Brent Satterly for calming my fears, allowing me to

vent, and guiding me through this fulfilling journey.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge the first cohort colleagues at Widener: Chris

Harris, Suchi Hiraesave, Wanja Ogongi, Sheri Boyle and Eileen Starr, for their enduring

support, for the friendships we created, and for the life changing experiences we shared.

v
 Abstract

This dissertation uses secondary data analysis to investigate the effects of

emotional abuse, parent and caregiver instability, and parental attachment on juvenile sex

offending. While traumatic experiences among juvenile offenders have been studied in

some depth, emotional abuse has received little attention in the juvenile sexual abuse

literature historically. Its impact as a causal factor of juvenile sex offending, along with

family instability and parental attachment, is examined here. The study population was

composed of 502 juvenile sexual and nonsexual offenders in a large Midwestern state,

who responded to questionnaires in an effort to examine juvenile offending antecedents

and attitudes about sexual behavior. The dissertation also contains an overview of juvenile

sexual offending in the United States, as well as a discussion of the historical precedents

noted in the literature on the treatment of juvenile offenders in the judicial and mental

health systems. Literature on juvenile offending, emotional abuse, parent and caregiver

instability, and attachment theory are reviewed. The behaviors of juvenile sex offenders

and nonsexual offenders are also compared throughout this study to contrast the

differences between the groups of adolescents. The dissertation concludes with a

discussion of the findings of the study. Limitations of current models of treatment,

theories of causation, and etiology of juvenile sex offending are discussed as well as

implications for the treatment of juvenile sex offenders.

VI
 Table of Contents

Acknowledgements v

Abstract vi

Chapter One: Introduction 1

Chapter Two: Literature Review 5

Juvenile Sex Offending 5

Juvenile Sex Offenders Compared to Nonsexual Offenders 7

Historical Overview 10

Social Learning Theory 13

Social Learning Theory and Families 15

Emotional Abuse 19

Emotional Abuse and Juvenile Sex Offending 25

Parent/Caregiver Instability 26

Attachment Theory 28

Attachment and Sex Offending 36

Attachment and Juvenile Nonsexual Offenders 37

Attachment and Juvenile Sex Offenders 37

Research Questions 40

Chapter Three: Research Methods 41

Characteristics of the Sample Population 41

Study/Research Design 43

Sample and Data Collection Procedures 43

vii
 Instrumentation 44

Emotional Abuse 49

Parent/Caregiver Instability 50

Attachment 50

Multicollinearity , 52

Chapter Four: Results 53

Number of Assaults and Victims 54

Outcome Variable: Juvenile Sex Offending 56

Independent Variables: Emotional Abuse, Parental Attachment, Parent-Caregiver

Instability 59

Correlational Analysis 61

Multivariate Analysis 69

Supplementary Analysis 71

Regression Analysis 72

Supplementary Analyses 76

Chapter Five: Findings, Discussion, Implications and Conclusions 79

Research Question One 79

Research Question Two 80

Research Question Three 81

Discussion 82

Research Implications 87

Practice Implications 89

Limitations 92
viii
Conclusions 93

Summary 97

References 99

IX
List of Tables

Table 1: Racial Characteristics of Study Respondents 42

Table 2: Mean and Standard Deviation for Age of Respondents 43

Table 3: Constructs and Measures 44

Table 4: Subscale Alpha Coefficients for Questionnaires 51

Table 5: Number of Assaults in Study Populations 54

Table 6: Number and Type of Victims in the Study Populations 55

Table 7: Number of Assaults Against Victim Type 57

Table 8: Frequency of Sexual Act 58

Table 9: Descriptive Statistics for Independent Variables (IV) of Emotional Abuse

and Attachment 60

Table 10: Descriptive Statistics for Parental Caregiver Instability 61

Table 11: First Order Pearson Correlations Between Independent Variables and Sexual

Offenses 63

Table 12: First Order Pearson Correlations Between Independent Variables and Juvenile

Sex Offender Status 68

Table 13: The Effects of Emotional Abuse on Juvenile Sex Offense Status 70

Table 14: Relationship of Emotional Abuse (Continuous Variable) With Offenses

Committed (Categorical) Utilizing Point-Biserial Correlations Among Juvenile Sex

Offenders 70

Table 15: Relationship Between Emotional Abuse (Categorical Low/High Using

Median Split on Emotional Abuse) With Offenses Committed (Categorical)

Using Chi-Square Analyses 72

x
Table 16: Regression Analysis Using Emotional Abuse as Dependent Variable 73

Table 17: The Effects of Parent/Caregiver Instability on Juvenile Sex Offending 75

Table 18. The Effects of Parent/Caregiver Instability and Emotional Abuse (Without

Paternal Attachment in the Analysis) 77

Table 19: Effects of Parent-Caregiver Instability, Emotional Abuse, and Attachment on

the Whole Study Population (Juvenile Sex Offenders and Juvenile Nonsexual Offenders

Group) 77

XI
 List of Appendices

Appendix A: Ohio Evaluation Survey 133

xn
 1

Chapter One

Introduction

Emotional abuse, similar to any other form of abusive behavior, can inflict

lifelong consequences. Detection of emotional abuse of a child or juvenile maybe

difficult because, unlike physical or sexual abuse, emotional abuse does not leave bodily

scars. Such abuse, inflicted early in life, can affect mental health functioning by leading

to emotional dysregulation and the development of pathological coping mechanisms,

such as holding a negative view of oneself and of the outside world. Early emotional

abuse may also impede social functioning through an inability to interact appropriately

with others and to develop satisfying intimate relationships (Riggs, 2010).

This less than optimal level of mental health may be characterized by negative

self-associations, as well as an elevated risk for depression or anxiety disorders (Riggs,

2010). Researchers have reported that emotional abuse was found to have the strongest

link with enhanced automatic self-depression and self-anxiety associations (van

Harmelen, de Jong, Glashouwer, Spinhoven, Penninx, & Elzinga, 2010).

Emotional abuse is a common phenomenon. Baker and Maiorino (2010) found in

their meta-analysis on the frequency of reported emotional abuse that 32.2% of the

clinical respondents from surveys across North America reported that they had suffered

either severe or extreme emotional abuse. Trickett, Mermen, Kim, and Sang (2009) found

that 50% of the respondents in their survey of inner city adolescents suffered from

emotional abuse. These researchers found that the county welfare agencies studied

identified only 9% of their juvenile consumers as "emotionally abused." However, when

 2

administered Trickett, et al.'s questionnaire post-referral, half of the welfare agencies'

juvenile consumers considered themselves to be emotionally abused.

Emotional abuse can be difficult to detect. Since scars or physical evidence are

not manifestations, the effects of emotional abuse can be seen in not only poor emotional

regulation but in chronic depressed affect, negative self- view, poor quality of

relationships, and delinquent behavior. These symptoms rarely resolve themselves in that

adults who were emotionally abused reported that their own psychosocial functioning had

been hampered throughout their lifetime (Taussig & Culhane, 2010).

Emotional abuse may be more prevalent in families where stressors exceed the

capacity of the in-place supports (Iwaniec, Larkin, & Higgins, 2006). There does not

appear to be one single factor that is stronger than others in emotionally abusive families.

It appears that a constellation of variables that leads to such behavior (Iwaniec, Larkin &

Higgins, 2006; Doyle, 1997).

Emotional abuse was measured in this study through the use of the Childhood

Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) (Bernstein & Fink, 1998). The CTQ is a self-report

questionnaire that consists of five subscales, one scale of the questionnaire measures

childhood emotional abuse.

The variables that make up an unstable home lifecharacterized by parents or

caregivers physically or sexually abusing children or each other, along with frequent

moves and numerous different people residing in the homewill be examined for their

possible relationship to juvenile sex offending. This construct of parent and caregiver

instability is measured by a demographic questionnaire administered to the respondents

 3

(see appendix). Eleven questions that inquire into the respondents' family makeup,

stability and activities will be analyzed for the occurrence of unstable, illegal, and

abusive behaviors.

These behaviors, in conjunction with issues concerning the juvenile's parental

attachment have been researched as possible causal factors of juvenile sex offending

(Barbaree, Marshall, & McCormack, 1998; Bischoff, 1991; Bischoff & Stith, 1992;

Lehmann, 2008; Marshall, 1989; Marshall & Mazzucco, 1995; Rich, 2006). The

following study will examine the role of attachment, through the use of the Inventory of

Peer and Personal Attachment (IPPA) (Armsden, & Greenberg, 1987). The scales of

parent attachment, 25 questions measuring perceived maternal attachment, and 25

questions measuring perceived paternal attachment were used in this study to determine

the respondents' representative view of their parent/ caregiver connection.

This dissertation uses secondary data analysis to investigate effects of emotional

abuse, parent and caregiver instability, and parental attachment in relationship to juvenile

sex offending. As noted earlier, emotional abuse is an understudied concept in the

research literature. Consequently, the impact of this variable as a causal factor of

juvenile sex offending along with family instability and parental attachment needs to be

examined. The study population was composed of 502 juvenile sexual and nonsexual

offenders in a large Midwestern state, who responded to questionnaires in an effort to

examine juvenile offending antecedents and attitudes about sexual behavior The

dissertation contains a review of juvenile sexual offending in the United States, as well as

a discussion of the historical precedents noted in the literature on the treatment of

 4

juvenile offenders in the judicial and mental health systems. Literature on juvenile

offending, emotional abuse, parent and caregiver instability, and attachment theory are

reviewed. The theoretical underpinnings of social learning theory are presented, and these

are applied as a possible explanation of the etiology of juvenile sex offending. The

dissertation concludes with a discussion of the results and findings of the study.

Limitations of the current models of treatment, theories of causation and explanations for

juvenile sex offending are discussed, as well as the implications for the treatment of

juvenile sex offenders.

 5

Chapter Two

Literature Review

This chapter provides an overview of juvenile sexual offending in the United

States, as well as a discussion of the historical precedents noted in the literature on the

treatment of juvenile offenders in the judicial and mental health systems. The chapter will

also review the literature on comparative studies of juvenile sexual offenders and

nonsexual offenders, social learning theory, emotional abuse and attachment theory.

Finally, the chapter ends with a review of the body of literature regarding research into

the possible relationship between emotional abuse, caregiver instability, attachment

history, and juvenile sex offending. Limitations of the current models of treatment and

published studies are discussed.

Juvenile Sex Offending

Sexually abusive, or offending, behavior can be defined as any sexual interaction

with a person of any age that is perpetrated (1) against the victim's will, (2) without

consent, or (3) in an aggressive, exploitative, manipulative, or threatening manner (Ryan

& Lane, 1997).

As of December 2008, a total of 673,989 sex offenders were registered in the

United States (National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, 2009). Of those,

approximately 26% were juvenile offenders (Finkelhor, Ormrod, & Chaffin, 2009). In

2006, the U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention reported that close

to 20,000 juveniles had been adjudicated for forcible rape or other violent sex offenses

during that year (Puzzanchera, Adams, & Sickmund, 2010).

 6

Research literature on juvenile offenders was relatively sparse until the 1980s

(Veneziano & Veneziano, 2002). The attention given to a number of sexual crimes

against children since the 1980s has led to increased national awareness of sexual

offending in general. Abel, Becker and Cunningham-Rathner (1984) found that over half

of the adult sex offenders, in their study, admitted to committing their first sexual crime

as a juvenile. This finding help to give rise to literature on the causes, prevention, and

treatment of juvenile sexual offending (Veneziano & Veneziano, 2002).

While the focus of this dissertation is to examine possible causal factors of

juvenile sex offending, implications for the possible prevention of such behavior are also

offered. It is equally important to set the stage for the treatment of such behavior and

review how the treatment for juvenile sex offenders in the United States has evolved over

the past 100 years. While juveniles may have previously been released into the custody of

their caregivers during the first 75 years of the 20th century, many specialized facilities

and programs designed to treat juvenile sex offenders have been created in the last 35 to

40 years.

Laws that were intended to address adult sex offenders have been adapted to

apply to juveniles in many states (Zimring, 2004). Issues regarding perpetrator's intent,

degree of planning and impulsivity in commission of the act, use offeree, threats and

coercion, and ideas for treating juvenile offenders in the courts in the same manner as

adults have created concerns among juvenile justice officials, mental health treatment

providers, and state legislators (Jones, 2007). Concerns such as juveniles receiving the

same criminal sentences and treatment as adult sex offenders, being forced to undergo
 7

treatments that were intended for adult offenders, and being placed on public access sex

offender registries where classmates, neighbors, and others can locate them are some of

the issues facing those who work with juvenile sex offenders (Jones, 2007; Zimring,

2004).

One of the concerns that professionals, including social workers, face in

conducting clinical work with juvenile sex offenders is the lack of available literature and

research on juvenile sex offending. The critiques of the research into juvenile sex

offending include pointing out the inadequate number of subjects in research populations

for most studies in this area. Since the numbers of juvenile offenders studied in any given

setting are generally smaller than their adult counterparts (Letourneau & Borduin, 2008;

Letourneau & Miner, 2005; Miner, 2007; Nelson, 2007) and due to the constantly

changing aspects of adolescents and youth, emotionally and physically, it is often

difficult to create a homogeneous "model" of a juvenile offender. Additionally, while

several instruments in the studies of offenders are widely used, a number of studies have

used questionnaires that were created for the individual study, and have not been

empirically validated (Letourneau & Borduin, 2008).

Juvenile Sex Offenders Compared to Nonsexual Offenders

In this study, the effects of emotional abuse, parent and caregiver instability, and

attachment on a population of incarcerated juvenile sex offenders and juvenile nonsexual

offenders are examined. The possible differences between the groups are examined in

Chapter four of this dissertation. It has been argued that juvenile sex offenders are

different than their nonsexual offending counterparts (Brown & Burton, 2010; Bullens,
 8

van Wijk, & Mali, 2006; Ford & Linney, 1995; Jonson-Reid & Way, 2001; Seto &

Lalumiere, 2010; van Wijk, Blokland, Duits, Vermeiren, & Harkink, 2007; van Wijk,

Vreugdenhil, van Horn, Vermeiren, & Doreleijers, 2007). However, several researchers

found that sexually offending and nonsexually offending juveniles are quite similar, and

similar interventions can be applied to both (Bullens et al., 2006; Becker & Hunter, 1997,

Miner & Munns, 2005). In this study, I examined the possible differences between these

two groups of offenders, in order to add to the existing body of literature that investigates

correlated factors of juvenile sex offending.

The term nonsexual offenders, for the purposes of this study, refers to juveniles

who have been incarcerated for crimes of a nonsexual nature. This behavior, often called

"delinquent," includes behaviors that are against the law for both children and adults,

such as assault, robbery, and drug offenses. Status offenses, reserved for juveniles, are

included in this category, for behaviors such as truancy and running away from home

(Smith & Stern, 1997). Jonson-Reid and Way (2001) found that juvenile sex offenders

may display offenses such as these later in life than other nonsexual offenders.

In comparing differences between the two groups, juvenile sex offenders have

been found to be older than nonsexual offenders at their first arrest (Ford & Linney,

1995; van Wijk, Vreugdenhil, van Horn, et al., 2007) and to have higher rates of sexual

victimization than nonsexual offenders (Becker & Hunter, 1997; Brown & Burton, 2010;

van Wijk, Vreugdenhil, van Horn, et al., 2007). These findings are of interest with respect

to later discussions in this dissertation about the role of sexual abuse in the family

dynamics of juvenile sex offenders. Duane, Carr, Cherry, McGrath, and O'Shea (2003)
 9

found in their comparison study of juvenile sex offenders and nonsexual offenders that

sexually abusive adolescents have experienced more family violence and disruption, as

well as physical or sexual abuse, than their nonsexual offending counterparts. This

finding is important to this study as one of the research questions focuses on the role of

family dysfunction in the lives of juvenile sex offenders.

As will be discussed later, this study's results will be analyzed through the lens of

social learning theory, which states that juveniles learn behaviors by observing influential

adults in their lives (Bandura, 1973). Fair, Brown and Beckett's (2004) findings are of

interest to this study in regard to the influence of learned behaviors. Those researchers

wrote that negative attitudes regarding sexuality may stem from learned norms and

expectations regarding sexual behavior rather than any proclivity or approval of violence

or danger. Fair et al. (2004) also found that juvenile sex offenders often display more

hyper-masculine attitudes than juvenile non-sex offenders; they often carry sexist beliefs

that females are to be used only for sexual gratification or exploration and are inferior to

males. Ryan (1997) and Fair et al. (2004) noted that many of these sexist attitudes and

beliefs are often fostered throughout the juvenile sex offender's family; they lack

appropriate role models who would counter such beliefs or attitudes. These findings

appear to mesh with the precepts of social learning theory, and will be discussed in depth.

While researchers have examined the lack of appropriate family role models and

the impact of family instability variables such as criminal activity, fighting, or multiple

moves on both juvenile sex offenders and nonsexual offenders (Baer & Maschi, 2003;

Becker & Hunter, 1997; Linney & Ford, 1995; Noshpitz, 1994; Schaeffer & Borduin,
 10

1999; van Wijk, Loeber, Vermeiren, Bullens, & Dorelejiers, 2005; vanWijk,

Vreugdenhil, van Horn, et al., 2007), or the effects of attachment on each group (Bowlby,

1944; Bowlby, 1969; Elgar, Knight, Worrall, & Sherman, 2003; Katsiyannis, Zhang,

Barrett, & Flaska, 2004; Marshall, Hudson, & Hodkinson, 1993; Rich, 2006), few studies

have measured the differences in the effects of emotional abuse on sexually offending

juveniles and nonsexual offending juveniles. This study attempts to examine the possible

differences between these two groups of offenders, in order to add to the existing body of

literature that investigates causal factors of juvenile sex offending.

Historical Overview

Zimring (2004) wrote that since the establishment of the first juvenile court in the

1890s until the 1970s, the court-ordered treatment for juvenile sex offending was limited

largely to the family and the community. Until the 1970s, most courts took a

"rehabilitation, not retribution" stance towards juvenile offenders (Eastman, 2005;

Zimring, 2004). Little research, quantitative or qualitative, was conducted on causal

factors or theories of offending. Bandura and Walters (1963) applied a social learning

theory perspective to juvenile sexually offensive behavior, while others focused on

theories that blamed juvenile sex offending on "curious impulses" as juveniles and

adolescents strove to learn about sex first hand (Zimring, 2004).

Not until the 1970s, when many changes in American societal institutions such as

the legal system occurred, the direction of justice, especially juvenile justice, shifted. A

move towards prosecuting juvenile offenders became evident during the 1970s, and the

"rehabilitation, not retribution" ideal began to shift towards incarceration and ultimately
 11

treatment. This move towards prosecution of juvenile sex crimes was spurred by the In re

Gault Supreme Court decision, which gave juveniles the right to due process in a court of

law (Zimring, 2004).

Juvenile residential placements and specialized facilities for juvenile sex offenders

were unheard of up until the 1970s. The few facilities that accepted and worked with

juvenile sex offenders often used treatment programs that showed little proof of efficacy

(Knopp, 1982; Lab, Shields, & Schondel, 1993). Most of the current facilities opened

after the 1980s (Lab et al, 1993; Reitzel & Carbonell, 2006). While relatively few mental

health providers specialized in the treatment of sex offenders, no treatment was

conducted on a large scale (Reitzel & Carbonell, 2006; Zimring, 2004). There was little

research on treatment effect, other than descriptive studies defining juvenile delinquency

(Zimring, 2004).

As more attention was placed on sexual offending in the United States, more

juveniles were adjudicated and ordered to receive treatment for their behavior (Reitzel &

Carbonell, 2006). The greater number of adjudicated juvenile sex offenders placed a

greater burden on existing programs for the treatment of juvenile sex offenders and

created a demand for new treatment programs. This increase in the numbers of juvenile

sex offenders and facilities that treated them led to more research on the causes and

treatment of juvenile sexual offending. Letourneau and Bourduin (2008) stated that a

large body of legislation created in the last 20 years containing such requirements as

residency restrictions and publicly accessed registries for juvenile sex offenders have
 12

been based on unsubstantiated and non-empirical findings, which pointed out a need for

"rigorous evaluations" of juvenile sex offender treatment.

A number of theories have been proposed as causes of juvenile sex offending.

Intrapsychic theory (Barbaree, Marshall, & Hudson, 1993; Figuerdo, Sales, Russell,

Becker, & Kaplan, 2000), attachment theory (Hunter, Figuerdo, Becker, & Malamuth,

2007; Shi & Nicol, 2007) and trauma theory (Brown & Burton, 2010; McMackin, Leisen,

Cusack, LaFratta, & Litwin, 2002)as well as cognitive theories (Apsche, Evile, &

Murphy, 2004; Knight & Knight, 2004; O'Reilly, Morrison, Sheerin, & Carr, 2001;

Righthand & Welch, 2004; van Vugt, Jan Stams, Dekovic, Brugman, Rutten, &

Hendriks, 2008), developmental theories (Calley & Gerber, 2008; Hickey, McCrory,

Farmer, & Vizard, 2008), learning theories (Burton, Miller, & Shift, 2002; Burton,

Nesmith, & Badten, 1997), and family systems theories (Bischoff, Stith, & Wilson,

1992)have all been offered as frameworks for explaining inappropriate and criminal

juvenile sexual behavior (Bancroft, Jannsen, Carnes, Goodrich, Strong, & Long, 2004;

Ryan & Lane, 1997). Research into the causes, prevention, and treatment of juvenile sex

offending has evolved only in the last 35 years (Righthand & Welch, 2004; Zimring,

2004); however, in that time, researchers have found that the causal factors for juvenile

sex offending are plentiful, and the behavior cannot be attributed to one single cause

(Burton, Miller, & Shift, 2002; Burton et al, 1997; Hickey et al., 2008; McCann &

Lussier, 2008; Righthand & Welch, 2004; Ryan, 1997; Schwartz, Cavanaugh, Pimental,

& Prentky, 2006; Shi & Nicol, 2007; van Oustem, Beckett, Bullens, Vermeiren, van

Horn, & Doreleijers, 2006).

 13

For the purposes of this study, the possible causal factors of juvenile sex

offending are viewed through the framework of Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977;

Burton, 2003). Social learning theory has provided a number of areas for consideration of

prevention and treatment of juvenile sex offending (Ryan, 1997). Other researchers have

examined the role of learning theories in the role of the cause and treatment of such

behavior (Andrews & Banta, 1998; Burton, 2004, 2002, 1997; Burton et al, 2002, Groth,

1977; Kaplan, Becker, & Cunningham, 1988; Laws, 1985; Longo, 1982; Orr, 1991;

Ryan, 1997; Sermabeikian & Martinez, 1994; Toch, 1979; Tremblay, 2002; Youstain,

2007).

Social Learning Theory

The concepts of both normal and deviant sexual behavior, as well as criminal or

delinquent behavior, are based in societal, familial and cultural values and norms (Baer &

Maschi, 2003; Higgins, Jennings, Marcum, Ricketts, & Mahoney, 2011; Ryan, 1997;

Smith & Stern, 1997). The familial culture often shapes the sexual or criminal behavior

that is displayed by its' members (Ryan, 1997).

Behavior within a family culture can be explained by three learning theorists:

Pavlov, Skinner, and Bandura. Pavlov theorized that through classic conditioning, one

can elicit a physiological response to paired stimuli (Clark, 2004). If sexual arousal is

paired with a deviant behavior, continued deviance may occur (Ryan, 1997). A child's

early sexual experiences with a caregiver who promotes a family culture of inappropriate

sexual behavior may result in that youth's repeating such sexualized behavior in order to

obtain a pleasurable physiological response. Skinner (1999) paired behavior with reward
 14

or punishment. Regarding juvenile sex offenders, a child's early sexual experiences may

be paired with a reward. For example, if a youngster is touched inappropriately by a

caregiver, and given a reward or "special treatment" by the abuser, the child may

continue to pair sexual behavior with rewards. Bandura's social learning theory may

apply to juvenile offenders in that his hypothesis advances the idea that learning may

begin before actual experience; therefore the observation of deviant behavior may serve

as a reinforcement in a youth's mind to act out accordingly (Bandura, 1977; Ryan, 1997).

Families that display inappropriate sexual behavior within the family setting, may

provide numerous opportunities for a child to observe such behavior, therefore

reinforcing the idea that inappropriate sexuality is an approved family norm.

Patterson, DeBaryshe, and Ramsey (1989) focused on the concepts of poor (either

diffuse or rigid) boundaries and a negative relational style within the family culture of

juvenile sex offenders. The researchers found that children raised in a family culture of

hostilityrejecting parental behavior, neglect, or a coercive environmentlearn to

respond negatively or in an antisocial manner towards others. Thus, exposure to parents

or siblings who model and reinforce inappropriate behavior and advance a negative

relational culture within the home may promote socially disapproved or criminal

activities, such as juvenile sex offending (Melby, Conger, Conger, & Lorenz, 1993). Shi

and Nicol (2007) wrote that children who grow up in a family culture that is "frightening,

unpredictable and violent" may lead a youth to become behaviorally violent, and in the

researchers' clinical case study, their client became sexually violent (p. 397). Abbassi
 15

and Aslinia (2010) wrote that exposure to a violent family culture can cause children to

promote such a culture, as they mature, in their own families of choice.

Bandura (1977) also posited that motivation was critical in the learning process.

The idea of motivation was introduced into the learning of behaviors through vicarious

reinforcement and self-reinforcement. Vicarious reinforcement is the process of learning

a behavior through observing the reinforcing or punishing consequences of others who

commit a behavior. This concept, also referred to as modeling, is an "essential function in

learning aggressive behavior" (Anderson & Kras, 2005, p. 103). Bandura and Walters

(1963) proposed that children are reminded of aggressive behavior by the discipline

enforced by caregivers, which is enacted to receive preferred results-compliance.

Children, in turn, resort to aggression rather than discipline to obtain a "desired outcome"

(Anderson & Kras, 2005, p. 104) such as victim compliance. In sexual offending, such

behavior could be learned by witnessing a caregiver offending a family member and by

observing the rewards that power over the victim brings the perpetrator (Stinson, Sales, &

Becker, 2008). Self-reinforcement refers to the drive to act in a way that gains

self-approval, such as pride or a sense of accomplishment through a behavior. A juvenile

who prides himself or herself in teaching a child to have sex may feel a sense of

fulfillment through such a behavior (Palmer, 2008; Stinson, Sales, & Becker, 2008).

Social Learning Theory and Families

Burton et al. (2002) found that social learning theory generally supported the

findings that sexually aggressive adolescents initiated their behaviors at a younger age,

possibly due to learned behaviors and family environment. In a study of 287 sexually
 16

aggressive adolescents, it was found that 70% of the subjects had at least one caregiver

with substance abuse or dependency issues. Additionally, 48% of the subjects had one

caregiver who was a victim of child sexual abuse. The authors noted that 72% of the

adolescents were themselves victims of sexual abuse, with 60% of the subjects reporting

they were victims of a current caregiver. Burton, et al's interpretation is that exposure to

negative social norms within the family context breeds similar behavior in adolescents

within such families.

These negative social norms that families of juvenile sex offenders display have

been addressed in a study by Henggler, Letourneau, Chapman, Schewe, Borduin, and

McCart (2009). The researchers concentrated on treating such negative social and family

norms as emotional and physical abuse by proposing a multi-systemic model of treatment

that works with juvenile sex offenders and their families in the home and community and

addresses a number of antecedents for negative behavior in juvenile sex offenders. This

model works to stabilize the family unit and to change antisocial and inappropriate

sexualized behavior. This challenge is undertaken by increasing caregiver involvement in

discipline and in developing a positive family culture through applying consistent

discipline and pro-social attitudes. In effect, the multi-systemic approach seeks to replace

negatively learned and acculturated family values with more appropriate and socially

accepted behaviors. Borduin, Schaeffer, and Helblum (2009) also studied the effects of

multi-systemic therapy on sexually offending juveniles' social background and family

constellation. Multi-systemic therapy was found to not only improve the juvenile's social

maturity and emotional bonding, but also to decrease interpersonal aggression and
 17

increase family cohesion and adaptability. This model, according to the researchers,

promotes a pro-social approach that adheres to societal norms and rules regarding

appropriate parenting. Evaluation of a multi-systemic therapy model with families of

juvenile sex offenders also provides a strengths-based approach within the familial

context and strives to promote such a concept within the families' relational efforts

(Henggler, et al, 2009).

The criticisms of social learning theory suggest that individuals' cognitions are

not considered in the learning equation (Palmer, 2008). The impact of aging and

maturation on thought processes is not addressed. This would be a critical piece to

examine with juvenile sex offenders as they age and develop new competencies, and

possibly new perspectives, on their behaviors.

While there are a number of studies that address the relationship between social

learning and juvenile sex offending (Boeringer, Shehan, & Akers, 1991; Burton, 2003;

Burton et al., 2002; Burton et al., 1997), further quantitative study is needed to make

associations between offending and familial factors such as family instability, which

includes emotionally abusive parental behavior (Bischoff & Stith, 1995; Bischoff et al.,

1992; Ronis & Borduin, 2007; Veneziano & Veneziano, 2002). Investigating the level of

attachment juvenile sex offenders perceive with their caregivers may be helpful in

determining the quality of the relational culture within the family (Shi & Nicol, 2007)

and in order to shed light on the relative strength of social learning theory regarding

juvenile sex offending. Shi and Nicol (2007) found that a negative relational culture

within the family is often displayed in socially inappropriate behaviors such as poor
 18

interpersonal boundaries, sexually inappropriate behaviors, and aggression towards

family members.

Despite Shi and Nicol's (2007) findings, one criticism of social learning theory is

that researchers have not been able to determine a link between internalized thoughts and

attitudes and corresponding behaviors. Stinson, Sales, and Becker (2008) questioned the

effect of the impact of negative parental or familial behavioral modeling on a juvenile. If

social learning theory were to be applied broadly, then every child who has observed

sexually inappropriate behavior as perpetrated by a caregiver would become a sex

offender.

Yet despite this statement, researchers have found that as many as 81% of the

juvenile sex offenders have experienced prior abuse victimization or have been exposed

to sexually inappropriate behavior from adults, parents, or caregivers. (Schwartz et al.,

2006). Burton (2003), in a meta-analysis of 49 studies, reported 43% of the more than

9,500 juvenile offenders had been sexually abused. Rates of victimization were higher for

sexually inappropriate youth under the age of 12 years. While this may prove the

assertion that not every juvenile who is exposed to a negative or unstable or

inappropriately sexualized familial culture turns out to be a sex offender, the numbers in

these studies are of concern to society and provide a basis for this dissertation.

Social learning theories provide a number of plausible explanations for juvenile

sexual offending. The research above suggests that investigating the learned sexual

behaviors and familial and cultural norms of the perpetrators' caregiving networks could

be a valuable methodology in the treatment and/or prevention of juvenile perpetration.

 19

The next section reviews the literature on emotional abuse. The section also gives

an overview of the definitions of emotional abuse, the prevalence of such abuse, and its'

effects on juveniles.

Emotional Abuse

The literature contains numerous studies examining the etiology and lifelong

effects of both physical and sexual maltreatment (Courtney, Kushwaha, & Johnson, 2008;

Egeland, 2009; Fryer, 2010; Iwaneic, 2003; Keith-Oaks, 1990; Rees, 2010; Spertus,

Yehuda, Wong, Halligan, & Seremetis, 2003; Yates, 2007). However, emotional abuse

"... .lacks the public and political profile of physical and sexual abuse" (Rees, 2010, p.

59), and therefore research is not as prevalent as the other forms of child maltreatment

(Iwaneic, 2003; Rees, 2010).

Because emotional abuse often lacks physical characteristics, it is frequently

misunderstood, misdiagnosed, and unrecognized. Emotional abuse can be described, but

has rarely been clearly defined (Rees, 2010). Yet, despite being an elusive entity, the

scope of emotional abuse can be broad. Close to 260,000 juveniles were referred to their

local child protective service (CPS) offices for emotional abuse in the United States in

2009 (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2009). Despite these numbers,

there appears to be less recognition of emotional abuse or maltreatment as a significant

problem, and research into the effects of emotional abuse lags behind research of child

physical or sexual abuse (Higgins, 2004; Shaffer, Yates, & Egeland, 2008). Emotional

abuse is rarely the focus of CPS investigations; however, emotional abuse is most often
 20

accompanied by allegations of physical and sexual abuse and neglect (Trickett, Mennen,

Kim & Sang, 2009).

Researchers state that emotional abuse is often composed of such factors as severe

criticism, hostility, and emotional neglect which is comprised of psychological

unavailability and lack of reciprocal affect toward the child (Cohen, Mannarino, Murray

& Igleman, 2006; Egelund, 2009; Keith-Oaks, 1990; Shaffer et al., 2009; Sneddon,

2003). Doyle (1997) provides a more comprehensive description of emotional abuse:

Acts of omission and commission which are judged on the basis of a combination

of community standards and professional expertise to be psychologically

damaging. Such acts are committed by parent figures who are in a position of

differential power that renders the child vulnerable. Such acts damage

immediately or ultimately the behavioral, cognitive, affective, social and

psychological functioning of the child, (p. 331)

Emotional abuse by caregivers is perpetrated for a number of reasons. Poor

parenting skills, parental abuse histories, economic concerns, substance abuse, and

cultural considerations are all factors (Doyle, 1997; Iwaniec, 2003; Lau, Huang, Garland,

McCabe, Yeh, & Hough, 2006; Rees, 2010). Parents who were themselves emotionally

abused may use such a history for a parenting model. Emotionally abused children often

(Berenson & Andersen, 2006) mimic the learned patterns of parent's behavior (Berenson

& Andersen, 2006). Caregivers who are under financial stress may be less concerned

about their child's emotional well-being, as are those who are in the throes of a drug or

alcohol addiction.
 21

The emotional damage to the child can be caused by verbal hostility, taunting,

denigration, unrealistic expectations, belittling, induced fear, or anxiety by threats of

abandonment, rejection and deprivation of attention, psychological unavailability, lack of

stimulation, lack of parental empathy, and by having excessive power over the child

(Egelund, 2009; Iwaniec, 2003; Moor & Silvern, 2006). Rees (2010) writes that

"emotionally abusive behaviors also include overprotection, threats, terrorizing, excessive

punishment, rejection, isolation, scapegoating, granting of inappropriate roles or

responsibilities, and the witnessing of inappropriate, or adult, activity" (p. 60).

It is also assumed that the effects of emotional abuse are not as severe as other

forms of maltreatment (Egelund, 2009; Shaffer et al., 2008; Sneddon, 2003). Indeed,

while physical and sexual abuse are rarely ever witnessed outside the context of the

family, emotional abusein the form of belittling comments, negative and dismissing

attitudes, and threatsmay be observed in a community setting, with little regard

towards the child's welfare (Doyle, 1997; Egelund, 2009; Iwaneic, 2003; Rees, 2010;

Shaffer et al., 2008; Sneddon, 2003). One could consider that the commission of

emotional abuse may be a form of appropriate parenting, and therefore in a sense, is

sanctioned by society (Sneddon, 2003). Cultural issues must be taken in context. What is

seen as warm and supportive in one culture may be seen as abuse in another. Some

cultures believe praising children leads to arrogance and excessive pride, and that

discipline is often attained by the application of threats (Doyle, 1997; Lau et al., 2006;

Rees, 2010).
 22

However, Yates (2007) found that childhood emotional abuse "disrupts

development across many domains, including social, emotional, self, cognitive and

biological processes" (p. 27). Emotional abuse in childhood can be the most pernicious

form of abuse, as it can lead to long-term harmful consequences in emotional and

psychological functioning (Brassard, Germain & Hart, 1987; Fryer, 2009).

The emotional or psychological toll on a juvenile victim of emotional abuse

includes difficulties with self-esteem, social skills, empathy, decision making, stress and

emotion regulation, impulse control, drug or alcohol abuse, academic performance,

sexual performance, intimate relationships, interpersonal relations, cognitive functioning,

delinquent behavior, depression, anxiety, and somatic complaints such as headaches and

intestinal discomfort, which may lead to further perpetration of sexual or emotional

abuse (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987; Bernstein & Fink, 1998; Burton, 2003; Courtney et

al., 2008; Egeland, 2009; Fryer, 2009; Hutchinson & Mueller, 2008; Iwaneic, 2003;

Keith-Oaks, 1990; Kenny, Lennings, & Munn, 2008; Messman-Moore & Brown, 2004;

Messman-Moore & Coates, 2007; Mulder, Brand, Bullens, & Van Marie, 2011; Plattner,

Karnik, Jo, et al., 2007; Polansky, Scull, Villanueva, & Ikambana, 2007; Rees, 2010).

In addition to problems relating to peers, emotional abuse has been linked to a

number of deficits in familial functioning and may contribute to the family's unstable

behavior (Messman-Moore & Coates, 2007; Simon, Herlands, Marks, et al., 2009; Yates,

2007). Such factors include scapegoating, or constant blaming for the family's ills, of the

victim by family members (Hollingsworth, Glass, & Heisler, 2007); inability to maintain

healthy intimate relationships when older (Higgins, 2004; Keith-Oaks, 1990; Messman-
 23

Moore & Coates, 2007; Simon et al., 2009); lower self-esteem and depression (Arata,

Langhinrichse-Rohling, Bowers, & O'Farrill-Swails, 2005; Courtney et al., 2008;

Sneddon, 2005); cognitive distortions; poor problem solving capabilities; difficulty

negotiating conflict; mislabeling of affect, an inability to appropriately process others'

intentions; trust or communication problems with caregivers or parents; and parenting

difficulties when older (Bolger & Patterson, 2001; Doyle, 1997; Gore-Felton, Koopman,

McGarvey, Hernandez, & Canterbury, 2001; Iwaneic, 2003; Iwaniec & Herbert, 1999;

Reyome, 2009; Riggs, 2010; Sneddon, 2003).

Iwaniec (1995) noted that child victims of emotional abuse tend to be withdrawn

socially and exhibit overdependence on parents or adults close to them (such as a

teacher). Emotionally abused children often will wander aimlessly in play areas, refuse to

separate from caregivers, generalize fear, and display sad and "miserable" facial

expressions. Iwaniec (1995) also found that such victims have frequent somatic

complaints, display frequent worry over future events, depend upon comfort habits such

as rocking or thumb sucking, rely on a "comfort object" such as a toy or a blanket, or

depend on masturbation. She also wrote that such children insist on rituals, or doing

things in a particular order in play situations, display encopretic or enuretic behavior

when previously trained, and exhibit changes in eating habits such as dependence on one

type of food and food refusal, and have frequent nightmares or disturbed sleep patterns.

Aggression towards peers may be correlated with emotional abuse or insufficient

parenting (Bolger & Patterson, 2001; Dodge, Bates, & Petit, 1990; Herrenkohl, Eglof, &

Herrenkohl, 1997). Increased startle reactivity has been noted in emotionally abused
 24

children (Jovanovic, Blanding, Norrholm, Duncan, Bradley, & Ressler, 2009), as well as

somatic complaints such as upset stomach, intestinal distress, and headaches (Messman-

Moore & Coates, 2007; Spertus et al., 2003). In addition to these behaviors, suicidal

thoughts, gestures, and attempts have been noted in adults who have been emotionally

abused, as well as the presentation of posttraumatic stress symptoms and difficulties in

maintaining adult interpersonal relationships (Messman-Moor & Coates, 2007; Mullen,

Martin, Anderson, Romans, & Herbison, 1996).

Several researchers wrote that neurobiological processes, such as brain

development and maturation, can be disrupted and impacted by childhood emotional

abuse (Hardy, 2007; Watts-English, Fortson, Gibler, Hooper, & DeBellis, 2006; Yates,

2007). The effects of stress-inducing Cortisol production can alter brain development and

leave an emotional abuse victim prone to hyper-vigilance, anxiety, depression, and, in

some cases, an increased startle response and an inability to emotionally regulate

(Jovanovic et al, 2009; Watts-English et al., 2006; Yates, 2007). Organic brain

dysfunctions; developmental factors such as low intelligence, poor concentration, and

restlessness; poor impulse control; sensation seeking; and low autonomic arousal have

also been researched for possible links to sexually offensive behaviors (Barbaree &

Langton, & Peacock, 2006; Ryan, 1997; Smallbone, 2006).

While few researchers have studied the effects of emotional abuse on juvenile sex

offenders and many researchers have examined the effects of emotional abuse on

nonsexual offending and noncriminal juveniles, further research is needed on both the

causes and effects of emotional abuse on juvenile sex offenders. The need for more
 25

research is indicated to educate at-risk families and juveniles, as well as to possibly

prevent future or further offending.

Emotional Abuse and Juvenile Sex Offending

The relationship between emotional abuse on children and adolescents and

juvenile sex offending is understudied. Despite the assertion that emotional abuse can be

the "most detrimental" (Fryer, 2010, p. 1) form of child abuse, few researchers have

investigated its impact on adolescent or adult functioning. Plattner, Karnik, Jo, Hall,

Schallaure, and Carrion (2007) found that high levels of emotional abuse resulted in

elevated rates of negative emotions such as anger in juvenile victims.

Among the possible causes of juvenile sex offending, as noted in the literature,

are emotional abuse (which includes emotional abuse and emotional neglect), frequent

separation from parents, a history of sexual abuse or physical abuse, severe trauma and

family dysfunction, poor social skill development, and poor impulse control (Barbaree &

Marshall, 2006; Burton, 2009; Ryan & Lane, 1997; Veneziano & Veneziano, 2002;

Worling & Curwen, 2000).

A number of researchers have shown that adolescents who sexually offend have

experienced physical and sexual abuse, and have witnessed family violence. (Kobayashi,

Sales, Becker, Figueredo, & Kaplan, 1995; Righthand & Welch, 2004; Ryan & Lane,

1997). Juvenile sex offenders "have been exposed to significant psychopathology and

family dysfunction, and have been cut off from possible sources of emotional support"

(Righthand & Welch, 2004, p. 21). These possible sources of emotional support, such as

a warm and supportive family network, were found lacking in a number of studies on the
 26

causation of juvenile sex offending (Bischoff, 1991, Brown, Henggeler, Brondino, &

Pickerel, 1999; Righthand & Welch, 2004, Ryan, 1997). In their Australian study, Lee,

Jackson, Pattison, and Ward (2002) found that childhood emotional abuse was "common

developmental risk factor" for pedophilia, exhibitionism, rape, or multiple paraphilias (p.

73). Schwartz et al.(2006) found that out of 813 juveniles surveyed, 91% of the boys and

95%) of the girls were subjected to neglect, and 46% of the boys and 51% of the girls

were subjected to psychological abusea category that included emotional abuse or

trauma. The common threads throughout these studies are the factors of emotional abuse,

family dysfunction, and less than ideal sources of emotional support for the adolescent.

Such research strengthens the need to further study the role of emotional abuse in

juvenile sex offending.

Parent/Caregiver Instability

For the purposes of this study, parent, or caregiver instability is defined as a

caregiving or parental unit that is characterized by the following: numerous moves or

homelessness; parents or caregivers who physically, sexually, or emotionally abuse or

neglect juveniles or adolescents under their care; domestic violence; hitting and slapping;

frequent changes in who lives in the home; placement of family members outside the

home such as residential care or juveniles who have been placed with families or friends

or in foster care; and parents or caregivers who commit illegal acts in the home.

Families with adolescents who have displayed inappropriate sexual behavior have

been characterized as being "unstable, with few resources" (Barbaree et al., 2006, p.

424). Pithers, Gray, Cunningham, and Lane (1993) reported that 38% of the respondents
 27

in their research on the composition of juvenile sex offenders' families fell below the

U.S. federal poverty level. Low economic status has been shown to be highly correlated

with child neglect and maltreatment (Barbaree & Langton, 2006). Poor families, in a

national survey of child abuse and neglect, had 18 times the incidence of child sexual

abuse (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 1996). These unstable families are

often characterized by "disorganized family structures" (Thornton et al., 2008, p. 362),

which include domestic violence, poorly defined personal and sexual boundaries, parental

sexual victimization, family dysfunction, substance abuse issues of one or both parents,

and the absence of a biological parent (Thornton et al., 2008). Indeed, few juvenile sex

offenders come from intact families (Kahn & Chambers, 1991).

Parental instability that may include the commission of emotional abuse can also

result in juveniles developing and suffering from a number of internalizing symptoms

such as lowered self-esteem, empathy deficits, anxiety, depression, withdrawing

behavior, and cognitive distortions regarding interpersonal relationships (Awad &

Saunders, 1991; Barbaree et al., 1998; Forman & Davies, 2003). Externalizing behaviors,

developed as a result of exposure to a disorganized and unstable caregiving environment,

are often evident in the behaviors of juvenile sex offenders and nonsex offenders (van

Wijk et al., 2007). These behaviorsinappropriate sexual behavior, sexual offending,

domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, criminal activity, antisocial behavior, and

social isolationare often forged by their experiences with behaviors modeled by their

unstable caregivers. The effects of this type of parent and caregiver instability on

juveniles have been well documented in the literature (Ackerman & Brown, 2010;
 28

Ackerman, Kogos, Youngstrom, Schoff, & Izard, 1999; Barbaree et al., 1998; Daversa,

2005; Ferguson, 2009; Forman & Davies, 2003; Hazen, Jacobvitz, & McFarland, 2005;

Marcynszyn, Evans, & Eckenrode, 2008; Thornton, Stevens, Grant, Indermaur,

Charmette, & Halse, 2008).

This study investigates not only the emotions that an adolescent experiences in

such unstable families, but also explores the abuse that is perpetrated upon them in such

families. The statements that could possibly constitute emotional abuse are also

investigated.

Parental attachment and its definitions, prevalence, and impact are reviewed in the

next section. Major theorists and proponents of attachment theory are discussed; later, the

relationship of attachment to juvenile sex offending is examined.

Attachment Theory

Attachment theory has evolved in several phases since Bowlby's conception,

which was an evolutionary theory with references to ethological data regarding mother-

infant interaction (Bowlby, 1969, 1982; Lehmann, 2008; Smallbone & Dadds, 1998). The

first phase was Bowlby's concept that the main goal of attachment for an infant was to

maintain closeness with the maternal caregiver (Bowlby, 1969, 1982; Goodrow & Lim,

1998; Hardy, 2007; Riggs, 2010; Slater, 2007; Smallbone & Dadds, 1998; Stubenbort,

Cohen, & Trybalski, 2007). Bowlby concluded, upon completion of his first empirical

study at a London boys' school for maladjusted children, that a disordered child-mother

relationship could lead to further psychopathology in the child, such as depression,

 29

anxiety, problems relating to others, and criminal behavior (Bretherton, 1992; Slater,

2007).

Bowlby also noticed that some children, when apart from their mothers, were

attracted to, or attempted to connect with other adults, even those who were not feeding

them. Bowlby then hypothesized that childhood attachments evolve from a biological

desirean attachment behavioral systemfor closeness to a caregiver, which evolved

from a primate's need for safety and survival (Slater, 2007). Bowlby's (1969) "internal

working model" of attachment, which is subconscious (Slater, 2007) and developed

within the "last quarter of the first year of life," is a combination of cognitions, mental

representations of the attachment with the caregiver, the internal representation of the

self, and the experienced environment (Riggs, 2010, p. 8); this allowed individuals,

according to Bowlby (1969), to anticipate interactions with others and to operationalize

their internal model when interacting with others such as caregivers. Smiling at a

caregiver may elicit a response in the caregiver that the child finds soothing. Crying or

displays of distress may alert the caregiver to calm the child and reduce his or her

suffering.

The primary goal, according to Bowlby (1969), of the child's internal working

model is to maintain closeness with the caregiver. Since he believed that the internal

working models originated from interactions with others, he believed them to be

reciprocal of one another. If an attachment figure is responsive, warm, and supportive,

the child will develop an internal working model of the self that is competent, empathetic,

and self-assured. Conversely, if the caregiver is distant and rejecting, the child's internal
 30

working model will reflect a self-representation that is undeserving and undesirable of

affection or warmth.

Bowlby (1969, 1980) thought the internal working models to be fairly consistent

over time; however, he felt that the self-representations should be open to changes in the

child's developmental structure and the attachment figure's responses to the child, due to

aging, over time. These changes, however, are contingent upon the quality of the

attachment. If the attachment figure is flexible and adaptive over the course of the child's

development, the internal representation of the child will be similarly responsive. If the

attachment figure is unyielding and unresponsive to developmental changes, the internal

working model of the child will represent the self as incompetent and unsure. This often

occurs when parents are overprotective of children as they age and do not allow them to

make age appropriate decisions (Sneddon, 1973).

These internal working models, however, do not only apply to caregivers. Bowlby

believed them to govern "significant social relationships throughout the life span" (Riggs,

2010, p. 8). Children learn to pattern and display behaviors with others, besides the

caregivers, as they act and react negatively and positively to various situations. In social

settings, the internal working model serves as a guide to interact with othersa guide

that was developed and honed through exchanges with caregivers. This guide throughout

life shows the impact caregivers have on children. The style of attachment between

parent and child is critical in the development of the child's internal working model of

attachments with others.

 31

Three attachment styles were identified by Ainsworth and Bowlby (1991):

securely attached, anxious ambivalent, and avoidant. Securely attached children and

adolescents, and those in attunement with their caregivers, hold an internal working

model of themselves as competent and worthy of care. The internal working model

representations of others, besides caregivers, are positive; they are seen as people who

can be responsive and supportive (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Bowlby, 1969;

Riggs, 2010).

Anxious ambivalent attached individuals are often suffering from low

self-esteem and constantly seek approval and support from others; they are often unable

to sustain satisfying interpersonal relationships in that they feel misunderstood and not

attuned to others (Beech & Mitchell, 2005, Stinson et al, 2008). Avoidant attached

individuals show little trust in attachment figures, attempt to distance themselves from

the attachment figure during distressful events, are viewed as emotionally cut off or

distant, and cannot offer comfort to those in distress (Nelson, 2000).

While most of the influential literature and research into attachment focused on

the parent-infant relationship, Bowlby intended to apply the ideas of attachment across

the lifespan (Shaver & Mikulincer, 2010). Indeed, in line with these concepts, Coan

(2010), proposed a Social Baseline Theory (SBT), which posits that the human brain was

developed through evolution to depend and rely upon relationships during the lifespan

with other humans' brains (Shaver & Mikulciner, 2010). Without secure attachments or

relationships, the brain develops less than efficiently. Attachment, therefore, according to

SBT, is a method of optimizing brain resources by allowing one person to rely on another
 32

for critical functions such as support or warmth. This theory identifies attachment as a

method for a child or adult to conserve resources while interacting with attachment

figures (Coan, 2010, Shaver & Mikulciner, 2010). The adequate development of neural

resources allows the person to function securely in an attuned relationship (Coan, 2010).

The next phase of evolution of attachment theory stems from the work of Mary

Ainsworth, who conducted two landmark studies of mothers and their infants in

Baltimore, Maryland, and Uganda, in which she used attachment theory as a model for

her investigation (Lehmann, 2009; Miner, Robinson, Knight, Berg, Romine, & Netland,

2009; Riggs, 2010; Slater, 2007). Ainsworth added to Bowlby's theory by stating that the

development of attachment alone was not important for the infantit was the quality of

the attachment (Clarke-Stewart, Goossens, & Allhusen, 2001). Ainsworth developed a

typology of attachment as a result of her work with infants and mothers in Baltimore.

This typology, called the Strange Situation (SS) Response, consists of four

categories of attachment: secure, avoidant-insecure, resistant-ambivalent, and

disorganized-disoriented. Children who showed signs of missing their mother during a

brief separation, greeted her warmly upon her return, and then returned to play, were

coded as secure, and treated their mother as a "secure base." Little anger is shown

towards the mother for her absence, and infants displayed low levels of anxiety during

the time away from the mother. These mothers were found to be sensitive to the child's

needs, were emotionally and physically comforting, and were attentive to the infant's

facial and physical cues. Those children who focused solely on playthings and toys

during the mother's absence and ignored the mother upon her return were coded as
 33

avoidant-insecure. In addition to being angry at the mother for leaving, these insecure

children were also anxious over their mother's whereabouts.

Children who were preoccupied with their mother's whereabouts, did not play,

and were angry or passive during her return were coded as resistant-ambivalent. The

mothers, when returning to their child, showed little emotional congruence with the

infant, were unpredictable in their responses, or generally unable to sooth the child

through holding or comforting.

The disorganized-disoriented classification was developed as a result of research

on the behaviors of children who were considered unclassifiable under the SS Response

guidelines. These children often showed such "diverse and anomalous" (Main, 1996, p.

239) behaviors in the parent's presence, such as acting in a trancelike manner, holding a

position for a long period of time, and then attempting to hold onto the parent while at the

same time attempting to extricate themselves from the parent's hold (Ainsworth, Blehar,

Waters & Wall, 1978; Bretheton, 1992; Clarke-Stewart, Goossens, & Allhusen, 2001;

Main, 1995).

Ainsworth's development of the SS Response typology enabled researchers to

determine that children who were secure in their relationships with their mother were

able to "exhibit greater ego resilience" (Main, 1995, p. 438) in addition to displaying

greater social competence than insecurly attached children. Carlson and Stroufe (1995)

found that children who displayed an avoidant attachment with their mother tended to

victimize others, and ambivalent-resistant children were often victimized.

 34

Ainsworth's naturalistic studies, in observing the quality of mother-infant

reactions, were inspired largely by Bowlby's theory that the variations in the quality of

the attachment were correlated to the psychological state and the sensitivity of the

caregiver (Lehmann, 2008). Bretherton (1992) noted that without Ainsworth's SS

Response, Bowlby's work would have "little influence on developmental and clinical

psychology" (p. 771).

The third phase of research addresses the role that attachment plays in the lives of

older children and adults (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Bretherton, 1992; Carlson,

1998; Main, 1985, 1996). Additionally, research into the role of genetics and

neurobiology and their impact on attachment has been studied in the last 20 years (Coan,

2008; Main, 1996; Shaver & Mikulincer, 2010). The impact on attachment and its

relation to other behavioral systems are also the focus of recent research (Shaver &

Mikulincer, 2010).

Bowlby (1969) believed that the attachment style developed in infancy was

displayed throughout the lifespan. Experiences throughout life call forth that model of

attachment, including the development of intimate relationships and interactions with

others. While attachment was studied initially as it related to mother-child interactions,

Cooper, Shaver and Collins (1988) studied the impact of attachment styles on

adolescents. The researchers found that anxious-ambivalent adolescents were more likely

to be depressed , display hostility and were more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol, and

engage in sexualized behavior.

 35

Despite the acceptance of attachment theory and the development of numerous

other theories and frameworks associated with the theory throughout the last 75 years,

criticisms of attachment theory are found in the literature. Very little research is available

regarding the effect of culture on attachment. Besides Ainsworth's work in Uganda, the

majority of attachment theory research was conducted in a western dominated world

(Slater, 2003). And, in that world, the mother is considered the primary caregiver (Cole,

2005; Slater, 2003). Gjerde (2001) wrote that researchers on attachment theory have

spent little time investigating cultural and contextual issues regarding attachment. Gjerde

(2001) stated that in the West, secure attachment is believed to promote exploration by

the child. In Japanese culture, however, interdependence and loyalty, rather than

independence, is stressed as desirable normative behavior. Secure attachment would be

represented by the child therefore relying on others, rather than ultimately themselves.

This concept of attachment, in the East, according to Gjerde (2001), and Rothbaum,

Weisz, Pott, Miyake and Morelli (2000) challenges the "core of attachment theory"

(Gjerde, 2001, p. 826).

Additionally, economic issues impact the mother-infant relationship in modern

society. As the mother-child relationship is paramount in attachment, for those mothers

who cannot stay at home and need to participate in the workplace, shame and guilt may

be added to their burden of single parenthood or economic concerns (Cole, 2005, Slater

2003).

The roles attachment and such internal working models play in adolescent sex

offending is further discussed in the next section.

 36

Attachment and Sex Offending

Smallbone and Dadds (1998) researched the role of childhood and adult

attachment in three different adult sex offender groups and discovered that sex offenders

reported less than secure attachment as children and adults. They also wrote that

"childhood attachment may play some role in the development of coercive sexual

behavior" (2000, p. 13.). Marshall (1989) wrote that not only would sex offenders likely

suffer from insecure childhood attachment, but they would also have an insecure

connection in adult intimate relationships. Avoidantly attached individuals detach from

the aforementioned intimate and interpersonal relationships, display little empathy, and

may be hostile towards others (Stinson et al., 2008, Ward, Hudson, Johnston, & Marshall,

1997). Marshall et al. (1993) wrote that this type of individual may harbor a fear of being

rejected by others; these individuals, in turn, distance themselves from intimate

relationships which creates emotional and social isolation. The resulting isolation can

cause the individual to develop feelings of resentment, hostility, and possibly aggression,

as he or she feels cheated out of experiencing a fulfilling intimate life. This attachment

style can lead to sexually inappropriate or offending behavior. In adolescents, the

combination of hostile feelings towards intimacy and cognitive distortions regarding

appropriate sexual behavior could cause an individual to sexually offend (Marshall,

Marshall, Serran & O'Brien, 2009). If no interventions are provided to such individuals,

the reinforcement of the cognitions of entitlement and resentment may occur, ultimately

continuing the avoidance of intimacy.

 37

Attachment and Juvenile Nonsexual Offenders

This avoidance of intimacy is evident with nonsexual offenders as well.

Katsiyannis et al. (2004) found that avoidant and ambivalent attached juvenile nonsexual

offenders reported a lowered need for support from others and tended to participate in

poorly formed and less than intimate relationships with peers. Elgar, Knight, Worrall, and

Sherman (2003) wrote that juvenile nonsexual offenders who felt detached and let down

by their parents and caregivers were likely to suffer distant and unsatisfying intimate

relationships. These findings are of importance to this study in that the comparison

between juvenile sex offenders and nonsexual offenders regarding parental attachment is

investigated.

Attachment and Juvenile Sex Offenders

Securely attached adolescents hold an internal working model of themselves as

competent and worthy of care. The internal working model representations of others,

besides caregivers, are positive; they are seen as people who can be responsive and

supportive (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Bowlby, 1969; Riggs, 2010). Conversely,

those children who are not securely attached can possibly hold an internal working model

of the self as unsure, incompetent, and tentative and may often view others with mistrust

and hold an internal working model of others as cold and uncaring (Riggs, 2010).

Marshall and Mazzucco (1995) discussed what can happen if a juvenile's parental

attachments were less than optimal or disrupted, and if their parents were "emotionally

neglectful or rejecting" (p. 280). Marshall (1989) wrote that juveniles with negative and

rejecting caregiver experiences often develop poor social skills and less than appropriate
 38

emotional regulation; they may develop a poor ability to differentiate among intimacy,

sexuality, and aggression. Juveniles or adolescents who are alienated by rejecting and

distant parents often are unable to develop secure attachments with caregivers and peers;

they later carry that representation of a relationship throughout their life, which causes

them to develop an inhibited sense of intimacy. This inhibited sense often leads to

loneliness. The loneliness developed through poor and insecure attachments often causes

the juvenile sex offender to gain intimacy through forceful or inappropriate means, such

as forced sex (Barbaree et al., 1993). Deficits in attachment, specifically anxious-

ambivalent and avoidant styles, may be specifically linked to such inappropriate sexual

behavior and juvenile sexual offending (Stinson et al., 2008).

The relationship the anxious-ambivalent or avoidant attached adolescent sex

offender has with the child victim often replicates what the ideal intimate relationship

should be for the offender, although the victim is much younger (Stinson et al., 2008).

Since anxiously attached adolescent sex offenders may have unsatisfying intimate

relationships with peers, comfort is sought with a much younger victim, who is perceived

as someone who understands the offender the way the adolescent claims to understand

the child (Stinson et al., 2008; Ward et al., 1997). Adolescent child molesters, who often

feel uncomfortable in the presence of same age peers, seek out nonthreatening child

victims as they are perceived as less judgmental and discerning than adults (Marshall &

Mazzucco, 1995).

Attachment theory and its relation to juvenile sex offending or juvenile nonsexual

offending is not without its' criticisms. Its earliest precepts were created on a western
 39

European cultural model, and multiculturalism is not taken into account in its earliest

applications. Rich (2006) criticized a heavy reliance on attachment theory's role with

adolescent sex offenders. He said that there is no clear empirical evidence for MuUoy and

Marshall's (1999) statement that attachment styles are an important area of dysfunction in

adolescent sexual offenders. Rich (2006) also wrote that there are difficulties measuring

attachment and its effects on sex offending. In addition, he criticized the use of the Adult

Attachment Interview (AAI) as a measurement, calling it "impractical... as it is lengthy,

time consuming and requires a great deal of training for both application and

interpretation" (p. 166). Since most surveys administered to sex offenders require

self-reporting, and the AAI and SS Response require observation (by trained observers),

there is often difficulty correlating results and determining conclusions.

Determining conclusions about attachment's role in juvenile sex offending is a

focus of Stinson et al, (2008). These researchers wrote that directionality regarding

attachment may be in question. Not all juvenile offenders have reported negative

caregiver attachments. The researchers state that "in cases where a child was sexually

abused by a family member.. .at a young age, it may be impossible to establish a strict

timeline in which a dysfunctional attachment style formed prior to the abuse" (p. 146).

While attachment does appear to have possible implications for adolescent sex

offender status, it is not the only causal factor in such behavior (Rich, 2006). More

empirical studies are needed to examine the relationship between emotional abuse and

juvenile sex offending, as well as the possible relationship between poor or disrupted

attachment and juvenile sex offending.

 40

The following section synthesizes the above literature review into the three

research questions that drive this study.

Research Questions

The first question examines the role of emotional abuse in juvenile sexual

offending. The second question investigates the effects of emotional abuse on the acts or

offenses the juveniles commit. Specifically, do emotionally abused juvenile sex offenders

commit more serious sex offenses than non-emotionally abused juvenile sex offenders?

The third question considers the impact of parent and caregiver instability and disrupted

parental attachment on the juvenile sex offender. This question examines whether or not

an unstable or chaotic home or family life correlates with juvenile sex offending status.

The third question also investigates whether or not a disrupted parental attachment is

correlated with juvenile sex offending status.

Questions:

1. What effect does exposure to emotional abuse have on juvenile sex offending?

2. What effect does emotional abuse have on the behaviors of juvenile sex

offenders compared to juvenile nonsexual offenders?

3. What effect does caregiver instability and disrupted parental attachment have

on juvenile sex offenders compared to juvenile nonsexual offenders?

 41

Chapter Three

Research Methods

Characteristics of the Sample Population

A total of 502 surveys were collected from adjudicated juvenile sex offenders

(n=332) and nonsexual offenders (n=170). The racial breakdown of all the respondents

was as follows: White, 45.7%; Black, 38%; Hispanic, 5.7%; and 10.6% were other or

multiracial. The small percentages of Asian or Pacific Islanders, Native

American/American Indian, and Arab American respondents were grouped into the

"Other" category. For the offender group, the racial breakdown was: White, 66.6%;

Black. 28.9%0; Native American, 24.4; Hispanic, 10.5; Asian, 1.2%; Arab American,

1.2% and Other, 12.3%. For the juvenile nonsexual offender group, the racial breakdown

was as follows: White, 42.9%, Black, 54.1%, Native American, 14.7%), Hispanic, 4.1%,

Asian, 1.2%, Native American, 14.7%, Arab American 0%, Other, 1.2%. Table 1 lists the

racial breakdown of both the juvenile sex offenders and juvenile nonsexual offenders in

the study population. The percentage totals were greater than 100% for each group, due

to the construct of the demographic question which asked "Which racial group do you

identify with?" It is possible several answers were checked by the respondents.

 42

Table 1

Racial Characteristics of the Study Population

Juvenile Sex Offender % n/N Juvenile Nonsexual Offender % n/N

White 66.6 221/329 42.9 73/164

Black 28.9 96/329 54.1 92/164

Native Am. 24.4 81/329 14.7 25/164

Hispanic 10.5 35/329 4.1 7/164

Asian 1.2 4/329 1.2 2/164

Arab Am. 1.2 4/329 0.0 0/164

Other 12.3 41/328 1.2 2/164

Note: Number of respondents varied, and respondents may have checked more than one

racial group on questionnaire.

The respondents ranged in age from 12 to 20 years, with the average age of

respondents at 16.6 years, and a standard deviation of 1.53 years. For the juvenile sex

offender group, the average age of respondents was 16.7 years with a standard deviation

of 1.65 years. For the juvenile nonsexual offender group, the average age was 16.5 years

with a standard deviation of 1.28 years. Table 2 lists the means and standard deviations

for the respondents' ages.

 43

Table 2

Means and Standard Deviations for Respondent Age- Juvenile Sex Offenders (JSO) and

Juvenile Nonsexual Offenders (JNSO)

JSO Mean SD JNSO Mean SD

Age 16.7 1.65 16.5 1.28

Study/Research Design

This study is a secondary analysis of an existing data set, which was first gathered

in a large Midwestern state in 2004. Surveys were administered to 505 juvenile sexual

and nonsexual offenders who were placed in secure facilities post adjudication. Of the

505 surveys administered, 502 were usable. This study is a crosssectional design and a

secondary analysis of an existing data set.

Sample and Data Collection Procedures

Approval for this study was obtained through the Widener University Institutional

Review Board (IRB) in June 2010. The data set was collected during Spring 2004 using

six pen and paper surveys from six juvenile residential placement facilities in a

Midwestern state. In addition to the 332 juvenile sex offenders who participated in the

study, a smaller comparison group of adjudicated juvenile nonsexual offenders (n=170)

also participated in the original data collection. The total number of usable surveys was

502 out of the 505 surveys administered.

 44

The surveys were administered in a group setting in each of the residential

facilities. Respondents were separated to prevent participants from viewing each other's

answers. No monetary incentives were provided, although free time in the placement

setting and pizza were offered for good behavior during the administration of the

questionnaire. Graduate research assistants were available to assist with the reading of the

surveys for respondents who had difficulty reading or comprehending the questionnaire.

Instrumentation

Demographic questionnaires were used in the original data collection. The

demographic questions, not the data, have been used in previous studies (Burton, 2003;

Burton et al., 2002). The Ohio Evaluation measure (see Appendix) used in this secondary

analysis was a collection of a number of instruments and adaptations of normative

measures (Leibowitz, 2007). The measures and constructs are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3

Constructs and Measures

Constructs Measures

Outcome Measures

1. # Sexual Assaults Demographic

Questionnaire/Self Report Sexual

Aggression Scale (SERSAS)

 45

2. # Victims Demographic

Questionnaire/SERSAS

Independent Variables

Childhood Trauma
1. Emotional abuse
Questionnaire (CTQ)

Demographic
2. Parental/ Caregiver instability
Questionnaire/SERSAS

Inventory of Parent and Peer

3. Attachment
Attachment (IPPA) (parent scales

only; included are four scales

within each parent scale that

measure anger, alienation,

communication, and trust. Peer

scales not used

Demographic Questionnaire

Demographic data were collected as part of the original survey including the

respondent's age, educational level, sexual abuse as well as sexual offending history and

historical questions regarding their families. Caregiver instability data are gathered by

such questions as "Do these describe your family and/or home? Frequent changes in who

lives in the home, Neglect of children, Hitting or other violence between parents or adults

at home, Children being placed outside of the family (not counting you), Lots of moves

and /or homelessness." All questions were rated by the respondent as "No," "Yes," and
 46

"Don't know." Race and ethnicity information was obtained by asking the participant to

"Please choose the ONE ethnic or racial group you feel closest to...."

The Emotional Abuse Scale of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ).

The CTQ (Bernstein & Fink, 1998), is a retrospective self-report questionnaire that

consists of items used to assess the extent to which respondents experienced five types of

negative childhood experiences: physical abuse, sexual abuse, and emotional abuse, as

well as physical and emotional neglect. The five scales are highly correlated (Bernstien &

Fink, 1998). For this study, the emotional abuse scale was included as part of the analyses

on the variable of emotional abuse. The Cronbach's alpha for the emotional abuse CTQ

scale in this study was computed at .88. A Cronbach's Alpha of .70 or higher is

considered satisfactory in most social science research studies (ucla.edu/stat, 2011).

The CTQ emotional abuse scale consists of 5 items that asked respondents to rate

the frequency with which various events occurred while they were "growing up" on a 1

to 5 scale. On the CTQ, l="never true" while 5="very true." The highest total a

respondent could attain on the emotional abuse scale was 25. The variable of emotional

abuse was calculated through the use of five questions from the CTQ: "People in my

family called me things like 'stupid,' 'lazy,' or 'ugly'; "People in my family said hurtful

or insulting things to me"; "I was frightened by being hurt by someone in my family";

"Someone in my family hated me'; and "I believe I was emotionally abused.".

Respondents were asked to rate the frequency of their experiences as a child while

responding to the statement: When I was growing up....

 47

Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA). The IPPA was created and

developed to assess juveniles' perceptions of the positive and negative dimensions of

their relationships with their parents, caregivers or peers (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987).

Quality of communication, degree of trust, and extent of anger and alienation are

measured by subscales. The measurement is a self-report questionnaire with a Likert-

scale response format. This study utilized the maternal and paternal attachment scales of

the IPPA, and excluded the peer attachment scales from analysis. The IPPA parent

attachment scales consist of 25 items in each of two setsone set each for questions

regarding the subjects' mothers and fathers to measure paternal and maternal attachment.

Quality of communication, degree of trust, extent of anger, and extent of alienation were

four subscales included in both maternal and paternal attachment questionnaires. These

three factors- communication, trust and anger/alienation were found to correlate well with

attachment, although the factors are inter-related (Pace, San Martini & Zavattini, 2011).

Questions that measure communication in the respondent-parent relationship included "I

like to get my mother's point of view on things I am concerned about" and "I feel it's no

use letting my feelings show around my father." Questions pertaining to parent-child trust

included "My father respects my feelings," and "I feel my mother does a good job as my

mother." Anger and alienation towards parental figures were measured by such questions

as "Talking over my problems with my mother makes me feel ashamed and foolish" and

"I get upset a lot more than my father knows about." The test-retest reliabilities for the

parent scales used in this study were .93 (Garbarino, 1996). Armsden and Greenberg

(1987) found that the IPPA correlated with the reported levels of family support, family
 48

conflict, and family cohesiveness (Garbarino, 1996). Cronbach's Alphas for all sub-

scales were found to be in the .72 to .91 range (Gullone & Robinson, 2005). The

Cronbach's alpha for the parent scales used in this study was .91.

Self Report Sexual Aggression Scale (SERSAS). The specific type of sexual

assault was measured in the questionnaire by the use of the SERSAS (Burton, 2003). The

SERSAS was designed by Burton & Fleming (1998) and was created to measure juvenile

sex offenders' abuse of their victims. The instrument was derived from the Sexual

Abuse Exposure Questionnaire (SAEQ), a 24 item questionnaire developed by Ryan,

Rodriguez, Rowan and Foy (1998). Modeled after similar questions on the SAEQ which

asks sexual abuse victims to describe what was done to them, the intent of the SERSAS is

to ask which acts the juvenile offenders committed not whether or not they have

offended. (Fleming, Jory & Burton, 2002). The SERSAS yielded an alpha of .88, with an

eight week test retest agreement of 82%) (Burton, 2003). For the purpose of this study, the

data analyzed were based on asking respondents if they had ever forced their victims to

observe sexual acts; exposed themselves to victims; fondled; forced oral sex; have had

their victims force fingers, objects, or penises into the perpetrators' private parts; or had

forced their own penises, fingers, or objects into their victims' private areas. Respondents

were also asked if they had sexually assaulted animals. By definition, these acts are

considered sexually offensive behavior (Ryan, 1997). Most states include such acts in

their criminal code. Voyeurism, exposure, fondling, rape, and animal abuse are

considered crimes in all states (U.S. Department of Justice, 2010). Sexual acts that

involve force and coercion are considered the "most extreme end of the sexual behavioral
 49

spectrum" (Broach & Petretic, 2006). The final question asked if the respondents forced

their victim to have sex with an animal. In this situation, the human victim is forced into

a sexual position or behavior with an animal.

Emotional Abuse

Childhood emotional abuse has been called one of the strongest predictors

of adolescent sexual perpetration (Zurbriggen, Gobin, & Freyd, 2010). While emotional

abuse is often difficult to measure (Leibowitz, 2008), its components include such actions

as verbal hostility, taunting, denigration, belittling, rejection, and deprivation of attention.

Emotionally abusing parents often provide little psychological availability, stimulation,

and empathy; often display excessive power over the child; and frequently induce fear or

anxiety through threats of abandonment and unrealistic expectations (Egelund, 2009;

Iwaniec, 2003; Moor & Silvern, 2006). The variable of emotional abuse was measured on

a numerical scale through the use of five items from the CTQ emotional abuse subscale:

"People in my family called me things like 'stupid,' 'lazy,' or 'ugly'; "People in my

family said hurtful or insulting things to me"; "I was frightened by being hurt by

someone in my family"; "Someone in my family hated me'; and "I believe I was

emotionally abused." Each question is measured from 1-5, with the lower number

indicating lower exposure to emotional abuse. A higher number indicates greater

exposure to emotional abuse. The full CTQ may be found in the appendix within the

Ohio Scales. The Cronbach's alpha for the five items for this study was computed at .90.
 50

Parent/Caregiver Instability

The demographic section of the questionnaire asked respondents to describe their

family setting by asking "Do these describe your family and/or home?" Frequent changes

in who lives in the home, Neglect of children, Physical abuse of children, Sexual abuse of

children, Illegal acts by family members (other than you), Hitting or other violence

between parents or adults at home, Children being placed outside of the family (not

counting you), Lots of moves and /or homelessness." The scale was constructed by

extracting questions from the SERSAS and were selected as the ones that best addressed

the study variables of parent or caregiver instability. All questions were rated by the

respondent as "No," "Yes," and "Don't know." The entire SERSAS may be found in the

Ohio Scales within the appendix section. The Cronbach's alpha for the Parent/Caregiver

Instability scale was calculated at .82.

Attachment

The variables of attachment used for the study were taken from the parent scales

of the IPPA. The questions included versions which asked about the participants'

relationships with their mothers, fathers, or person(s) who acted as their parents. A total

of 25 questions were asked for each parent or caregiver. A Likert scale answer format

was used with responses ranging from "Almost Never or Never True" (1) to "Not Very

Often True"(2) to "Sometimes True" (3) to "Often True" (4) to "Almost Always or

Always True" (5). Questions asked of the study's participants in the IPPA paternal and

maternal scales were "My mother/father respects my feelings"; "I feel my mother/father

does a good job as my mother/father" and "I wish I had a different mother/father."; The
 51

entire IPPA device may be found in the appendix within the Ohio Scale questionnaire.

The peer scales of the IPPA were not used as one of the foci of this study was to measure

the effects of parental attachment on juvenile sex offenders and, as a comparison group,

nonsex offenders. Each paternal and maternal scale measures the factors of trust,

communication, anger and alienation. These factors were considered to be appropriate

measure of the quality of parent attachment by the instrument's originators (Armsden &

Greenberg, 1987). The IPPA demonstrated good internal consistency with alphas ranging

from 72-.91 across maternal and paternal sub-scales when administering the IPPA to a

group of 16-20 year old participants (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987). For this study, the

Cronbach's alpha for the maternal scale of the IPPA was calculated at .77. The alpha for

the paternal scale was calculated at .85. Table 4 lists the subscale alpha coefficients for

each of the measures used in the study.

Table 4

Subscale Alpha Coefficients for Measures

Independent Variables Measure Alpha

Emotional Abuse (CTQ) .90

Parental/Caregiver Instability (SERSAS) .82

Attachment, maternal (IPPA) .77

Attachment, paternal (IPPA) .85

 52

MulticoUinearity

The Pearson's correlation values among the independent variables were analyzed.

The vast majority of the Pearson's correlations between the independent variables were

small to moderate, in the .10 to .30 range. The highest correlated variables in the juvenile

sex offender population were between emotional abuse and physical abuse (.58) and

emotional abuse and neglect (.55) for the non-offender group. A few relationships were

similarly correlated, most likely due to stronger definitional/conceptual overlap. These

correlations may be large, but are not large enough to cause concern for multicoUinearity

in the logistic regressions analyses that follow (typically requiring correlations above

.70-80). MulticoUinearity refers to the statistical concept that correlations are too closely

related, and therefore cannot be separated statistically and examined individually.

 53

Chapter Four

Results

In this chapter, the results of the data analysis for each of the research questions

are presented. Descriptive statistics were computed for emotional abuse, attachment, and

parent/caregiver instability, considered independent variables in this study. Additionally,

the number of assaults and victims, as well as the types of acts committed by the

respondents, were tabulated and treated as dependent variables in this study. Pearson

Correlation Coefficients were used to determine the strength of association between the

acts committed by the respondents, which are identified as vouyerism, fondling, forced

oral sex, penetration by the victim and to the victim, sex with animals and the

independent variables. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the

associations between emotional abuse, poor attachment, parent/caregiver instability, and

juvenile sex offending. Chi-square analysis was used to determine the goodness of fit

among all variables. Goodness of fit refers to the statistical significance of the differences

in groups' scores, or the difference between observed values versus the expected values.

It is expected that the larger sample of juvenile sex offenders will have more sexual

offending behavior than the juvenile nonsexual offenders. Goodness of fit will assess the

statistical significance of the difference in the two group's scores. It should be noted that

data were missing on each variable . This may be due to fatigue or a refusal to answer

questions. Missing data were managed by assigning a score of "99" or "96".

 54

Number of Assaults and Victims

The number of assaults refers to the number of sexual assaults the respondents

have admitted to on the demographic section of the questionnaire. The respondents were

asked to estimate the number of assaults they committed, in varying increments, from 1-

90. The question "How many people have you sexually abused?" was asked to determine

the number of victims and assaults each respondent claimed. The available answers were

"number of male children, teens, and adults" and "number of female children, teens, and

adults." Table 5 lists the total number of assaults in the study population. The most

frequent number of assaults was in the 2-3 range with 12.3% (n=42) of the respondents

committing that number.

Table 5

Number of Assaults in Study Population for Juvenile Sex Offenders

#Assaults (n/N) %

1 40/332 12.0

2-3 42/332 12.3

4-5 29/332 8.7

6-8 13/332 3.9

9-13 6/332 1.8

14-21 7/332 2.1

22-34 7/332 2.1

35-55 11/332 3.3

 55

56-89 4/332 1.2

90 or more 25/332 7.5

Note: 332 total respondents in survey. 135 of 332 respondents did not answer this
question, or responses were illegible. While noting that 40.6 % of the respondents did not
answer this question, the data was presented to give scope to the number of assaults
committed by the respondents. There may have been reluctance to admit to more assaults
by the respondents due to concerns that they would have been further prosecuted.

Table 6 lists the number and type of victims in the study. Of the 332 respondents,

female children were the most frequently victimized. Based on responses from 309

respondents, 321 female children were sexually assaulted. Female teens were the second

most victimized with 277 such victims reported. Male children were third on the list with

239 out of 309 respondents assaulting such victims. The total number of female adults

victimized was 98, out of 308 respondents. Male teens were victimized by 72 out of 306

respondents, and the least number victimized were male adults, who were noted as

victims by 6 out of 311 respondents.

Table 6

Number and Type of Victims in Study Population for Juvenile Sex Offenders

Victim type (n/N) %

Female Children 321/309 103.8

Female Teens 277/307 90.2

Male Children 239/309 77.3

Female Adults 98/307 31.9

Male Teens 72/306 23.5

 56

Male Adults 6/311 1.9

Note: 332 total respondents in survey. Total numbers vary due to no responses or
illegible responses. Respondents may have committed multiple offenses multiple times
against a number of victims.

Outcome Variable: Juvenile Sex Offending

The first step in the data analysis calculated the number of assaults and the

number of victims from the survey respondents who were convicted of a juvenile sex

offense. Of the 502 juvenile sexual and nonsexual offenders, 332 sexual offenders were

identified. Table 7 lists the statistical breakdown of assaults to types of victims, and

includes assaults reported by nonsexual offenders, who may have reported such acts for

the first time during the completion of the questionnaire and who may have never been

convicted of such offenses. Assaults by juvenile nonsexual offenders were minimal, with

6 assaults reported by 6 out of the 170 respondents in this study.

Of the juvenile sexual offender group, the most frequent victim of sexual assault

was a female relative with 29.3% (n = 91) of the respondents committing 252 assaults.

The second most frequent assault was against male relatives, with 174 attacks committed

by 19.3%) (n=60) juvenile sex offenders. Female teen friends were the third most

prevalent victims, having been assaulted 244 times by 14.5%> (n=45) of the respondents.

Male teen friends were fourth with 106 assaults reported by 11.2% (n=35) of the juvenile

sex offenders. Females considered girlfriends were assaulted by 5.6% (n=18) of the

offenders, who committed a reported 39 assaults. Offenses against female teen strangers

were committed by 4.8% (n=15) of the respondents for a total of 60 assaults.

Table 7
 57

Number of Assaults Against Victim Type

Victims Number of assaults against n/N %

Female relative 252 91/309 29.3

Male relative 174 60/310 19.5

Female teen friend 244 45/311 14.5

Male teen friend 106 35/312 11.2

Girlfriend 39 18/313 5.6

Female teen stranger 60 15/314 4.8

Adult female friend 21 9/312 2.8

Male teen stranger 19 7/314 2.2

Adult female stranger 55 6/313 2.0

Adult male friend 3 2/313 0.6

Adult male stranger 1 1/314 0.2

Table 8 lists the frequency of the sexual acts committed by the respondents. The

most frequently reported type of assault was the hands-on act of fondling, with 64.5%

(n=293) of the juvenile sex offenders committing a total of 192 such acts. Forced oral sex

was the next highest reported act as 59.1% (n=172) of the respondents committed this

behavior. Placing their fingers, objects or penis into their victims private parts was third

with 44.3%) (n=147) of the participants admitting to this penetrative act. The act of

exposure was fourth with 41.9%) (n=122) of the respondents reported committing this non

hands-on behavior. The act of surreptitiously viewing others having sex (voyuerism) was
 58

the fifth most reported act with 20.2%> of the participants admitting. Having the victims

penetrate the respondents was sixth most frequent act, with 37 (11.1) of the juvenile

offenders admitting to this behavior. Sex was animals was the least frequently reported

act, with only 4 (1.2%) out of the 292 respondents admitting to such activity.

The nonsexual offender group reported very little sexual perpetration, with 6 out

of 170 respondents (3.5%) admitting to any inappropriate sexual activity. The most

frequently reported acts for the nonsexual offenders were exposure and watching sexual

acts (n=4, 2.4%), followed by fondling and oral sex (n=3. 1.8%>). Penetration was

reported by 2 (1.2%) nonsexual offenders, while having the victims penetrate them, and

sex with animals were reported by none of the nonsexual offenders. This table was

included to present the scope of the offenses committed by the respondents.

Table 8

Frequency of Sexual Act

Sexual Act Offender Group (n/N (%)) Nonsexual offender Group

Fondling 189/293 (64.5%) 3/170(1.8%)

Oral sex 172/291 (59.1%) 3/170(1.8%)

Placing their fingers, objects, 147/290 (44.3%) 2/170(1.2%)

or penis into victims' private parts

Exposure 122/291 (41.9%) 4/170 (2.4%)

Watching a sexual act 59/292 (20.2%) 4/170(2.4%)

 59

Sexual Act Offender Group (n/N (%>)) Nonsexual offender Group

Placing victims' fingers,

objects or penis into private ' 37/292(11.1%)) 0/170(0.0%)

parts

Sexual activity with animals 4/292 (1.2%) 0/170 (0.0%)

Note: Sample sizes (N) vary due to non-response or missing data.

Independent Variables: Emotional Abuse, Parental Attachment, Parent-Caregiver

Instability

Table 9 presents the means and standards deviations for each of the independent

variables. All differences between groups were significant, with the offender group

having more experiences with emotional abuse and poorer maternal and paternal

attachment (higher scores on the IPPA indicate better attachment; higher scores on the

CTQ represent more emotional abuse) than the nonsexual offender group. Emotional

abuse was the most commonly experienced variable for the offender group. Maternal and

paternal attachment as measured by the IPPA showed relatively high scores for both

groups.
 60

Table 9

Descriptive Statistics for Independent Variables (IV) of Emotional Abuse and Attachment

Variable Offender Af(SD) Nonoffender M (SD) TOTAL M(SD) t fdf)

Emotional Abuse 11.6(6.2) 6.7(3.3) 10.0(5.9) 9.3 (476)

Mom attach 91.3(25.1) 97.4(25.0) ' 93.3(25.1) 2.5 (461)

Dad attach 82.1 (28.2) 88.4 (27.2) 83.8 (28.0) 2.0 (363)

Note. All t-tests were significant at/? < .05 comparing offender and nonsexual offender

groups.

Table 10 presents the descriptive statistics for parental caregiver instability.

Importantly, the sample sizes for this yes/no question are somewhat reduced as a small

subset of respondents answered "Don't Know." This ranged from 13 to 26 respondents

depending on the item (this did not occur for two items that had complete data available).

In subsequent analyses that used this variable, respondents who answered "Don't Know"

were excluded. A series of chi-square tests that were all significant showed that parental

caregiver instability was greater for the juvenile sex offender group than for the

nonsexual offender group.

 61

Table 10

Descriptive Statistics for Parental Caregiver Instability

Offender Nonoff TOTAL DK(n) chi 2 (ldf)

Frequent 101/321(30.4%) 22/168 (13.1%) 123/489 (25.2%) 26/489 21.1

changes

Neglect 78/316(23.5%) 12/166(7.1%) 90/482 (17.9%) 13/482 22.8

Physical ab. 120/325(36.1%) 11/168(6.5%) 131/493 (26.6%) 13/493 52.5

Sexual abuse 94/326(28.8%) 4/165(2.4%) 98/491 (20.0%) 16/491 49.5

Illegal acts 155/290(87.3%) 31/155(18.2%) 186/445(41.8%) 0/445 46.5

Hitting/slap 151/318(45.5%) 24/161 (14.1%) 175/479 (34.9%) 0/479 48.9

Placed out 71/323(22.0%) 21/167(12.4%) 92/490(18.8%) 16/490 6.5

Moves 128/323 (39.6%) 22/167(13.2%) 150/490(30.6%) 13/490 37.7

Note. All chi-squares were significant at/?<.05 comparing offender and nonsexual

offender groups.

Correlation Analysis

As can be seen in Table 11, emotional abuse is highly correlated with three out of

the seven sexual offenses. The highest correlations between the independent variables

and the sexual acts committed by the respondents were between emotional abuse and the

surreptitious viewing of sexual acts (.193 in the offender sample). Oral sex and emotional

abuse (.188), as well as fondling and emotional abuse (.188) were the second and third

highest correlated variables. Exposure and emotional abuse were the fourth highest
 62

correlated variables (.154).The fifth highest correlated variables were having the victims

penetrate the perpetrator and emotional abuse (.139),

The highest correlation between the independent variables and the sexual acts

committed by the offenders was between the parent and caregiver instability variable of

sexual abuse and fondling (.254). Sexual abuse and forced oral sex (.188), was the second

highest correlated parent/caregiver instability/sexual act variable, while sexual abuse and

watching someone having sex (.152) and sexual abuse and exposure (.147) were the third

and fourth highest, respectively, correlated parent/caregiver instability sexual act

variables. The parent and caregiver instability variable of frequent changes in who lives

in the home were highly correlated with watching someone have sex (.157) and

penetration of the victim with fingers, penis or objects (.150). Neglect, one of the parent

and caregiver instability variables was highly correlated with watching someone having

sex (.155), and exposure (.181). The commission of physical abuse by a family member

or a caregiver was highly correlated with the acts of watching someone having sex (.125),

and exposure (.178), while observing hitting or being hit was highly correlated with

watching someone having sex (.123) and penetration of the victim with fingers, penis or

objects (.145). Maternal and paternal attachment was not highly correlated with any of

the sexual acts. Table 11 lists all correlations between the independent variables of

emotional abuse, parent and caregiver instability, sexual acts committed by the offenders,

and parental attachment and juvenile offender status. Maternal and paternal attachment

was not highly correlated with any of the sexual acts.

 63

Table 11

First-order Pearson Correlations Between Independent Variables (emotional abuse,

parental attachment, and parent caregiver instability) and Sexual Acts for Offenders

Variable Pearson correlation to offender status

Watching someone have sex

Ebuse .193(289)**

Frequent changes .157(267)*

Neglect .155(268)*

Sexual abuse .152(273)*

Physical .125(278)*

Hitting, etc. .123(278)*

Children placed .090(275)

Illegal Acts -.010(254)

Homeless, etc -.020(274)

Pa Attach -.082(232)

Ma Attach -.117(261)

Exposure

Neglect .181(267)**

Physical .178(277)**

Ebuse .154(288)**

Sexual abuse .147(272)*

Homeless, etc .125(273)*

 64

Variable Pearson correlation to offender status

Exposure

Frequent changes .117(266)

Hitting, etc. .112(277)

Children placed .098(274)

Illegal Acts .066(254)

Ma Attach .033(261)

Pa Attach -.072(231)

Variable Pearson correlation to offender status

Fondling

Sexual abuse .254(274)

Ebuse .188(290):

Homeless, etc .091(275)

Physical .082(279)

Neglect .077(269)

Frequent changes .054(268)

Children placed .053(276)

Hitting, etc. .052(279)

Illegal Acts .039(255)

Ma Attach -.028(262)

Pa Attach -.083(233)
 65

Variable Pearson correlation to offender status

Oral Sex

Ebuse .188(288)**

Sexual abuse .136(272)*

Hitting, etc. .079(277)

Physical .067(277)

Neglect .060(267)

Illegal Acts .032(252)

Homeless, etc .013(273)

Children placed -.013(274)

Frequent changes -.022(266)

Ma Attach -.031(261)

Pa Attach -.113(231)

Victims Placing Their Fingers,, Objects or Penis into

Ebuse .139(289)*

Neglect .100(269)

Sexual abuse .052(274)

Frequent changes .023(268)

Physical .020(279)

Homeless, etc -.009(275)

Ma Attach -.008(261)

Illegal Acts -.051(255)

 66

Variable Pearson correlation to offender status

Victims Placing Their Fingers, Objects or Penis into your Private Parts

Children placed -.078(276)

Hitting, etc. -.082(278)

Pa Attach -.093(232)

Placing your Fingers, Objects or Penis into their Private Parts

Frequent changes .150(265)*

Hitting, etc. .145(276)*

Children placed .120(273)*

Ebuse .104(287)

Sexual abuse .074(271)

Physical .072(276)

Homeless, etc .067(272)

Neglect .051(267)

Illegal Acts .046(252)

Pa Attach -.012(231)

Ma Attach -.061(259)

Made Victims do anything Sexual to Animals

Children placed .078(275)

Neglect .062(268)

Hitting, etc. .036(278)

Ebuse .029(289)
 67

Variable Pearson correlation to offender status

Made Victims do anything Sexual to Animals

Illegal Acts .028(254)

Physical .025(278)

Homeless, etc .014(274)

Sexual abuse -.018(273)

Frequent changes -.025(267)

Pa Attach -.039(233)

Ma Attach -.101(261)

*p< .05, **p< .01

The independent variable of emotional abuse was found to have the highest direct

relationship to offender status (r=.393, p<.01). The parent/caregiver instability variable of

illegal acts (r=.323, p<.01) also was highly correlated to offender status. Illegal acts refers

to the respondents having viewed their parents or caregivers committing criminal or

illegal activity. Respondents who observed or experienced or witnessed hitting in the

home was the third highest correlated variable (r=.320, p<.01), while sexual abuse

(r=.285, p<.01), homelessness (r=.281, p<.01), physical abuse (r=.268,p<.01), neglect

(r=.221, p<.01), frequent changes (r=.213, p<.01) and children placed outside the home

(r=.l 17, p<.05) ranked in descending order. While parental attachment was thought to

play a major role in the lives of juvenile sex offenders, the weakest first-order

relationships to offender status in this study were maternal (r=.l 15, p<.05), and paternal
 68

attachment (r=.095, p<.05). Table 12 lists the first order Pearson correlations between the

Independent variables of emotional abuse, parental attachment and parent and caregiver

instability to juvenile sex offending status.

Table 12

First-order Pearson Correlations Between Independent Variables (emotional abuse,

parental attachment, and parent caregiver instability) and Offender Status

Variable Pearson correlation to Offender Status

Attachment

Ma Attach -.115(427)*

Pa Attach -.095(348)

Emotional Abuse

Ebuse .393(478)**

Parent/Caregiver Instability

Illegal Acts .323(445)**

Hitting, etc. .320(479)**

Sexual abuse .285(491)**

Homeless, etc .281(477)**

Physical .268(493)**

Neglect .221(467)**

Frequent changes .213(463)**

Children Placed .117(474)*

*p< .05, **p< .01

 69

Multivariate Analysis

The following analysis examined the following questions:

1. What effect does exposure to emotional abuse have on juvenile sex offending

status? (Step 1 of a Logistic Regression)

2. Do juvenile sex offenders experience more emotional abuse and display more

severe behavioral difficulties than nonsexual offenders? (Using Point-Biserial

Correlations Among Juvenile Sex Offenders, and further regression analysis

to test the strength of the emotional abuse variable)

3. What additional effects does caregiver instability and parental attachment

have on juvenile sex offending? (Step 2 of a Logistic Regression)

To answer the first research question, logistic regression was conducted in order

to examine the relative strength of the variable of emotional abuse in predicting group

membership (juvenile sexual offender vs. nonsexual offender). The analysis used the

subsample of data for paternal attachment (N=25l). The results of the logistic regression

are presented in Table 13, Step One. Emotional abuse was a significant predictor of

sexual offender status (p<.00\), with 72.9% (183/251) of the cases correctly classified as

juvenile sex offenders. The Nagelkerke R-squared for the analysis was .20. A goodness

of fit chi-square (Hosemer & Lemeshow test) was not significant at .53, suggesting that

the model provided adequate fit.

 70

Table 13

The Effects of Emotional Abuse on Juvenile Sex Offense Status

Logistic Regression Step One (N=251)

Beta SE Wald df Sig Odds Ratio (OR)

Emotional abuse .220 .048 21.181 1 .000 1.245

To answer the second research question, a point-biserial mean split cross-

tabulation was conducted to determine correlations between the acts committed by the

self-identified emotionally abused juvenile sex offenders. The intent was to observe if

emotionally abused juvenile sex offenders committed more hands-on offenses than did

the nonemotionally abused juvenile sex offenders. The number of respondents varied

from 287 to 290 self-identified emotionally abused juvenile sex offenders. This is due to

the fact that respondents did not answer all of the questions in either the CTQ or omitted

answers in the demographic questionnaire. Table 14 shows the correlations between

emotional abuse and the offenses or acts committed. All of the sexual acts were

significantly correlated with emotional abuse among the juvenile sex offenders with the

exception of sexual activity with animals.

Table 14

Relationship of Emotional Abuse With Offenses Committed Using Point-Biserial

Correlations Among Juvenile Sex Offenders

Reported Offenses Correlation/ N Significance Level

Exposure .154/288 .005

Watching a sexual act .193 / 289 <001

 71

Reported Offenses Correlation/ N Significance Level

Fondling .188/290 <.001

Oral sex .188/288 <.001

Placing victims' fingers,

Objects, or penis into private parts .139 / 289 .009

Placing their fingers, objects, .104/287 .039

or penis into victims'

private parts

Sexual activity with animals .029 / 289 not significant

(p=-314)

Supplementary Analysis

A supplementary analysis of the correlation between emotionally abused juvenile

sex offenders and the acts or offenses they committed was conducted. This analysis was

run to test the relative strength of the correlations between the two variables. Table 15

shows the strengths of the relationship using chi-square analysis. The emotionally abused

offenders were split into two groups: Low Emotional Abuse and High Emotional Abuse,

as determined by the score on the e-abuse variable. The e-abuse variable consists of the

five questions on the CTQ device that make up the emotional abuse scale. A high score

on this scale would indicate high levels of emotional abuse. A mean split was used to

separate the high abuse scores from the low abuse scores on the e-abuse variable. An

average score of 11.6 or greater on the e-abuse variable would indicate a high level of
 72

emotional abuse. An average score of 11.5 or lower would indicate a low level of

emotional abuse. The hands-on acts of fondling, oral sex, and placing their fingers,

penises, or objects into their victims' private parts were highly correlated to the

respondents who were considered to have suffered high levels of emotional abuse.

Table 15

Relationship Between Emotional Abuse (Categorical Low/High Using Mean Split on

Emotional Abuse) With Offenses Committed (Categorical) Using Chi-Square Analyses

Reported Offenses High Ebuse Low Ebuse Chi-Square

Exposure 72/148 (48.6%) 49/140(35.0%) 5.50,^=019

Watching a sexual act 39/148 (26.4%) 20/141 (14.2%) 6.58,^=01

Fondling 111/149(74.5%) 76/141 (53.9%) 13.42, ^=.000

Oral sex 98/148 (66.2%) 71/140(50.7%) 7.13,^=008

Placing victims' fingers, 22/148 (14.9%) 14/141 (9.9%) 1.61,^=204

objects, or penis into private parts

Placing their fingers, objects, 81/148 (54.7%) 63/149(45.3%) 2.54,^=111

or penis into victims' private parts

Sexual activity with animals 3/149 (2.0%) 1/140(0.7%) .893, p=. 345

Regression Analysis

In order to test the strength of the independent variable of emotional abuse, a

regression analysis was conducted. Emotional abuse was entered into the equation as a
 73

dependent variable, and the sexual acts committed by the juvenile sex offenders were

entered as independent variables. This was done to further collaborate the findings that

emotional abuse maybe a significant predictor of sexual offending status. Table 16 lists

the regression results. A multiple linear regression was calculated to predict the effects of

the sexual acts perpetrated by the juvenile sex offenders on emotional abuse. A

significant regression equation was found (F(7, 279)= 109.930, p<.005), with an R2 of

.073. The sexual offenses were coded as 1. This inverse relationship shows the relative

strength of emotional abuse as a predictor of juvenile sex offender status.

Table 16

Regression Analysis Using Emotional Abuse as a Dependent Variable

Model R R square Adjusted R2 S.E

1 .270 .073 .049 5.93

a. Predictors: sexual acts

ANOVA

Model Sum of squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 769.512 7 109.930 3.124 .003

Residual 9818.557 279 35.192

a. Predictors: sexual acts b. Dependent variable: eabuse

To answer the third research question, step two of the logistic regression was

used and included examining the relative strength of the variables parental attachment

(mother and father separately) and the eight parent caregiver instability variables: (a) lots
 74

of moves or homelessness, (b) neglect of children, (c) physical abuse, (d) sexual abuse,

(e) parents committing illegal acts, (f) children placed outside the family, (g) parents

hitting, slapping, or punching children, and (h) frequent changes in who lives at home on

sexual offender status along with emotional abuse. The results of the logistic regression

are presented in Table 17, Step Two. The results show that with 15.1% (190/251) of the

cases correctly classified, emotional abuse was still a significant predictor of sexual

offense status; however, when analyzed in conjunction with parent/caregiver instability

variables, "lots of moves" was the strongest predictor of offender status, followed by

children placed outside of the home, sexual abuse, and emotional abuse. The

parent/caregiver instability variables significantly increased the Nagelkerke R-square to

.30 from .20. A goodness of fit chi-square (Hosemer & Lemeshow test) was not

significant at .749, again suggesting that the model provided adequate fit.

Odds ratios (OR) were computed on all 11 variables and ranked in descending

order as predictors of sexual offender status in Table 17. Using a Wald chi-square test for

the Beta values, four variables were significant: lots of moves (OR=4.67,/K.003),

emotional abuse (OR=1.14, /?<.018), children placed outside the home (OR=2.48,

p<.QA6) and sexual abuse (OR=3.37,/?<.047). Maternal and paternal attachment did not

significantly contribute to the model as they were two of the weakest predictors of sexual

offender status, with no ability in terms of odds ratios to separate juvenile sex offenders

and nonsexual offenders (OR=l).

 75

Table 17

The Effects of Parent/Caregiver Instability and Parental Attachment on Juvenile Sex

Offending

Logistic Regression Step Two (N=251)

Beta SE Wald df Sig Odds Ratio (OR)

Lots of moves -1.540 .550 7.841 1 .003* 4.67

Emotional abuse .127 .060 4.450 1 .018* 1.14

Children placed .906 .539 2.827 1 .046* 2.48

Sexual abuse -1.214 .727 2.787 1 .047* 3.37

Hitting, etc. -.716 .478 2.239 1 .063 2.04

Neglect .904 .873 1.072 1 .155 2.47

Physical abuse -.453 .741 .374 1 .275 1.57

Frequent changes -.089 .568 .025 1 .438 1.09

Illegal acts -.094 .416 .051 1 .410 1.09

Maternal attach .000 .009 .009 1 .463 1.00

Paternal attach .000 .006 .017 1 .448 1.00 \

Note: Beta values greater than 1 refer to the change in standard deviation in the

dependent variable.
 76

Supplementary Analyses

However, given the fact that in these analyses paternal attachment had a weak

relationship with offender status, the analyses were re-run with the larger sample of data

(JV=322), omitting paternal attachment in order to use the larger data set to test the

relative strength of the variables of emotional abuse and parent/caregiver instability with

the entire study population. The research questions addressed in the supplemental

analyses were numbers one (What effect does exposure to emotional abuse have on

juvenile sex offending?) and three (What additional effects does caregiver instability and

less than secure parental attachment have on juvenile sex offending?). The analogous

logistic regressions for the analysis of questions one and three are presented in Table 18.

To answer the first research question with the larger data set, logistic regression

was calculated in order to examine the relative strength of the variable of emotional abuse

in predicting sexually offensive behavior. The results show that the presence of emotional

abuse was again a significant predictor of sexual offender status (p <.000), with 66.8%

(215/322) of the cases correctly classified as juvenile sex offenders. The Nagelkerke R-

squared for the analysis was .233. A goodness of fit chi-square (Hosemer & Lemeshow

test) was not significant at. 109, suggesting that the model provided adequate fit (slightly

less so than previously).

When answering the third research question with the larger data set, the results of

the logistic regression are presented in Table 19, Step Two. The results show that with

71.4%o (230/322) of the cases correctly classified, emotional abuse was the strongest

predictor of offender status. When analyzing the total sample, there was a significant
 77

increase in the Nagelkerke R-squared to .346. A goodness of fit chi-square (Hosemer &

Lemeshow test) was not significant at .287, again suggesting that the model provided

adequate fit.

Odds ratios were computed on all 11 variables and ranked in descending order as

predictors of sexual offender status in Table 19. Using a Wald chi-square test for the Beta

values, four variables were significant: emotional abuse (OR=1.17,/K.000), sexual abuse

(OR= 5.18,/?<.007), lots of moves (OR=2.51,jp<.012), hitting/slapping/punching

(OR=1.99, p<.041), and the presence of hitting, slapping, or punching in the home

(OR=l .99,p<.041). Maternal attachment again did not significantly contribute to the

model (OR=l.01).

Table 18

Without Paternal Attachment

Logistic Regression Step One (N = 322)

Beta SE Wald df Sig. Odds Ratio

Emotional abuse .228 .039 33.27 1 .000 1.26

Table 19

Effects of Parent-Caregiver Instability, Emotional Abuse, and Attachment on the Whole

Study Population (Juvenile Sex Offenders and Juvenile Non-sex Offenders Group)

Logistic Regression Step two (N = 322)

Beta SE Wald df Sig. Odds Ratio

Emotional abuse .156 .049 10.20 1 .000* 1.17

 78

Sexual abuse -1.64 .671 6.00 1 .007* 5.18

Beta SE Wald df Sig. Odds Ratio

Lots of moves or homelessness -.923 .407 5.15 .012* 2.51

Hitting, slapping, or punching -.689 .411 2.82 .047* 1.99

Maternal attachment .010 .006 2.46 .059 1.01

Illegal acts -.497 .343 2.10 .074 1.64

Placement outside home .608 .458 1.76 .092 1.84

Neglect .528 .679 .604 .291 1.70

Frequent Changes -.259 .496 .272 1 .301 1.30

Physical abuse -.186 .597 .097 1 .378 1.20

 79

Chapter Five

Findings, Discussion, Implications and Conclusions

Summary of Findings

Research question one. What effect does exposure to emotional abuse have on

juvenile sex offending?

The statistical analysis showed that the highest direct relationship to offender

status was emotional abuse, as shown in Table 13. This supports the findings of several

researchers, who stated that the presence of emotional abuse and family violence were

factors in juvenile sex offender status (Kobayashi et al., 1995; Righthand & Welch, 2004;

Ryan & Lane, 1997). As stated previously, a logistical regression analysis (Table 9)

showed that emotional abuse was a significant predictor of sexual offender status with

close to 73% of the respondents classified as emotionally abused. This statistic was

computed while including the weaker variable of paternal attachment with a smaller

number of respondents (N=251). The analysis was later run omitting paternal attachment

as a variable, which yielded a larger sample (N=322); emotional abuse again was a strong

predictor of offense status 66.8% of cases identified as emotionally abused. This finding

supports the work of researchers who found that emotional abuse could be a significant

contributor to offender status, such as Righthand and Welch (2004) who found that many

juvenile sex offenders did not receive emotional support within their families. This

study's findings were consistent with the results of Ikomi, Rodney, and McCoy (2009),

who found that emotional abuse was a strong predictor of juvenile sexual offense status

and that emotional abuse was not limited to one specific racial group (Black, Hispanic, or
 80

White). Williams (2007) found that emotional abuse was one of the strongest predictors

of sexual re-offense status in her study on risk factors for juvenile sex offender

recidivism. Lee et al. (2001) wrote that juvenile offenders who were emotionally abused

were at high risk for such offenses as exhibitionism and multiple paraphilias. The results

of the current study support these findings, in that emotional abuse was highly correlated

to such offenses as exposure, or exhibitionism, and the paraphilia of voyeurism, as well

as rape, which is defined in many jurisdictions as forcible penis and mouth contact (oral

sex) (U.S. Code, Title 18, 2010; State of Delaware, 1998).

Research question two. What effect does emotional abuse have on the behaviors

of juvenile sex offenders compared to juvenile nonsexual offenders?

The idea behind this question was to investigate how emotional abuse affected

the actual offending behaviors of the identified juvenile sex offenders. Did emotional

abuse predict that the identified juveniles would commit more hands-on or penetrative

offenses? The analysis split the identified emotionally abused juvenile offenders into two

groupsthose who scored high on the emotional abuse scale as measured by the CTQ

and those who scored lower, with proscribed statistical cutoff points. The self-identified

emotionally abused juvenile sex offenders with lower levels of emotional abuse were

shown to have committed a smaller number of hands-on or penetrative offenses. Of the

population of lower level emotionally abused juvenile sex offenders, 53.9% fondled ,

50.7% forced oral sex, and 45.3% committed rape. The juvenile sex offenders who

suffered higher levels of emotional abuse committed more penetrative or hands-on

offenses; 14.5% fondled, 66.2% forced oral sex, and 54.1% committed rape.
 81

Research question three. What effect does caregiver instability and more

disrupted parental attachment have on juvenile sex offenders compared to juvenile

nonsexual offenders?

The idea behind this question was to examine how a perceived unstable home

environment and poor attachment would impact juvenile sex offender status. The results

of the analysis found that caregiver instability and emotional abuse were strong predictors

of offender status, while both maternal and paternal attachments had little effect and were

actually the weakest predictors of offender status in this population. Of the 11 variables

included in the analysis, emotional abuse was a still a strong predictor of offender status,

yet six caregiver instability variables were more robust forecasters of juvenile sex

offender status. The strongest predictive variable of offender status was lots of moves or

homelessness, followed by sexual abuse in the home; children placed out of the home;

neglect by caregivers; observing hitting, punching, or slapping; physical abuse; and

finally, emotional abuse. The predictive strength of the variable of homelessness or lots

of movesalong with the strength of the physical and sexual abuse, neglect, and hitting

slapping, and punchingare consistent with the findings of other researchers, who stated

that family violence and instability were often found in homeless situations (Pardeck,

2005; Whitbeck & Hoyt, 1999). The current study found that lots of moves and

homelessness, along with sexual abuse, were two of the strongest predictors of offender

status. Pardeck (2005) also found that sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and physical abuse

had the highest degrees of occurrence in his study of child maltreatment among homeless
 82

families. The current study's findings are similar in that all three abuse variables were

strong predictors of offender status.

The variables of paternal and maternal attachment appeared to have little effect on

the relationship between emotional abuse and juvenile sex offending status in the current

study. In the regression analysis, step two (Table 9), maternal and paternal attachment did

not significantly affect offender status as they were two of the weakest predictors in the

analysis.

Discussion

For this study, I examined the effects of emotional abuse, parent and caregiver

instability, and parental attachment on offender status among a sample of 502

incarcerated Midwestern youths. Using a social learning theory perspective, the research

examined the roles the study variables played in allowing juvenile offenders to replicate

the behavior that was inflicted upon them prior to or during their sexually abusive

behaviors.

The role of emotional abuse in the commission of juvenile sex offending was

discussed in chapter two. The findings here show that even low levels of emotional abuse

can have an effect on the type of sexual crime an emotionally abused juvenile may

commit. In this study, the actual offenses the respondents committed were examined, to

see if higher levels of emotional abuse indicated a more serious, hands-on sex offense.

The respondents committed a range of sexually offensive behavior, from noncontact

offenses such as exposure or voyeurism to penetrative acts such as forced oral sex or

rape.
 83

These penetrative offenses can be the most damaging, physically and emotionally,

to victims (Lemieux & Byers, 2008). Leaders in law enforcement and the justice system

in the United States consider rape or penetrative sexual acts to be the most serious of

sexual crime.

Understanding the factors contributing to such devastating behaviors can have

long-term societal implications. Preventing emotional abuse and helping to stabilize at-

risk families may help to break the intergenerational cycle of violence.

This study is one of the few that has researched the role of emotional abuse,

parent and caregiver instability, and poor parental attachment on juvenile sex offender

status. Seto and Lalumiere (2010), in their meta-analysis on the causes of adolescent sex

offending, found few studies that focused mainly on the current study's variables. Most

of the research reviewed in their meta-analysis focused on the role of prior atypical

sexual interests and sexual abuse as a factor in the commission of juvenile sex offending.

The findings of the current study concur with the research of Bandura (1977) who

stated that the learning of behavior through observation was sufficient to reinforce such

behavior in a child's developing brain. Observing an unstable parent or caregiver as he or

she sexually and physically abuses, conducts illegal acts, and is emotionally abusive

within intimate relationships serves as a model for the impressionistic child. Bandura and

Walters (1963) wrote that inappropriate sexual behavior can be the result of "parental

encouragement and reinforcement of such behavior" (p. 154). Burton, Smith and Badten

(1997) found that exposure to negative family norms and behaviorsat an early age

can profoundly affect the conduct displayed by the child exposed to abuse and violence.
 84

The findings of this study reinforce one of the main precepts of social learning theory

observational learning in which a child observes a negative behavior by a parent or

caregiver, and in turn, repeats a similar behavior (Bandura, 1977). In the current study,

with nearly 76% of the cases correctly identified as juvenile sex offenders it was found

that the parent and caregiver instability variables, which included negative parental

behavior, within the study questionnaire, was observed by the repsondents. While this

maybe true statistically for this study, the role of other societal influences, such as

television, access to the internet, drug and alcohol use, and peer influences must also be

considered (Burton, Duty & Leibowitz, 2011; Duane, et. al., 2003; Dunn, Ilapogu,

Taylor, Naney, Blackwell, Wilder, & Givens, 2008; Kelley, Lewis & Sigal, 2004; Knight

& Knight, 2004; Nabi & Riddle, 2008; Seto & Lalumiere, 2010).

The findings of the study are similar to prior research which indicates a

relationship between emotional abuse and intimate relationship violence (Berzenski &

Yates, 2010; Doyle, 1997; Egelund, 2009; Iwaneic, 2003; Rees, 2010; Reyome, 2010;

Yates, 2007). Indeed, while emotional abuse played a role in juvenile sexual offender

status, it also was closely correlated to the commission of more invasive and penetrative

offenses such as oral sex and rape. Emotional abuse was also a predictor of juvenile sex

offender status even when adding such variables as parent and caregiver instability and

maternal and paternal attachment in the analysis. The results of this study are consistent

with Berzenski and Yates (2010) statement that "childhood emotional abuse was by far

the most robust predictor of relationship violence, compared to other types of

maltreatment" (p. 193).

 85

Other predictors of juvenile sexual offender status- the variables of parent and

caregiver instabilitywhen manifested in such acts as numerous residential moves,

neglect, sexual and physical abuse, placement of children outside the home, the

commission of illegal acts by caregivers, frequent changes in who resides in the home,

hitting slapping and punching in the home, also were strong predictors of sexual offender

status. Coupling this instability with emotional abuse, however, makes the relationship

much stronger. In this study, the parent-caregiver instability variables of numerous moves

and sexual abuse were the strongest predictor of juvenile sex offender status. These

findings are consistent with the literature that stresses the negative effects of such

behaviors and acts on juvenile sexual offender status (Kahn & Chambers, 1991; Thornton

et al., 2008)

The variable of parental attachment appeared to be a weak contributor to offender

status. Indeed, many of the respondents in the study stated that their attachment to their

mothers or fathers was appropriate or non-problematic. These findings seem to contradict

research on the role of attachment on juvenile sex offending (Burk & Burkhart, 2003;

Cortoni, 1998; Goodrow & Lim, 1998; Lehmann, 2008; Marshall et al., 1993; Marshall &

Mazzucco, 1995; McCormack, Hudson & Ward, 2002; Miner et al., 2010; Ward, Hudson

& Marshall, 1996) In this study, it appeared that emotional abuse and parent and

caregiver instability played a larger role in offense status than parental attachment.

While a number of studies point to the role of attachment in adult offender status

(Baker, Beech, & Tyson, 2006; Burk & Burkhart, 2003; Hudson & Ward, 1997; Lyn &

Burton, 2004, 2005; Marshall, 1989; Marshall et al, 1993; Miner et al., 2010; Smallbone,
 86

2005), few studies examine the role of attachment in juvenile offenders. This may be due

to age and developmental variables, as the juveniles may not have acquired the awareness

of a disrupted or disorganized attachment and may be holding an idealized version of the

parental relationship (Futterman, 2008). One possible reason for the lack of relative

strength of the parental attachment variable in this study could be that the respondents

were "idealizing" their parents and attempted to portray their relationships with their

parents or caregivers as warm and supportive. This is consistent with the findings of

Noshpitz (1994), who wrote that idealization of parents may allow a "difficult pattern of

defense [to emerge].. .that in which the very deprivation that gave rise to the inner sense

of worthlessness and unlovability leads as well to an idealization of the neglectful and

punitive caregiver" (p. 360). Despite the abuse foisted upon the respondents, along with

an unstable home life, an idealized image of the parent or caregiver may be held by the

study's participants. It is important to note that this idealization often serves as a defense

against a painful realization of the parents' or caregivers' shortcomings and may be an

adaptive function to allow the juvenile to function (Barth, 2010). The cultural bias of

attachment theory (Cole, 2005; Slater, 2003), as discussed in chapter two, where mainly

white and western family units were studied, may play a role in the weakness of this

variable in the study, as over 54% of the respondents identified themselves as racial

minorities.

The role of context in attachment with adolescents has also been examined. The

idea that at times in a young person's life, an attachment to a peer group or a romantic

interest may be stronger than parental attachment has been examined (Mikulciner &
 87

Selinger, 2001; Miller & Hoicoiwitz, 2004). Indeed, one's needs, at any given point in

time, may be met more effectively by a peer or romantic partner than by a parent figure

Another possible explanation for the lack of strength of the parental attachment

variable is the finding of Lehmann (2008), who found that the use of the IPPA scale and

other "self-report attachment instruments may not assess attachment security within the

sex offender population" (p. 148). Along with that observation, Lehmann (2008) wrote

that limitations with such self-report instruments may also occur with response bias and

an "unconscious defensive exclusion of traumatic events" (p. 148) that the IPPA and

similar questionnaires fail to capture. Respondents, therefore, may be blocking or

repressing negative thoughts, beliefs, or perceptions of their parents or caregivers. The

IPPA, according to Lehmann, may not be accurately measuring the unconscious

representation of parental attachment.

Research Implications

While attachment has been extensively discussed in the literature, parent and

caregiver instability and emotional abuse, in relation to juvenile sex offending, has been

understudied. This lack of research is concerning in that social learning theory states that

children learn what they see; with that as a guide, this study presents opportunities for

those who wish to further examine the role an unstable and unsupportive home life play

in the formation of risk factors within a juvenile's environment for such behavior.

Additionally, as Levenson, D'Amora, and Hern pointed out (2007), there is a gap

in empirical studies on the etiology of juvenile sex offending. Any further studies on the
 88

relationship of any type of abuse or neglect on juvenile sex offender status will only

strengthen a relatively limited body of research.

The role of emotional abuse in a child's development is understudied as well

(Riggs, 2010). The effects of years of devaluing and neglectful comments and the

withholding of support have yet to be determined, although most researchers suggest that

the effects are just as devastating as the physical and sexual abuse of children (Fryer,

2009).

Also, further examination of a juvenile offender's family life while the adolescent

is in the home should be considered. As many states reconsider the utility and economics

of sending juveniles to residential placements, the need for more outpatient and

community based care may necessitate that juvenile sex offenders reside with their

families during treatment. Indeed, increased outpatient and community based care may

compel families to become more involved, and vested in treatment (Letourneau,

Bandyopadhyay, Sinha, & Armstrong, 2009).

The results of this study are but a beginning for future researchers to contribute to

Social Work by studying the home and family environment and its impact on juveniles at

risk for sexually offensive behavior. The findings provide numerous areas for the Social

Work researcher to examine in order to create and implement effective sexual offending

prevention strategies and treatments for juvenile sex offenders and at risk youth.
 89

Practice Implications

While social workers and those who conduct clinical work with juvenile sex

offenders are often aware of their clients' prior behavior, it is essential to research their

thoughts and feelings about their parents and caregivers, as well as their home life, in

order to compile a more complete and effective assessment of behavior and risk for re-

offense. Having the client admit to behavior and pledge to work on a comprehensive

relapse prevention plan means little if the client cannot come to terms with the possible

emotional, physical, or sexual abuse he/she may have suffered, or tries to make sense of

an unstable, nonsecure, and often chaotic upbringing and home environment. The

knowledge of a client's schema of how he/she views intimate affiliations is important to

treatment professionals as they attempt to assist clients in working through issues that

may have caused them to offend. Equally important is the need to know the impact of an

unsteady and disordered home of the client, as well as the effects of emotional abuse, if

the client is to reduce the risk of acting out in the future.

The findings of this study could have an impact a number of Social Work practice

settings. Foster care social workers will need to know not only the factual history of the

clients they are trying to place, but the emotional history of the client as well. Foster care

social workers will need to be aware of how to articulate the treatment needs of such

juveniles to potential care providers. The findings also illustrate the need for child

welfare, homeless, child abuse advocate, foster care, domestic violence and clinical social

workers to be trained in identifying the symptoms and effects of emotional abuse. Also,

Social Workers will need to be aware of the possible behaviors emotionally abused at risk
 90

youth can present. As stated previously, in chapter two, emotional abuse is rarely the

focus of child welfare investigations (Trickett, et al, 2009), and a Social Work assessment

that accounts for emotional abuse and its effects can not only provide a more complete

history of the child, it can also direct targeted and more effective, interventions.

Social workers who intervene with youth who are homeless or whose families

have lost their housing need to be aware of the effects of such experiences on the client,

As this study indicated, homelessness or lots of moves placed a child at risk for juvenile

sex offender status. The trauma of losing one's home, or the instability of not knowing

where they will reside, what school they will attend, who their peers are, and an uncertain

existence, may offer an unsupervised, and possibly emotionally abused child an

opportunity to conduct sexually inappropriate or offensive, behavior. Such a child, whose

parents search for housing, or possibly conduct illegal activities, as the results of this

study presented, will benefit from an intervention that a Social Worker, trained in

identifying the effects of homelessness, family instability and emotional abuse can

provide.

Designing targeted assessments and interventions for emotional abuse and parent

or caregiver instability is one implication of the current study to Social Work practice. A

clinical social worker providing service to juvenile sex offenders will assess the client's

progress throughout the course of treatment. Juvenile sex offender treatment involves the

assessment of the client's feelings towards family members. Assessment of the client's

progress in treatment often takes into account dynamic and static factors. Static or

historical factors are just thathistorical and unchanging. Dynamic factorssuch as

 91

feelings and thoughts about sex, sexuality, victims, or intimate relationshipscan

change, and that ability to change, in a positive direction, is a hallmark of successful

juvenile sex offender treatment (Fanniff & Becker, 2006). Dynamic factors can only

change when the social worker is aware of the feelings held by the client. While these

feelings develop as a result of the offender's life experiences, it becomes critical to

understand how the offender arrived at this station in life. As social learning theory states,

the juvenile offender learns behavior through modeling, or observation, often times of a

parent or caregiver. It is essential the clinician become aware of the possible origins of

such deviant or abhorrent activity such as emotional abuse with their clients. Also, Social

Workers treating the emotionally abused juvenile sex offender will need to be aware of

their clients' historical factors, such as parent or caregiver instability, in order to assist

and effect positive change with the client.

The implications of this study's findings will also impact those social workers

who engage with and treat families. It should be noted that the involvement of the family

is critical in the treatment of juvenile sex offenders and the prevention of such behavior.

Social workers who utilize a lens of social learning theory would want to inform their

clients or families of the importance of learned behavior and modeling and the impact on

each family members' behaviors. At-risk youths need to be aware of influential factors

within themselves and their family that may predispose them to offensive behavior. To

that end, if such risk factors are identified within the family constellation, the social

worker must then work to assist the juvenile client in developing positive coping

mechanisms when the opportunity to offend presents.

 92

The social worker's role is critical in aiding families in identifying which risk

factors exist in the home environmentsuch as many of this study's variables-physical

abuse, domestic instability and emotional abusein order to establish a warmer and

more supportive home and family setting and to reduce the odds of further offensive

behavior. It will be important for the family to be aware of how previous family activities

or unstable behavior have affected the adolescent's potential ability to sexually offend

(Bischoff etal., 1992).

Limitations of the Study

The study's participants were limited to 332 juveniles considered sex offenders in

a large Midwestern state. Therefore, while 332 is a robust number, it would be difficult to

generalize the results to the close to 34,000 registered juvenile sex offenders in the

United States (Puzzanchera, et al, 2010). It should be noted that the survey was

conducted during a 1-day period and may be only a brief "snapshot" of how the

respondent was feeling that particular day.

Secondly, the study was conducted on male adolescents. These results should not

be generalized to a population of female juvenile or adolescent sex offenders, whose

etiology of offending and treatment needs are markedly different from juvenile males

(Elliott, Eldridge, Ashfield, & Beech, 2010; Freeman & Sandler, 2008; Johansson-Love

& Fremouw, 2009; Wijkman, Bijleveld, & Hendriks, 2010). Female offenders have been

noted to commit fewer offenses than their male counterparts, suffer higher percentages of

sexual victimization, and often offend in conjunction with a partner (Johansson-Love &

Fremouw, 2009; Wijkman et al., 2010).

 93

Third, it should be noted that the survey of the respondents was conducted at

inpatient facilities throughout the state. Juveniles who were living at home were not

included; therefore, while the results were convincing for the effects of emotional abuse

and parent and caregiver instability on offender status, it would be a consideration for

future research to assess the feelings, thoughts, and emotions of juvenile offenders who

are living and interacting with parents or caregivers at the time of survey in order to

evaluate perceptions of emotional abuse, parent and caregiver instability, and parental

attachment.

Finally, as mentioned earlier, the idea that the IPPA may not be a wholly accurate

measure of internalized perceptions of parental attachment merits further exploration. A

projective instrument may be a more accurate measure of unconscious or implied

representations of attachment (Lehmann, 2008).

Conclusions

One of the goals of this study was to examine the role of exposure to emotional

abuse on a population of juvenile sex offenders. This study is one of the few that not only

looks at the relationship of the combination of emotional abuse, parent and caregiver

instability, and parental attachment on juvenile sex offending, but may be one of the few

that examines the relationship of emotional abuse to the specific sexualized behavior

juvenile offenders commit. It was discovered that emotional abuse was a significant

indicator of offender status; it played an important and critical function in how the

population viewed themselves and their families and in how they manifested their

offending behaviors.
 94

The role of emotional abuse in any juvenile's developmental history should not be

underestimated. As noted earlier, emotional abuse can escape detection and is difficult to

define or pinpoint. Emotional abuse can have devastating lifelong effects even if a

juvenile's family environment was relatively stable. Adding the impact of the toxic

consequences of name calling, scapegoating, spurning, blaming, withholding of affection,

and emotional neglect to the environment of a child who may be at risk for sexually

offensive behavior affixes a potentially explosive ingredient to the juvenile's already

skewed sense of interpersonal relations and intimacy.

The ability to conduct close, intimate and appropriate interpersonal affiliations

can be damaged as a result of emotional abuse. The capability to master social settings

and interactions is often compromised by lowered self-esteem, a byproduct of emotional

abuse. Researchers have noted that juvenile sex offenders have often substituted sexual

acting out in place of appropriate intimacy; this inability to develop a warm and empathic

relationship with others can be attributed to the effects of emotional withdrawal, neglect,

or abuse by the caregivers.

Emotionally abused and neglected juvenile males may display externalized sexual

behaviors. The findings of the current study appear to substantiate such research that

reports of emotional abuse have been noted as increasing the odds of sexually

inappropriate or abusive behavior. Indeed, these findings also showed that even low

levels of emotional abuse can increase the chances of the juvenile sex offender

committing a more damaging penetrative or hands-on sexual act.

 95

Using a social learning theory perspective, the findings, while concerning, should

not be surprising. If a child learns mastery over a situation by re-creating behavior that

he/she believes will win them praise, then that juvenile will continue to display such

behavior. If a caregiver imparts an emotionally distant and uncaring attitude towards a

child, then that child learns to act accordingly in his/her relationships as a method of

gaining approval from the parent or caregiver.

These relationships can be viewed through the lens of a social learning

perspective when an emotionally abused child sexually offends in order to create his own

form of intimacy or bonding, which he or she may have learned by observing the adults

in his or her early life. Those who find themselves wanting for closeness and intimacy

may have no appropriate road map of directives to carry out and create warm, intimate,

and satisfying relationships.

In addition to the impact of emotional abuse, the effects of parental and caregiver

instability and poor parental attachment on juvenile sex offending status were researched.

While insecure attachment, as measured by the IPPA, did not act as a powerful predictor

of offender status, parent and caregiver instability did.

Despite the relatively weak standing of disrupted parental attachment as a

correlated factor of juvenile sex offending in this study, which contradicts most current

research, the participants may indeed feel securely attached to their parents or caregivers

who displayed abusive and criminal behaviors, or who were unable to provide the basics

of everyday life, such as shelter or regular meals. Social learning theory would explain

the behavior juveniles display, especially if witnessed in the home by an influential adult.
 96

And the juvenile sex offender may indeed feel securely or appropriately attached to the

parent or caregiver, especially if he/she is replicating behaviors that the parents were

observed to commit, such as committing illegal acts in the home or exhibiting violent

interpersonal behavior such as frequent hitting, slapping, or punching others. This display

of similar behaviors may be a method of gaining the adults' approval and may be

reinforced by the parents, through praise or tacit approval.

The findings on the effects of parent and caregiver instability in this study are

consistent with research that reported juvenile sexual acting out and criminality may be a

result of poor boundaries and chaos within the family unit (Dallaire & Wilson, 2010;

Merrick et al., 2008), The concept of parent and caregiver instability was also studied by

Phillips, Leathers, and Erklani (2009), who found that children who witnessed parents or

caregivers commit crimes, abuse drugs, and were physically violent within the home

were more likely to be emotionally disturbed. These findings are consistent with the

precepts of social learning theory that would posit that children who act criminally,

abuse, and cannot manage the basics of life often learn such behavior from their early

caregivers. This also reinforces Bandura's (1977) assertions that observational learning is

foundational in learning and influential later in displaying aggressive behavior.

While a number of studies point to the role of disrupted and less than secure

attachments as part of the sequelae of juvenile sex offending status (Lehmann, 2008;

Marshall, 2010, 1989; Marshall et al, 1993; Marshall & Mazzucco, 1995; Miner et al.,

2010; Rich, 2006), it did not appear to be a strong predictor of offender status in this

study. This finding may be a result of the juveniles' desire to view their parents or
 97

caregivers positively. Indeed, the juveniles who participated in the study were

incarcerated and, as a result, may be idealizing or wishing for a better or more securely

attached relationship with their parents while in placement.

It is important for social workers who treat juvenile sex offenders to be aware of

the possible needs of children and adolescents who display such behaviors, despite the

presence of secure parental attachment. This study's findings show that despite a

somewhat secure parental attachment, social work practitioners must be aware of the

presence of emotional abuse and parent and caregiver instability with juvenile sex

offender clients.

Summary

The relationships among parent and caregiver instability and emotional abuse and

juvenile sex offending status has been shown to be quite significant in this analysis.

While one can observe an unstable home environment and point out behaviors that can

imperil a youth's development and increase his risk for offending, it still remains that

emotional abuse is often a difficult entity to point out and define. Indeed, what is

emotionally abusive to one juvenile may be normal family banter to another.

Nevertheless, as emotional abuse was described to the respondents, the relationship was

found to be quite strong; this finding suggests that a home environment that provides

little emotional support and warmth may indeed add to the constellation of risk factors

that cause a juvenile to sexually offend. Importantly, it was shown that even low levels of

emotional abuse may cause a juvenile offender to commit a more serious and damaging

penetrative or hands-on sexual offense.

 98

While the idea that poor attachments were a factor in offense status was not

significant, this study also found that coupling an emotionally abusive home setting with

a physically unstable environment may further the risk for a juvenile's potential to

sexually offend. This study also provided a linkage to the literature on juvenile offending,

emotional abuse, attachment theory, and social learning theory. In addition, it provided an

empirical analysis of an existing data set and offered suggestions for future research.
 99

References

Abbassi, A., & Aslinia, S. (2010). Family violence, trauma and social learning theory.

Journal of Professional Counseling: Practice, Theory & Research, 38(1), 16-27.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Able, G., Becker, J., & Cunningham-Rathner, J. (1984). Complications, consent and

cognitions in sex between children and adults. International Journal of Law and

Psychiatry, 7, 89-103.

Ackerman, B., & Brown, E. (2010). Physical and psychosocial turmoil in the home and

cognitive development. Chaos and its influence on children's development: An

ecological perspective (pp. 35-47). Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/12057-003

Ackerman, B., Kogos, J., Youngstrom, E., Schoff, K., & Izard, C. (1999). Family

instability and the problem behaviors of children from economically

disadvantaged families. Developmental Psychology, 35(1), 258-268.

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.35.1.258

Ainsworth, B., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: a

psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ., Erlbaum.

Ainsworth, M., & Bowlby, J. (1991). An ethological approach to personality

development. American Psychologist. 46(4), 333.

Allen, J. P., & Miga, E. M. (2010). Attachment in adolescence: A move to the level of

emotion regulation. Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, 27(2), 181-190.

doi: 10.1177/0265407509360898
 100

Anderson, J., & Kras, K. (2005). Revisiting Albert Bandura' s social learning theory to

better understand and assist victims of intimate personal violence. Women &

Criminal Justice, 17(1), 124.

Andrews, D., & Banta, J., (1998). Psychology of criminal conduct, second edition.

Psychology of Criminal Conduct (2nd ed.). Retrieved from SocINDEX

with Full Text database.

Apsche, J. A., Evile, M. M., & Murphy, C. (2004). The thought change system: An

empirically based cognitive behavioral therapy for male juvenile sex

offenders: A pilot study. Behavior Analyst Today, 5(1), 101-107.

Arata, C , Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Bowers, D., & O'Farrill-Swails, L. (2005). Single

versus multi-type maltreatment: An examination of the long-term effects of child

abuse. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 11(4), 29-52.

doi:10.1300/J146vlln04_02

Armsden, G., & Greenberg, M. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer attachment:

Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in

adolescence. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 16(5), 427-454. Retrieved from

EBSCOAo^..

Awad, G., & Saunders, E. (1991). Male adolescent sexual assaulters: Clinical

observations. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6(4), 446-460.

doi: 10.1177/088626091006004004

Baer, J., & Maschi, T. (2003). Random acts of delinquency: Trauma and self-

destructiveness in juvenile offenders. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal,

 101

20(2), 85-98.

Bagley, C , & Shewechuk-Dann, D. (1991). Characteristics of 60 children and

adolescents who have a history of sexual assault against others: Evidence from a

controlled study. Journal of Child & Youth Care, 43-52. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

Baker, E., Beech, A., & Tyson, M. (2006). Attachment disorganization and its relevance

to sexual offending. Journal of Family Violence, 21, 221-231.

Bancroft, J., Jannsen, E., Carnes, L., Goodrich, D., Strong, D., & Long, J. (2004).

Sexual activity & risk taking in young heterosexual men. The relevance of

sexual arousability, mood & sensation seeking. Journal of Sex Research, 41(2).

181-192. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Social Learning Theory. Retrieved from

SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A., & Walters, R. (1963). Social learning and personality development. New

York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Barbaree, H., Langton, C , & Peacock, E. (2006). Different actuarial risk measures

produce different risk ranking for sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of

Research & Treatment, 18(4), 423-440.

Barbaree, H., & Marshall, W., Eds. (2006). The juvenile sex offender, (2nd ed.). New

York, NY: Guilford.

 102

Barbaree, H., Marshall, W., & Hudson, S., Eds., (1993). The juvenile sex offender. New

York, NY: Guilford.

Barbaree, H., Marshall, W., & McCormick, J. (1998). The development of deviant sexual

behaviour among adolescents and its implications for prevention and treatment.

Irish Journal of Psychology, 19(1), 1-31. Retrieved from PsycINFO database.

Barth, F. (2010). Frozen in time: Idealization and parent-blaming in the therapeutic

process. Clinical Social Work Journal, 38(3), 331-340. doi:10.1007/sl0615-009-

0237x

Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: a test

of a four category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.61, 226-

244.

Becker, J., & Hunter, J. (1997). Understanding and treating child and adolescent sex

offenders. Advances in Clinical Child Psychology, 19, 177-197.

Beech, A., & Mitchell, I. (2005). A neurobiological perspective on attachment problems

in sexual offenders and the role of selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors in the

treatment of such problems. Clinical Psychology Review, 25(2), 153-182.

doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2004.10.002

Berenson, K., & Andersen, S. (2006). Childhood physical and emotional abuse by a

parent: Transference effects in adult interpersonal relations. Personality and

Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(11), 1509-1522. doi:l 0.1177/0146167206291671

Bernstein, D. P., & Fink, L. (1998). Childhood trauma questionnaire. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.
 103

Berzenski, S., & Yates, T. (2010). A developmental process analysis of the contribution

of childhood emotional abuse to relationship violence. Journal of Aggression,

Maltreatment & Trauma, 19(2), 180-203. doi:10.1080/10926770903539474

Bischoff, G. (1991). Adolescent male sexual offenders' perceptions of their family

characteristics. Retrieved from SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Bischoff, G., & Stith, S., (1995). Family environments of adolescent sex offenders and

other juvenile delinquents. Adolescence, 30(11) 157-171.

Bischoff, G., Stith, S., and Wilson, S., (1992). A comparison of the family systems

of adolescent sexual offenders and nonsexual offending delinquents. Family

Relations, 41(3), 318-323.

Boeringer, S. B., Shehan, C. L., & Akers, R. L. (1991). Social contexts and social

learning in sexual coercion and aggression: Assessing the contribution of

fraternity membership. Family Relations, 40(1), 58-64.

Bolger, K., & Patterson, C. (2001). Pathways from child maltreatment to internalizing

problems: Perceptions of control as mediators and moderators. Development and

Psychopathology, 13(4), 913-940. Retrieved from PsycINFO database.

Borduin, C. M., Schaeffer, C. M., & Heiblum, N. (2009). A randomized clinical trial of

multisystemic therapy with juvenile sexual offenders: Effects on youth social

ecology and criminal activity. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology,

77(1), 26-37. doi:10.1037/a0013035

Bowen, M., (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. New York, NY: Aronson.

Bowlby, J. (1944). Forty-four juvenile thieves: Their characters and home life.
 104

International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 25, 19-53. Retrieved from SocINDEX

with Full Text database.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Disruption of affectional bonds and its effects on behavior. Canada's

Mental Health Supplement, 59. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Retrospect and prospect. American Journal of

Orthopsychiatry, 52(4), 664-678. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Brassard, M, Germain, R., & Hart, S. (1987). Psychological Maltretament of Children

and Youth. New York, Pergamon Press.

Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary

Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28(5), 759-775. doi:10.1037/0012-

1649.28.5.759

Broach, J., & Petretic, P. (2006). Beyond traditional definitions of assault: Expanding

our focus to include sexually coercive experiences. Journal of Family Violence,

27(8), 477-486. doi:10.1007/sl0896-006-9045-z

Brown, A., & Burton, D. L. (2010). Exploring the overlap in male juvenile sexual

offending and general delinquency: Trauma, alcohol use, and masculine beliefs.

Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 19(4), 450-468.

Brown, T. L., Henggeler, S. W., Brondino, M. J., & Pickrel, S. G. (1999). Trauma

exposure, protective factors and mental health functioning of substance-abusing

and dependent juvenile offenders. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral

Disorders, 7(2), 94-102. doi:l 0.1177/106342669900700204

 105

Bullens, R., van Wijk, A., & Mali, B. (2006). Similarities and differences between the

criminal careers of Dutch juvenile sex offenders and non-sex offenders. Journal of

Sexual Aggression, 12(2), 155-164.

Burk, L. R., & Burkhart, B. R. (2003). Disorganized attachment as a diathesis for sexual

deviance: Developmental experience and the motivation for sexual offending.

Aggression and Violent Behavior, 8(5), 487-511.

Burton, D. (2003). Male adolescents: Sexual victimization and subsequent sexual abuse.

Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 20(4), 277-296. Retrieved from

Academic Search Premier database..

Burton, D. (2009, February 18). Juvenile sex offender treatment. Training series

presented for the State of Delaware Division of Youth Rehabilitation Services,

Wilmington, DE.

Burton, D., Duty, K., & Leibowitz, G. (2011). Differences between Sexually Victimized

and Nonsexually Victimized Male Adolescent Sexual Abusers: Developmental

Antecedents and Behavioral Comparisons. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 20(1),

77-93. doi:10.1080/l0538712.2011.541010

Burton, D, & Fleming, M (1998). Psychometric examination of the sex offender

evaluation instrument. Poster for the National Conference of the Association for

the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Vancouver, B.C., Canada

Burton, D., Miller, D., & Shill, C. (2002). A social learning theory comparison of the

sexual victimization of adolescent sexual offenders and nonsexual offending male

delinquents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 26(9), 893.

 106

Burton, D., Nesmith, A., & Badten, L. (1997). Clinician's view on sexually aggressive

children and their families: A theoretical exploration. Child Abuse & Neglect,

21(2), 157-170.

Calley, N., & Gerber, S. (2008). Empathy promoting counseling strategies for

juvenile sex offenders: A developmental approach. Journal of Addictions &

Offender Counseling, 22(2), 68-85. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

database.

Carlson, E. A. (1998). A prospective longitudinal study of attachment

disorganization/disorientation. Child Development, 69(4), 1107. Retrieved from

'EBSCOhost.

Carlson, E., & Sroufe, A. (1995). Contribution of attachment theory to developmental

psychopathology. In D. Chichetti & D. Cohen (Eds.) Developmental

Psychopathology: Theory & Methods. (Vol. 1, p. 581-617). New York, Wiley.

Clark, R. (2004). The classical origins of Pavlov's conditioning. Integrative

Physiological and Behavioral Science, 39(4), 279-294.

Clarke-Stewart, K., Goosens, F. A., & Allhusen, V. D. (2001). Measuring Infant-Mother

Attachment: Is the Strange Situation Enough?. Social Development, 10(2), 143-

169. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Coan, J. A. (2010). Adult attachment and the brain. Journal of Social & Personal

Relationships, 27(2), 210-217. doi:l0.1177/0265407509360900

Cohen, J., Mannarino, A., Murray, L., & Igelman, R. (2006). Psychosocial interventions

for maltreated and violence-exposed children. Journal of Social Issues, 62(4),

 107

737-766. doi:10.1111/J.1540-4560.2006.00485.X

Cole, S. A. (2005). Foster Caregiver Motivation and Infant Attachment: How do Reasons

for Fostering Affect Relationships?. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal,

22(5/6), 441-457. doi:10.1007/sl0560-005-0021-x

Cooper, M.,Shaver, P. and Collins, N. (1988). Attachment styles, emotion regulation and

adjustment in adolescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,

1380-1397.

Cortoni, F. (1998). The relationship between attachment styles, coping, the use of

sex as a coping strategy, and juvenile sexual history in sexual offenders.

Dissertation Abstracts International. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. (59)

Courtney, E., Kushwaha, M., & Johnson, J. (2008). Childhood emotional abuse and risk

for hopelessness and depressive symptoms during adolescence. Journal of

Emotional Abuse, 8(3), 281-298. doi:l 0.1080/10926790802262572

Daversa, M. (2005). Early caregiver instability and maltreatment experiences in the

prediction of age of victims of adolescent sexual offenders. Dissertation

Abstracts International. Retrieved from PsycINFO database. (65)

Dodge, K., Bates, J., & Pettit, G. (1990). Mechanisms in the cycle of violence. Science,

250(4988), 1678-1683. doi:10.1126/science.2270481

Doyle, C. (1997). Emotional abuse of children: Issues for intervention. Child Abuse

Review, 6, 330-342.

Duane, Y., Carr, A., Cherry, J., McGrath, K., & O'Shea, D. (2003). Profiles of the parents

of adolescent CSA perpetrators attending a voluntary outpatient treatment

 108

programme in Ireland. Child Abuse Review, 12(1), 5-24. doi:10.1002/car.776

Dunn, M., Ilapogu, V., Taylor, L., Naney, C , Blackwell, R., Wilder, R., & Givens, C.

(2008). Self-reported substance use and sexual behaviors among adolescents

in arural state. Journal of School Health, 78(11), 587-593. doi:10.111 l/j.1746-

1561.2008.00350.x

Eastman, B. (2005). Variables associated with treatment failure among adolescent sex

offenders. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 42(3), 23-40. Retrieved from

SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Egeland, B. (2009). Taking stock: Childhood emotional maltreatment and developmental

psychopathology. Child Abuse & Neglect, 55(1), 22-26. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2008.

12.004

Elgar, F. J., Knight, J., Worrall, G. J., & Sherman, G. (2003). Attachment characteristics

and behavioural problems in rural and urban juvenile delinquents. Child

Psychiatry & Human Development, 34(1), 35-48.

Elliott, I. A., Eldridge, H. J., Ashfield, S., & Beech, A. R. (2010). Exploring risk:

potential static, dynamic, protective and treatment factors in the clinical histories

of female sex offenders. Journal of Family Violence ,25(6): 595-602. Retrieved

from CINAHL with Full Text, EBSCOAo^.

Fair, C , Brown, J., & Beckett, R. (2004). Ability to empathise and

Masculinity levels: comparing male adolescent sex offenders with a

normative sample of non- offending adolescents. Psychology, Crime & Law,

10(2), 155-167. doi:10.1080/10683160310001597153

 109

Ferguson, K. (2009). Exploring family environment characteristics and multiple abuse

experiences among homeless youth. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(11),

1875-1891. doi:10.1177/0886260508325490.

Figueredo, A., Sales, B. D., Russell, K. P., Becker, J. V., & Kaplan, M. (2000). A

Brunswikian evolutionary-developmental theory of adolescent sex offending.

Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 18(2/3), 309-329.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R., & Chaffin, M. (2009). Juveniles who commit sex offenses

against minors. United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice

Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency Programs. Washington, DC.

with Full Text database.

Fleming, W. M., Jory, B., & Burton, D. L. (2002). Characteristics of Juvenile Offenders

Admitting to Sexual Activity with Nonhuman Animals. Society & Animals, 10(1),

31-45. doi:10.1163/156853002760030860

Ford, M. E., & Linney, J. (1995). Comparative analysis of juvenile sexual offenders,

violent nonsexual offenders, and status. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10(1),

56.

Forman, E., & Davies, P. (2003). Family instability and young adolescent maladjustment:

The mediating effects of parenting quality and adolescent appraisals of family

security. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 52(1), 94-105.

doi:l 0.1207/15374420360533095

Freeman, N., & Sandler, J. (2008). Female and male sex offenders: A comparison of
 110

recidivism patterns and risk factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(10),

1394-1413. Retrieved from EBSCOhost..

Fryer, L. (2010). A longitudinal examination of outcomes related to emotional abuse in

children. Dissertation Abstracts International. Retrieved from PsycINFO

database. (70)

Futterman, W. K. (2008). The relationship between attachment, perceived parental

relationships and current social functioning. Dissertation Abstracts International.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost. (68)

Garbarino, J. J. (1996). A review of the psychometric properties of selected attachment

instruments. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Gjerde, P. F. (2001). Attachment, Culture, and Amae. American Psychologist, 56(10),

826. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Goodrow, K., & Lim, M. (1998). Attachment theory applied to juvenile sex offending.

Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 27(1/2).149-165. Retrieved from SocINDEX

with Full Text database.

Gore-Felton, C , Koopman, C , McGarvey, E., Hernandez, N., & Canterbury II, R.

(2001). Relationships of sexual, physical, and emotional abuse to emotional and

behavioral problems among incarcerated adolescents. Journal of Child Sexual

Abuse, 70(1), 73-88.

Groth, N. (1977). The adolescent sexual offender and his prey. International Journal of

Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 21(3), 249-254. doi: 10.1177/

0306624X7702100309
 Ill

Gullone. E., & Robinson, K. (2005). The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment

Revised (IPPA-R) for children: a psychometric investigation. Clinical Psychology

& Psychotherapy, 12(1), 67-79. doi:10.1002/cpp.433

Hardy, L. T. (2007). Attachment theory and reactive attachment disorder: Theoretical

perspectives and treatment implications. Journal of Child & Adolescent

Psychiatric Nursing, 20(1), 27-39. doi:10.1111/j.l744-6171.2007.00077.x

Hazen, N., Jacobvitz, D., & McFarland, L. (2005). Antecedents of boundary disturbances

in families with young children: Intergenerational transmission and parent-infant

caregiving patterns. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 5(2-3), 85-110. doi:10.1300/

J135v05n02_05

Henggeler, S. W., Letourneau, E. J., Chapman, J. E., Schewe, P. A., Borduin, C. M., &

McCart, M. R. (2009). Mediators of Change for Multisystemic Therapy With

Juvenile Sexual Offenders. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 77(3),

451-462. doi:10.1037/a0013971

Herrenkohl, R., Egolf, B., & Herrenkohl, E. (1997). Preschool antecedents of adolescent

assaultive behavior: A longitudinal study. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,

67(3), 422-432. Retrieved from Social Work Abstracts database.

Hickey, N., McCrory, E., Farmer, E., & Vizard, E. (2008). Comparing the developmental

and behavioural characteristics of female and male juveniles who present with

sexually abusive behaviour. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 14(3), 241-252.

Higgins, D. (2004). Differentiating between child maltreatment experiences. Family

Matters, 69, 50-55. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

 112

Higgins, G. E., Jennings, W. G., Marcum, C. D., Ricketts, M. L., & Mahoney, M. (2011).

Developmental trajectories of nonsocial reinforcement and offending in

adolescence and young adulthood: An exploratory study of an understudied part

of social learning theory. Journal of Criminal Justice, 59(1), 60-66.

Hollingsworth, J., Glass, J., & Heisler, K. (2007). Empathy deficits in siblings of

severely scapegoated children: A conceptual model. Journal of Emotional Abuse,

7 (4), 69-88. doi:10.1300/J135v7n04_04

Hudson, S., & Ward, T. (1997). Intimacy, loneliness & attachment style in sexual

offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 323-339.

Hunter, J., Figueredo, A., Becker, J., & Malamuth, N. (2007). Non-sexual delinquency

in juvenile sexual offenders: The mediating and moderating influences of

emotional empathy. Journal of Family Violence, 22(1), 43-54.

Hutchinson, L., & Mueller, D. (2008). Sticks and stones and broken bones: The

influence of parental verbal abuse on peer related victimization. Western

Criminology Review, 9(\), 17-30.

Ikomi, P., Rodney, H., & McCoy, T. (2009). Male juveniles with sexual behavior

problems: Are there differences among racial groups? Journal of Child Sexual

Abuse, 18(2), 154-173.

Iwaniec, D. (1995). The emotionally abused and neglected child: Identification,

assessment and intervention. Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley.

Iwaneic, D. (2003). Identifying and dealing with emotional abuse and neglect. Child

Care in Practice, 9(1), 49-61.

 113

Iwaniec, D., & Herbert, M. (1999). Multidimensional approach to helping emotionally

abused and neglected children and abusive parents. Children & Society, 13(5),

365-379. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Iwaniec, D., Larkin, E., & Higgins, S. (2006). Research review: Risk and resilience in

cases of emotional abuse. Child & Family Social Work, 77(1), 73-82.

doi:10.111 l/j.l365-2206.2006.00398.x

Johansson-Love, J., & Fremouw, W. (2009). Female sex offenders: A controlled

comparison of offender and victim/crime characteristics. Journal of Family

Violence, 24(6), 367-376. doi:10.1007/s 10896-009-9236-5

Jones, M. (2007, July 22). How can you distinguish a budding pedophile from a kid

with real boundary problems? Sunday New York Times Magazine, p. 33.

Jonson-Reid, M., & Way, I. (2001). Adolescent Sexual Offenders: Incidence of

Childhood Maltreatment, Serious Emotional Disturbance. American Journal of

Orthopsychiatry, 71(1), 120. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Jovanovic, T., Blanding, N. Q., Norrholm, S. D., Duncan, E., Bradley, B., & Ressler, K.

J. (2009). Childhood abuse is associated with increased startle reactivity in

adulthood. Depression & Anxiety (1091-4269), 26(11), 1018-1026.

doi:10.1002/da.20599

Kahn, T., & Chambers, H. (1991). Assessing reoffense risk with juvenile sexual

offenders. Child Welfare, 70(3), 333-345. Retrieved from Academic Search

Premier database.

Kaplan, M., Becker, J., & Cunningham, R. (1988). Characteristics of parents of

 114

adolescent incest perpetrators: Preliminary findings. Journal of Family Violence

3(3), 183-191. Retrieved from SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Katsiyannis, A., Zhang, D., Barrett, D. E., & Flaska, T. (2004). Background and

psychosocial variables associated with recidivism among adolescent males: A 3-

year investigation. Journal of Emotional & Behavioral Disorders, 72(1), 23-29.

Keith-Oaks, J. (1990). Emotional abuse: Destruction of the spirit and the sense of self.

Clearing House, 64(\), 31. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Kelley, S., Lewis, K., & Sigal, J. (2004). The impact of risk factors on the treatment of

adolescent sex offenders. Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling, 24(2),

67-81.

Kenny, D. T., Lennings, C. J., & Munn, O. A. (2008). Risk factors for self-harm and

suicide in incarcerated young offenders: Implications for policy and practice.

Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 8(4), 358-382.

Knight, R., & Sims-Knight, J. (2004). Testing an etiological model for male

juvenile sex offending against females. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 75(3/40),

33-55.

Knopp, F. H. (1982). Remedial intervention in adolescent sex offenses; Nine program

descriptions. Orwell, VT: Safer Society Press.

Kobayashi, J., Sales, B. D., Becker, J. V., & Figueredo, A. J. (1995). Perceived parental

deviance, parent-child bonding, child abuse, and child sexual aggression. Sexual

Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 7(1), 25-44. doi:10.1007/

BF02254872
 115

Lab, S., Shields, G., & Schondel, C. (1993). Research note: An evaluation of juvenile sex

offender treatment. Crime & Delinquency, 59(4), 543-553. Retrieved from

SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Lau^ A., Huang, M., Garland, A., McCabe, K., May, Y., & Hough, R. (2006). Racial

variation in self-labeled child abuse and associated internalizing symptoms among

adolescents who are high risk. Child Maltreatment, 77(2), 168-181. doi:10.1177/

1077559505285776

Laws, D. (1985). Predicting relapse in sex offenders, Retrieved from SocINDEX with

Full Text database.

Lee, J., Jackson, H., Pattison, P., & Ward, T. (2002). Developmental risk factors for

sexual offending. Child Abuse & Neglect, 26(\), 73-92. Retrieved from Social

Work Abstracts database.

Lehmann, M. (2008). Attachment status in juveniles who sexually offend. Dissertation

Abstracts International. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. (69)

Leibowitz, G. (2007). Exploring the relationship among dissociation, trauma, and

juvenile sexual offending. Dissertation Abstracts International. Retrieved from

EBSCOAo^. (68)

Lemieux, S. R., & Byers, E. (2008). The sexual well-being of women who have

experienced child sexual abuse. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32(2), 126-144.

doi:10.1111/j.l471-6402.2008.00418.x

Letourneau, E., Bandyopadhyay, D., Sinha, D., & Armstrong, K. (2009). Effects of
 116

sex offender registration policies on juvenile justice decision Making. Sex Abuse:

A Journal of Research & Treatment (Sage). 21(2), 149-165.

Letourneau, E., & Borduin, C. (2008). The effective treatment of juveniles who

sexually offend: An ethical imperative. Ethics & Behavior, 18(2/3), 286-306.

Letourneau, E., & Miner, M., (2005, July). Juvenile sex offenders: A case against the

legal and clinical status quo. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of research & Treatment,

77(3), 293-312.

Levenson, J., D'Amora, D., & Hern, A., (2007). Megan's Law and its impact on

community re-entry for sex offenders. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 25(4),

587- 602.

Longo, R. (1982). Sexual learning and experience among adolescent sex offenders.

International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 26(3),

235-241.

Lyn, T. S., & Burton, D. L. (2004). Adult Attachment and Sexual Offender Status.

American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 74(2), 150-159. doi:10.103710002-

9432.742.150

Lyn, T., & Burton, D. (2005). Attachment, anger and anxiety of male sexual offenders.

Journal of Sexual Aggression, 77(2), 127-137. Retrieved from Academic Search

Premier database.

Main, M. (1995). In S. Goldberg, R. Muir & J. Kerr (Eds.). Attachment Theory: Social,

Developmental and Clinical Perspectives (p. 407-474). Hillsdale, NJ., Analytic

Press.
 117

Main, M., Kaplan, N., & Cassidy, J. (1985). Security in infancy, childhood and

adulthood: A move to the level of representation. In I. Bretherton & E. Waters

(Eds.), Growing points of attachment theory and research. Monographs of the

Society for Research in Child Development, 50(1-2), 66-104.

Marcynyszyn, L., Evans, G., & Eckenrode, J. (2008). Family instability during early and

middle adolescence. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(5), 380-

392. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.06.001

Marshall, W. L. (2010). The role of attachments, intimacy, and loneliness in the etiology

and maintenance of sexual offending. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 25(1),

73-85. doi:10.1080/14681990903550191

Marshall, W. L. (1989). Intimacy, loneliness and sexual offenders. Behaviour Research

and Therapy, 27(5), 491-503. doi:10.1016/0005-7967(89)90083-l

Marshall, W. L., Hudson, S. M., & Hodkinson, S. (1993). The importance of attachment

bonds in the development of juvenile sex offending. In H. E. Barbaree, W. L.

Marshall, S. M. Hudson, H. E. Barbaree, W. L. Marshall, & S. M. Hudson (Eds.),

The juvenile sex offender (pp. 164-181). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Marshall, W. L., Marshall, L. E., Serran, G. A., & O'Brien, M. D. (2009). Self-esteem,

shame, cognitive distortions and empathy in sexual offenders: their integration

and treatment implications. Psychology, Crime & Law, 15(2/3), 217-234.

doi:10.1080/10683160802190947

Marshall, W. L., & Mazzucco, A. (1995). Self-esteem and parental attachments in child
 118

molesters. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 7(4), 279-285.

doi:10.1007/BF02256832

McCann, K. & Lussier, P.(2008, October). Anti-sociality, Sexual deviance and Sexual

reoffending in Juvenile Sex Offenders: A Meta-Analytical Investigation. Youth

Violence & Juvenile Justice, 6(4), 363-385.

McCormack, J., Hudson, S. M., & Ward, T. (2002). Sexual Offenders' Perceptions of

Their Early Interpersonal Relationships: An Attachment Perspective. Journal of

Sex Research, 39(2), 85. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

McMackin, R., Leisen, M., Cusack, J., LaFratta, J., & Litwin, P. (2002). The relationship

of trauma exposure to sex offending behavior among male juvenile offenders.

Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 77(2), 25-40.

Melby, J. N., Conger, R. D., Conger, K. J., & Lorenz, F. O. (1993). Effects of parental

behavior on tobacco use by young male adolescents. Journal of Marriage &

Family, 55(2), 439-454.

Merrick, M. T., Litrownik, A. J., Everson, M. D., & Cox, C. E. (2008). Beyond sexual

abuse: The impact of other maltreatment experiences on sexualized behaviors.

Child Maltreatment, 13(2), 122-132. doi:10.1177/1077559507306715

Messman-Moore, T., & Brown, A. (2004). Child maltreatment and perceived family

environment as risk factors for adult rape: Is child sexual abuse the most salient

experience? Child Abuse & Neglect, 25(10), 1019-1034. doi:10.1015/j.chiabu

2004.05.003.

Messman-Moore, T., & Coates, A. (2007). The impact of childhood psychological abuse
 119

on adult interpersonal conflict: The role of early maladaptive schemas and

patterns of interpersonal behavior. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 7(2), 75-92.

doi:10.1300/J135v07n02_05

Mikulincer, M., & Selinger, M. (2001). The interplay between attachment and affiliation

systems in adolescents' same-sex friendships: The role of attachment style.

Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, 18(1), 81

Miller, J., & Hoicowitz, T. (2004). Attachment contexts of adolescent friendship and

romance. Journal of Adolescence, 27(2), 191.

doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2003.11.008

Miner, M., (2007). The fallacy of juvenile sex offender risk. Criminology & Public

Policy. 6(3), 565-572.

Miner, M., & Munns, R. (2005). Isolation and normlessness: Attitudinal comparisons of

adolescent sex offenders and non-delinquents. International Journal of Offender

Therapy & Comparative Criminology, 49(5), 491-504. Retrieved from

SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Miner, M. H., Robinson, B. E., Knight, R. A., Berg, D., Romine, R., & Netland, J.

(2010). Understanding sexual perpetration against children: Effects of attachment

style, interpersonal involvement, and hypersexuality. Sexual Abuse: Journal of

Research and Treatment, 22(1), 58-77. doi:10.1177/1079063209353183

Moor, A., & Silvern, L. (2006). Identifying pathways linking child abuse to

psychological outcome: The mediating role of perceived parental failure of

empathy. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 6(4), 91-114. doi:10.1300/J135v06n04_

 120

05.

Mulder, E., Brand, E., Bullens, R., & Van Marie, H. (2011). Risk factors for overall

recidivism and severity of recidivism in serious juvenile offenders. International

Journal of Offender Therapy & Comparative Criminology, 55(1), 118-135.

Mullen, P., Martin, J., Anderson, J., Romans, S., & Herbison, G. (1996). The long-term

impact of the physical, emotional, and sexual abuse of children: a community

study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 20(1), 7-21. Retrieved from Social Work Abstracts

database.

Nabi, R., & Riddle, K. (2008). Personality Traits, Television Viewing, and the

Cultivation Effect. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 52(3), 327-348.

doi:10.1080/08838150802205181

Nelson, J. (2000). Clinical assessment of crying and crying inhibition based on

attachment theory. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic. 64(4), 509.

Nelson, M. (2007). Characteristics, treatment and practitioners' perceptions of juvenile

sex offenders. Journal for Juvenile Justice Services, 27(1/2), 7-16.

Noshpitz, J. D. (1994). Self-destructiveness in adolescence: Psychotherapeutic issues.

American Journal of Psychotherapy, 48(3), 347. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

O'Reilly, G., Morrison, T., Sheerin, D., & Carr, A. (2001). A group-based module for

adolescents to improve motivation to change sexually abusive behaviour. Child

Abuse Review, 10(3), 150-169.

Orr, B. (1991). Male adolescent sex offenders: A comparison of two treatment

approaches. Journal of Child & Youth Care, Retrieved from SocINDEX with Full
 121

Text database.

Pace, C , San Martini, P., & Zavattini, G. (2011). The factor structure of the Inventory of

Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA): A survey of Italian adolescents. Personality

& Individual Differences, 51(2), 83-88. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.006

Palmer, E. (2008). Contemporary psychological contributions to understanding crime.

In Forensic psychology (pp. 29-56). New York, NY: Wiley. Retrieved from

PsycINFO database.

Pardeck, J. T. (2005). An exploration of child maltreatment among homeless families:

Implications for family policy. Early Child Development & Care, 175(4), 335-

342. doi:l0.1080/0300443042000244019

Patterson, G., DeBaryshe, B., & Ramsey, E. (1989). A developmental perspective on

anti-social behavior. American Psychologist, 44, 329-335.

Pavio, S. C , & Cramer, K. M. (2004). Factor structure and reliability of the Childhood

Trauma Questionnaire in a Canadian undergraduate student sample. Child Abuse

& Neglect, 28(8), 889-904. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.01.011

Phillips, S., Leathers, S., & Erkanli, A. (2009). Children of probationers in the child

welfare system and their families. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 18(2), 183-

191.doi:10.1007/sl0826-008-9218-x

Pithers, W., Gray, A., Cunningham, C , Lane., S. (1993). From trauma to understanding:

A guide for parents of children with sexual behavior problems. Brandon, VT:

Safer Society Press.

Plattner, B., Karnik, N., Jo, B., Hall, R. E., Schallauer, A., Carrion, V.,...Steiner, H.
 (2007). State and trait emotions in delinquent adolescents. Child Psychiatry and

Human Development, 38(2), 155-169. doi:10.1007/sl0578-007-0050-0

Poehlmann, J., Dallaire, D., Loper, A., & Shear, L. D. (2010). Children's contact with

their incarcerated parents: Research findings and recommendations. American

Psychologist, 65(6), 575-598. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Polansky, M., Scull, N. C , ViUanueva, A. M., & Ikambana, P. (2007). Adolescent boys

in an extended day treatment program for behavior problems and their reflections

about relationships with women and girls. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 7(4), 1-

25.

Puzzanchera, C , Adams, B., & Sickmund, M. (2010). Juvenile court statistics 2006-

2007. United States Office of Juvenile Justice and Prevention. Washington, DC.

Rees, C. A. (2010). Understanding emotional abuse. Archives of Disease in Childhood,

95. 59-67.

Reitzel, L., & Carbonell, J. (2006). The effectiveness of sexual offender treatment for

juveniles as measured by recidivism; A meta-analysis. Sex Abuse: A Journal of

Treatment, 75,401-421.

Reyome, N. (2010). The effect of childhood emotional maltreatment on the emerging

attachment system and later intimate relationships. Journal of Aggression,

Maltreatment & Trauma, 79(1), 1-4. doi:10.1080/10926770903486007

Rich, P. (2006). Attachment and sexual offending: Understanding and applying

attachment theory to the treatment of juvenile sexual offenders. New York, NY:

Wiley.
 123

Riggs, S. A. (2010). Childhood emotional abuse and the attachment system across the life

cycle: What theory and research tell us. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment &

Trauma, 79(1), 5-51. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Riggs, S., Cusimano, A., Benson, K. (2011). Chilhood emotional abuse and attachment

processes in the dyadic adjustment of dating couples. Journal of Counseling

Psychology, 55(1).

Righthand, S., & Welch, C. (2004). Characteristics of youth who sexually offend.

Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 75(3/4), 15-32.

Rodriguez, N., Ryan, S. W., Rowan, A. B., & Foy, D. W. (1996). POSTTRAUMATIC

STRESS DISORDER IN A CLINICAL SAMPLE OF ADULT SURVIVORS OF

CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ABUSE. Child Abuse & Neglect, 20(10), 943-952.

Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Ronis, S., & Borduin, C. (2007). Individual, family, peer, and academic characteristics

of male juvenile sex offenders. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 35(2),

153-163.

Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J., Pott, M., Miyake, K., & Morelli, G. (2001). Deeper Into

Attachment and Culture. American Psychologist, 56(10), 827. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

Ryan, G. (1997). Theories of etiology. In G. Ryan & S. Lane (Eds.), Juvenile sexual

offending: Causes, consequences and correction (2nd ed., pp. 19-35). San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Ryan, G., & Lane, S., Eds. (1997). Juvenile sexual offending: Causes, consequences,
 124

and correction (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Schaeffer, C , & Borduin, C. (1999). Mother-adolescent-sibling conflict in families of

juvenile felons. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 160(1), 115.

Schwartz, B., Cavanaugh, D., Pimental, A., & Prentky, R. (2006). Descriptive study of

precursors to sex offending among 813 boys & girls: Antecedent life experiences.

Victims & Offenders, 7(1), 61-77.

Sermebeikian, P., & Martinez, D. (1994). Treatment of adolescent sex offenders: Theory

based practice. Child Abuse & Neglect, 75(11), 969-976. Retrieved from

SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Seto, M. C , & Lalumiere, M. L. (2010). What is so special about male adolescent sexual

offending? A review and test of explanations through meta-analysis.

Psychological Bulletin, 136(4), 526-575. doi:10.1037/a0019700

Shaffer, A., Yates, T., & Egeland, B. (2009). The relation of emotional maltreatment to

early adolescent competence: Developmental processes in a prospective study.

Child Abuse & Neglect: The International Journal, 55(1), 36-44. Retrieved from

ERIC database.

Shaver, P. R., & Mikulincer, M. (2010). New directions in attachment theory and

research. Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, 27(2), 163-172.

doi: 10.1177/0265407509360899

Shi, L., & Nicol, J.(2007). Into the mind of a juvenile sex offender: A clinical

analysis and recommendation from an attachment perspective. American Journal

of Family Therapy, 35, 395-402.

 125

Simon, N., Herlands, N., Marks, E., Mancini, C , Letamendi, A., Zhonghe, L.,...Stein, M.

B. (2009). Childhood maltreatment linked to greater symptom severity and poorer

quality of life and function in social anxiety disorder. Depression & Anxiety,

26(11), 1027-1032. doi:10.1002/da.20604

Skinner, B. (1999). Some responses to the stimulus "Pavlov." Journal of the

Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72(3), 463.

Slater, R. (2007). Attachment: Theoretical development and critique. Educational

Psychology in Practice, 25(3), 205-219. doi:l0.1080/02667360701507285

Smallbone, S.W. (2005). Attachment insecurity as a predisposing and precipitating

factor in sexual offending by young people. In M. C. Calder (Ed.), Children and

young people who sexually abuse: New theory, research, and practice

developments (pp. 6-18). London, England: Russell House.

Smallbone, S. W. (2006). Social and psychological factors in the development of

delinquency and sexual deviance. In H. E. Barbaree, W. L. Marshall, H. E.

Barbaree, W. L. Marshall (Eds.), The juvenile sex offender (2nd ed., pp. 105-127).

New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Smallbone, S. W., & Dadds, M. R. (1998). Childhood attachment and adult attachment in

incarcerated adult male sex offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13(5),

555-573. doi:10.1177/088626098013005001

Smith, C. A., & Stern, S. B. (1997). Delinquency and antisocial behavior: A review of

family processes and intervention research. Social Service Review, 77(3), 382-

420.
 126

Sneddon, H. (2003). The effects of maltreatment on children's health and well-being.

Child Care in Practice, 9(3), 236-250. doi:10.1080/1357527032000167795

Spertus, I., Yehuda, R., Wong, C , Halligan, S., & Seremetis, S. (2003). Childhood

emotional abuse and neglect as predictors of psychological and physical

symptoms in women presenting to a primary care practice. Child Abuse &

Neglect, 27(11), 1247-1258. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2003.05.001

more emphasis on interpersonal factors.

American Psychologist, 60(4), 340-341.

State of Delaware (1998, June 11). Section 2. Amend Sections 636(a)(6), 3508(a),

3508(b) and 3509(a) of Title 11 of the Delaware Code. Retrieved from

http://delcode.delaware.gov/sessionlaws/gal39/chp285.shtml

Stickrod-Gray, A., & Wallace, R., (1992). Adolescent sex offender assessment packet.

Brandon, VT: Safer Society Press.

Stinson, J., Sales, B., & Becker, J. (2008). Social learning theories. Sex offending: Causal

theories to inform research, prevention, and treatment (pp. 77-91). Washington,

DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/11708-006

Stubenbort, K., Cohen, M. M., & Trybalski, V. (2010). The effectiveness of an

attachment-focused treatment model in a therapeutic preschool for abused

children. Clinical Social Work Journal, 55(1), 51-60. doi:10.1007/sl0615-007-

0107-3

Taussig, H. N., & Culhane, S. E. (2010). Emotional maltreatment and psychosocial

functioning in preadolescent youth placed in out-of-home care. Journal of

 127

Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 79(1), 52-74. doi:10.1080/

10926770903476008.

Thornton, J., Stevens, G., Grant, J., Indermaur, D., Charmette, C , & Halse, A. (2008).

Interfamilial adolescent sex offenders: Family functioning and treatment. Journal

of Family Studies, 14(3), 362-375.

Toch, H. (1979). Psychology of crime & criminal justice. Prospect Heights, IL:

Waveland Press.

Tremblay, P. (2002). Social interactions among paedophiles. Social Interactions Among

Paedophiles. Retrieved from SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Trickett, P., Mennen, F., Kim, K., & Sang, J. (2009). Emotional abuse in a sample of

multiply maltreated, urban young adolescents: Issues of definition and

identification. Child Abuse & Neglect, 55(1), 27-35. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.

2008.12.003

United States Code Title 18 Crimes and Criminal Procedures, Chapter 109A, Sexual

abuse. Retrieved from http://www.students.haverford.edu/masar/documents/

USRapeLaws.pdf

United States Department of Health & Human Services (2009). Child maltreatment

2009. Retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/ pubs/cm09/

United States Department of Health & Human Services. (1996). Executive summary of

the Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse & Neglect (NIS-3),

Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

United States Department of Justice: Federal Bureau of Investigation (2010). 2070

 128

uniform crime reports. Retrieved from www.fbi.gov/ucr/10cius

University of California at Los Angeles. (2011). What does Cronbach 's alpha

mean? Retrieved from www.ucla.edu/stats.

van Harmelen, A., de Jong, P. J., Glashouwer, K. A., Spinhoven, P., Penninx, B. H., &

Elzinga, B. M. (2010). Child abuse and negative explicit and automatic self-

associations: The cognitive scars of emotional maltreatment. Behaviour Research

& Therapy, 48(6), 486-494. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2010.02.003

van Outsem, R., Beckett, R., Bullens, R., Vermeiren, R., van Horn, J., & Doreleijers,

T., (2006). The adolescent sexual abuser project assessment measures-Dutch

revised version: A comparison of personality characteristics between juvenile sex

offenders, juvenile perpetrators on non-sexual violent offences and non-

delinquent youth in the Netherlands. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 12(2), 127-

141. Retrieved from Academic Search premier database.

van Vugt, E., Jan Stams, G., Dekovic, M., Brugman, D., Rutten, E., & Hendriks, J.

(2008). Moral development of solo juvenile sex offenders. Journal of Sexual

Aggression, 14(2), 99-109. doi:10.1080/13552600802248106

van Wijk, A., Blokland, A., Duits, N., Vermeiren, R., & Harkink, J. (2007). Relating

psychiatric disorders, offender and offence characteristics in a sample of

adolescent sex offenders and non-sex offenders. Criminal Behaviour & Mental

Health, 77(1), 15-30.

van Wijk, A., Loeber, R., Vermeiren, R., Bullens, R., & Dorelejiers, T. (2005). Violent

sex offenders compared with violent juvenile nonsex offenders: Explorative

 129

findings from the Pittsburgh youth study. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research

and Treatment, 77(3), 333-352.

van Wijk, A. H., Mali, B., Bullens, R., & Vermeiren, R. (2007). Criminal Profiles of

Violent Juvenile Sex and Violent Juvenile Non-Sex Offenders. Journal of

Interpersonal Violence, 22(10), 1340-1355.

van Wijk, A., Vermeiren, R., Loeber, R., Hart-Kerhoffs, L., Doreleijers, T., &

Bullens, R. (2006). Juvenile sex offenders compared to non-sex offenders.

Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 7(4) 227- 243. Retrieved from Academic

Search Premier database,

van Wijk, A. H., Vreugdenhil, C , van Horn, J., Vermeiren, R., & Doreleijers, T. H.

(2007). Incarcerated Dutch juvenile sex offenders compared with non-sex

offenders. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 16(2), 1-21.

Veneziano, C , & Veneziano, L. (2002). Adolescent sex offenders: A review of

the literature. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 3(4), 247-260.

Ward, T., Hudson, S. M., & Marshall, W. L. (1996). Attachment Style in Sex Offenders:

A Preliminary Study. Journal of Sex Research, 33(1), 17-26. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

Ward, T., & Siegert, R. J. (2002). Toward a comprehensive theory on child sexual abuse:

A theory knitting perspective. Psychology, Crime & Law, 8(4), 319. Retrieved

from EBSCOAo^.

Watts-English, T., Fortson, B., Gibler, N., Hooper, S., & DeBellis, M. (2006). The
 130

psychobiology of maltreatment in childhood. Journal of Social Issues, 62(4), 111-

736. doi:10.1111/j.l540-4560.2006.00484.x

Whitbeck, L. B., & Hoyt, D. R. (1999). Nowhere to grow: Homeless and runaway

adolescents and their families, Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Wijkman, M., Bijleveld, C , & Hendriks, J. (2010). Women don't do such things!

Characteristics of female sex offenders and offender types. Sexual Abuse: A

Journal of Research & Treatment (Sage), 22(2), 135-156. doi:10.1177/

1079063210363826

Williams, J. (2007). Juvenile sex offenders: Predictors of recidivism. Ph.D. dissertation,

Auburn University, United States Alabama. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from

Dissertations & Theses: Full Text.(Publication No. AAT 3265532).

Worling, J., & Curwen, T. (2000). Adolescent sex offender recidivism: Success of

specialized treatment and implications for risk prediction. Child Abuse &

Neglect., 24(1), 965-982.

Wright, K. D., Asmundson, G. G., McCreary, D. R., Scher, C , Hami, S., & Stein, M. B.

(2001). Factorial validity of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire in men and

women. Depression & Anxiety (1091-4269), 13(4), 179-183. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

Yates, T. (2007). The developmental consequences of child emotional abuse: A

neurodevelopmental perspective. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 7(2), 19-34.

doi:10.1300/J135v07n02_02

Youstain, T. (2007). Learning to become a sex offender: The extent to which social
 131

learning theory can Account for Sexual Deviance. Conference Papers-American

Society of Criminology, Retrieved from SocINDEX with Full Text database.

Zimring, F. (2004). An American travesty: Legal responses to adolescent sexual

offending. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Zurbriggen, E. L., Gobin, R. L., & Freyd, J. J. (2010). Childhood emotional abuse

predicts late adolescent sexual aggression perpetration and victimization. Journal

of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 19(2), 204-223. doi:10.1080/

10926770903539631
 132

Appendix A: Ohio Evaluation Survey Device

 133

Ohio
Evaluation
Thank you for taking the time to participate in our
project! We are available to answer questions if you
have any. Please answer all questions as honestly as
possible.

There are many questions in this survey about things

that may not apply to you. If that is the case, please
write NA on that question or page, or first page of that
set of questions, so we can know that those questions do
not apply to you.

Please also know that if you share any new abuses with
us (e.g., people who have hurt you or people you have
hurt), we will report this information to the proper
authorities.

Thank you!
 134

Many of the surveys have two sides.

Please answer every question you are able to.
Please ask questions at any time.
 135

The first set of questions asks for information about you and your family.
First Name Last name
Unit name
1. How old are you? years
2. In school, what grade did you last complete? (Select one)

7 tn 10tn College (how many years? )

3. Which one of the following BEST describes the family you were raised in
(PLEASE CHECK ONLY ONE)?
1. Two parents 4. Mom and partner 7. Grandparent
2. Single mom 5. Dad and partner 8. Foster home
3. Single dad 6. Other relative
4. Do these describe your family and/or home?
Don't
No Yes Know
A. Parent with alcohol or drug problem 0 2
B. Parent who sold drugs 0 2
C. Illness or physical health problems in the family 0 2
D. Mental health problems in the family 0 2
E. Frequent changes in who lives at home 0 2
F. Neglect of children 0 2
G. Physical abuse of children 0 2
H. Sexual abuse of children 0 2
I. Illegal acts by family members (other than you) 0 2
J. Hitting, slapping, punching, or other violence between
parents or adults at home 0 2
K. Children being placed outside the family
(not counting you) 0 2
L. Lots of moves and/or homelessness 0 2
M. Very poor (little money, food, clothes, heat, etc.) 0 2
5. Please check ALL the ethnic or racial groups you belong to.
 136

1. Black or African American 5. Native American/American Indian

2. White or Caucasian 6. Arab American
3. Hispanic or Latino 7. Other (please
list).
4. Asian or Pacific Islander

6. Please choose the ONE race or ethnic group you feel closest to.
1. Black or African American 5. Native American/American Indian
2. White or Caucasian 6. Arab American
3. Hispanic or Latino 7. Other (please list)
_ _ 4. Asian or Pacific Islander

7. In general, belonging to my ethnic/racial group is an important part of my self

image (how I see myself). Please circle your answer.
Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree
1 2 3 4
8. How close do you feel to people of your race or ethnic group? Would you say?

Not Close at All Not too Close Fairly Close Very Close
1 2 3 4
9a. Before you were arrested how important was religion in your life?
(please circle the number that best represents the importance)

Not very Neutral/Mixed Very Important

Important
1 2 3 4 5
9b. Since you were arrested how important is religion in your life?
(please circle the number that best represents the importance)

Not very Neutral/Mixed Very Important

Important
1 2 3 4 5
 137

10. During the year prior to your arrest how often did you attend
religious services and/or gatherings? Place a check next to the best
answer for you.
1. several times a week 4. several times a year
2. once a week 5. never
3. once or twice a month
11. How many times have you... (Place a check in the appropriate box):
Answer the questions about what you have experienced yourself, not
what you have seen on television or in the movies.
Once or A Few Many
Never Twice Times Times
11a. Had somebody threaten to stab you 1 2 3 4
1 lb. Had somebody threaten to shoot you 1 2 3 4
lie. Had somebody threaten to kill you 1 2 3 4
lid. Been beat up 1 2 3 4
1 le. Seen a stranger get shot 1 2 3 4
11 f. Seen a stranger get stabbed 1 2 3 4
llg. Seen a stranger being beat up 1 2 3 4
1 lh. Seen a stranger get killed 1 2 3 4
Hi. Seen a relative or friend get shot 1 2 3 4
1 lj. Seen a relative or friend get stabbed 1 2 3 4
1 Ik. Seen a relative or friend get beat up 1 2 3 4
111. Seen a relative or friend get killed 1 2 3 4
11m. Seen somebody get arrested 1 2 3 4
lln. Seen a gun in your home 1 2 3 4
llo. Heard guns being shot (not when 1 2 3 4
hunting animals)
1 lp. Seen people having sex 1 2 3 4
12. Please indicate how many of each of these tvt>es of out of home pla ces you ma y
have lived or received services from. Place a number on each blank to indicate
how many placements you have had at that sort of place (Example: _5 Foster
Care, if you have lived at three foster homes)
A. Foster Care with strangers (not relatives)
B. Foster care with relatives
C. Group Home
 138

D. Locked detention or assessment facility

E. Residential treatment program
F. Outpatient treatment program
G. Residential substance abuse treatment program
H. Community substance abuse program
I. Other:

13. How much time in total have you served in facilities previous to this
stay?
Years Months
14. Are you on any medicine prescribed by a psychiatrist?
(1) Yes (0) No

15. Have you begun taking part in a sex offender treatment group?

(1) Yes (0) No

15a. If so, how long have you been in this group (total)?
Years Months

16. How many people sexually abused you?

Gender/ Age Group Children Teens Adults

Males IS -.f

Females ti r

17. How much do you agree with the following statements (mark a spot
with an X)?
Most of
Never Sometimes Usually the time Always
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
a. "I used/abused drugs before my
criminal offenses." (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
b. "I used/abused alcohol before my
criminal offenses." (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
c. "I used/abused drugs after my
criminal offenses." (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
 139

d. "I used/abused alcohol after my

criminal offenses." (2) (3) (4) (5)
e. "I looked at pornography just before
my criminal offenses." (2) (3) (4) (5)
f. "I looked at pornography right after
my criminal offenses." (2) (3) (4) (5)
g. "I spent a lot of time planning my
criminal offenses." (2) (3) (4) (5)
h. "I felt guilty about my criminal
offenses right after committing them." (2) (3) (4) (5)

18. Have you ever been in a healthy (consensual) romantic relationship?

JT) Yes (0) No

19. Have you ever committed murder? (1) Yes 10} No

20. If you have ever committed murder, was any person whom you murdered
someone you also sexually offended against? (1) Yes (0) No

22. How much have you been sexually excitec by the fol owing?
Not at A little Somewhat A lot A great
all bit deal
a. Females under age 12 0 2 3 4
b. Females between 13-18 0 2 3 4
c. Males under age 12 0 2 3 4
d. Males between 13-18 0 2 3 4
e. Masturbating in public 0 2 3 4
f. Obscene phone calls 0 2 3 4
g. Peeping at others without them 0 2 3 4
knowing it (voyeurism)
h. Rape 0 2 3 4
i. Rubbing your genitals on people 0 2 3 4
without their permission (frottage)
j . Sex with animals (bestiality) 0 2 3 4
k. Sexual pain for yourself 0 2 3 4
(masochism)
 140

1. Sexual pain of others (sadism) 0 1 2 3 4

m. Showing your body to others
without their permission 0 1 2 3 4
(exhibitionism)
n. Underwear 0 1 2 3 4
o. Your own sexual abuse (if you were 0 1 2 3 4
sexually abused as a child)
22. Were you sexually abused as a child? a) Yes an No

23. Were you ever told to abuse someone else, by a third person (for example, your
uncle asked you to abuse your sister/brother)? (p Yes (0) No

24. How many people have you sexually abused?

Gender/ Age Group Children Teens Adults
Males <-. s* '
i
Females 4
 141

The following section will ask you to think back

over your childhood. It might help to remember

the places you lived in, who you lived with, and

what you did with your time as a child. Please

answer the questions while thinking about your

childhood.
 142

Please think of your mother or the woman who raised you and check the
number that best describes her.

1. She was generally warm and responsive. She was good at knowing when to be
supportive and when to let me operate on my own. Our relationship was almost always
comfortable, and I have no major reservations or complaints about it.

Not at all Very

like my much like
mother my mother

2. She was fairly cold and distant, or rejecting and not very responsive; I wasn't her
highest priority. Her concerns were often elsewhere. It's possible that she might not
have wanted me.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Not at all Very
like my much like
mother my mother

3. She was noticeably inconsistent in her reactions to me, sometimes warm and sometimes
not. She had her own agendas which sometimes got in the way of being receptive and
responsive to my needs. She definitely loved me but didn't always show it in the best way.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Not at all Very
like my much like
mother my mother

Place a check mark next to all of the words which describe the attitudes, feelings, and
behaviors your mother (or the woman who raised you) showed toward you.

l respectful 8 intrusive 14 accepting

2 caring 9 demanding is responsible
3 loving 10 humorous 16 affectionate
4 confident li sympathetic 17 strong
 143

5 disinterested 12 unresponsive 18 unfair

6 likable 13 rejecting 19 violent
7 abusive

Now think of your father or the man who raised you and circle the number below
that best describes him.
1. He was generally warm and responsive. He was good at knowing when to be supportive
and when to let me operate on my own. Our relationship was almost always comfortable,
and I have no major reservations or complaints about it.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Not at all Very
like my much like
father my father

2. He was fairly cold and distant, or rejecting and not very responsive. I wasn't his
highest priority. His concerns were often elsewhere. It's possible that he might not have
wanted me.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Not at all Very
like my much like
father my father

3. He was noticeably inconsistent in his reactions to me, sometimes warm and

sometimes not. His own agendas sometimes got in the way of being receptive and
responsive to my needs. He definitely loved me but didn't always show it in the best
way.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Not at all Very
like my much like
father my father

Place a check mark next to all of the words which describe the attitudes, feelings,
and behaviors your father (or the man who raised you) showed toward you.
 144

i respectful 8 intrusive 14 accepting

2 caring 9 demanding is responsible
3 loving 10 humorous 16 affectionate
4 confident n sympathetic 17 strong
5 disinterested 12 unresponsive is unfair
6 likable 13 rejecting 19 violent
7 abusive
 145

PERSONAL HISTORY SURVEY

Note that the first set of questions deals with

sexual abuse you experienced as a child. Sexual
abuse occurs when someone forces, coerces, or
manipulates you to do sexual things AND/OR
when they are 3 years or more older than you at
the time of the abuse. It may or may not have
hurt you. If you have never been sexually
abused, please skip to question 6.
 146

1 W h o sexually abused you AND how many sexual abusers did you have?
Please write the number of people who sexually abused you in each category.
# #
Females Males
Female relative 7 Male relative
1
2 Girlfriend 8 Boyfriend
3 Female teen friend or 9 Male teen friend or neighbor
neighbor ,

4 Female teen stranger 10 Male teen stranger

5 Adult female friend or 11 Adult male friend or neighbor
neighbor
6 Adult female stranger 12 Adult male stranger

2 W h a t did they do to you? (check all that apply)

l Exposed themselves to you, or made you expose yourself to them.

2 Made you watch them in a sexual act (intercourse, oral sex,

masturbation.)

3 Fondled your private parts, made you touch their private parts.
4 Made you perform oral sex on them, performed oral sex on you.
5 Made you put your fingers, objects, or penis into their private parts.
6 Put their fingers, objects, or penis into your private parts.
7 Made you do anything sexual to/with animals.

3 H o w did they get you to do what they wanted? (check all that apply)
I Offered you favors such as being very nice to you, giving you candy, playing games
to get you to like them, baby-sitting you.
2 Made threats of harming you or others (i.e. your family or friends)
3 Used physical force.

4 H o w often, counting all occasions, were you sexually abused? (check one)
a 1 c 4-5 e 9-13 g 22-34 i 56-89
b 2-3 d 6-8 f 14-21 h 35-55 J 90 or more
 147

When you were first sexually abused...

a. How old were you the very first time you were abused?
b. How old were you the very last time you were abused?
 148

Please note that the next set of questions deals

with how you may have sexually abused other
people. Please take your time and be as accurate
as possible.
Thanks again for your help.

Sexual abuse occurs when you force, coerce, or

manipulate someone else to do sexual things
AND/OR when that person is 3 years younger
than you.

Please note that the proper authorities will be

notified if you share new abuses with us. This
is for both your safety and the safety of your
victims.
 149

6 W h o did you sexually abuse and how many victims did you have?
Write the number of people that you sexually abused in each category.
Females # #
Males
Female relative 7 Male relative
1
2 Girlfriend 8 Boyfriend
3 Female teen friend or 9 Male teen friend or neighbor
neighbor
4 Female teen stranger 10 Male teen stranger
5 Adult female friend or 11 Adult male friend or neighbor
neighbor
6 Adult female stranger 12 Adult male stranger

7 W h a t did you do to them? (check all that apply) 3

I Exposed yourself to them or made them expose themselves to you.
2 Made them watch you in a sexual act (intercourse, oral sex,
masturbation.)

3 Fondled their private parts or made them touch your private parts.
4 Made them perform oral sex on you or you performed oral sex on them.
5 Made them put their lingers, objects, or penis into your private parts.
6 Put your fingers, objects, or penis into their private parts.
7 Made them do anything sexual to/with animals.

8 H o w did you get them to do what you wanted? (check all that 3
apply)
I Offered them favors such as being very nice to them or giving them candy,
playing games to get them to like you, baby-sitting them.
2 Made threats of harming them or others (i.e., their family or friends.)
3 Used physical force.

9 H o w often, counting all occasions, did you sexually abuse them? (check one)
A 1 c 4-5 e 9-13 g 22-34 i 56-89

B 2-3 d 6-8 f 14-21 h 35-55 J 90 or more

10 H o w old were your victims?
 150

a. When you started abusing them? (the youngest)

b. When you stopped abusing them? (the oldest)

11 When you started and stopped sexually abusing people...

a. How old were you the first time you sexually abused someone?
b. How old were you the last time you sexually abused someone?
 151

These questions ask about some of your experiences growing up as a child. For
each question, circle the number that best describes how you feel. Although
some of these questions are of a personal nature, please try to answer as
honestly as you can.
Some- Very
Never Rarely times Often often
When 1 was growing up ... true true true true true
1. There was someone in my family
2 3 4 5
whom I could talk to about my
problems.
2. I didn't have enough to eat.
2 3 4 5

3. People in my family showed

confidence in me and encouraged 2 3 4 5
me to succeed.
4. Someone in my family hit me or
2 3 4 5
beat me.
5. I lived in a group home or in a
2 3 4 5
foster home.
6. I knew that there was someone to
2 3 4 5
take care of me and protect me.
7. People in my family called me
things like "stupid," "lazy," or 2 3 4 5
"ugly."
8. I was living on the streets by the
time I was a teenager or even 2 3 4 5
younger.
9. My parents were too drunk or
2 3 4 5
high to take care of the family.
10. People in my family got into
2 3 4 5
trouble with the police.
11. There was someone in my family
2 3 4 5
who helped me feel important or
special.
12. I had to wear dirty clothes.
2 3 4 5
 152

Some- Very
Never Rarely times Often often
When 1 was growing up... true true true true true
13. I lived with different people at
different times (like different 2 3 4 5
relatives or foster families).
14. People in my family hit me so
hard that it left me with bruises or 2 3 4 5
marks.
15. I had sex with an adult or with
someone who was a lot older 2 3 4 5
than me (someone at least 5
years older than me).
16. There was someone in my family
who wanted me to be a success. 2 3 4 5
17. I was punished with a belt, a
board, a cord (or some other hard 2 3 4 5
object.)
18. People in my family said hurtful or
insulting things to me. 2 3 4 5
19. I got hit or beaten so badly that it
was noticed by someone like a 2 3 4 5
teacher, neighbor, or doctor.
20. I believe that I was physically
abused. 2 3 4 5
21. I felt loved. 2 3 4 5
22. I spent time out of the house and
no one knew where I was. 2 3 4 5
23. People in my family felt close to
each other. 2 3 4 5
24. Someone tried to touch me in a
sexual way or tried to make me 2 3 4 5
touch them.
25. Someone threatened to hurt me
or tell lies about me unless I did 2 3 4 5
something sexual with them.
26. People in my family looked out for
 153

each other. 1 2 3 4 5

Some- Very
Never Rarely times Often often
When 1 was growing up ... true true true true true
27. 1 was frightened of being hurt by
someone in my family. 2 3 4 5
28. Someone in my family hated me. 2 3 4 5
29. 1 believe that 1 was emotionally
abused. 2 3 4 5
30. Someone in my family tried to
make me do or watch sexual 2 3 4 5
things.
31. Someone in my family molested 2 3 4 5
me.
32. Someone in my family believed
in me. 2 3 4 5
33. I believe that I was sexually
abused. 2 3 4 5
34. My family was a source of
strength and support. 2 3 4 5
 154

Educational History
This survey asks about your educational history.
Please answer these questions from your years in
elementary and secondary school.
Not Very
difficult difficult
at all
1. How difficult was/is reading
2 3 4 5
for you?
2. How difficult was/is math for
2 3 4 5
you?
3. How difficult was/is
penmanship (writing letters or 2 3 4 5
numbers) for you?
4. How difficult was/is spelling
2 3 4 5
for you?
5. How difficult was/is it for you
2 3 4 5
to write your thoughts on paper?

6. How much do you like school? Not Very

much much
1 2 3 4 5

7. Was more than one language spoken in your home? (1) Yes (0) No
8. Was sign language used in your home? (1) Yes (0) No

9. Do you remember someone saying that you had a learning disability or problem?
(1) Yes fO) No
10. Did/do you attend Special Education classes? (1) Yes (0) No
11. How many hours per day did/do you spend in Special Education (not including
individual/group therapy) classes? 0 *1 *2 *3 *4 *5 *A11 day
12. Did/do you receive help with reading? (1) Yes (0) No
13. Have you been told that you see letters/numbers "backwards"? (1) Yes (0)
14. How often do you WRITE letters/numbers "backwards"?

Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Always

1 2 3 4 5
 155

15. Do you remember someone saying that you had/have a problem with SPEECH?
(1) Yes (0) No
17. Do you remember someone saying that you had/have a problem with MEMORY?
m Yes (0) No
18. Do you remember people saying that they had/have a hard time understanding you when you
spoke? (1) Yes (0) No
19. Did/do you receive help with your speech? (1) Yes (0) No

20. How long have you received help with your speech? Years, and months.

21. How often did/do you feel that you "forgot" words when you were speaking?

Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Always

1 2 3 4 5

Not Very
difficult difficult
at all
22. How much difficulty did/do
you have understanding what 1 2 3 4 5
others were saying to you?
23. How difficult was/is it for you
1 2 3 4 5
to communicate with others?
24. How difficult was/is it for you
to communicate your FEELINGS 1 2 3 4 5
to others?
25. How difficult was/is it for you
to communicate your 1 2 3 4 5
IDEAS/THOUGHTS to others?
26. How difficult was/is it for you
to understand SPOKEN 1 2 3 4 5
directions?
27. How difficult was/is it for you
to understand WRITTEN 1 2 3 4 5
directions?
 156

AAPS

Before the age of 10, how many times had you seen...
over
1-5 6-25 26-50 51-100 101-500 500
Never times times times times times times
1. Naked adults in photographs? 2 .3 4 5 6 7
2. Naked adults in movies? 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Naked adults in person? 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. Naked adults on the web or internet? 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. Naked children in photographs? 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. Naked children in movies? 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. Naked children in person? 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. Naked children on the web or internet? 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. Adults having sex in photographs? 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. Adults having sex in movies? 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. Adults having sex in person? 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. Adults having sex on the web or
internet? 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. Adults forcing adults to have sex in
photographs? 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. Adults forcing adults to have sex in
movies? 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. Adults forcing adults to have sex in
person? 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. Adults forcing adults to have sex on
the web or internet? 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. Adults having sex with children in
photographs? 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. Adults having sex with children in
movies? 2 3 4 5 6 7
19. Adults having sex with children in
person? 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. Adults having sex with children on
the web or internet? 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. Children having sex with children in
photographs? 2 3 4 5 6 7
 157

22. Children having sex with children in

movies? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. Children having sex with children in
person? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

24. Children having sex with children on

the web or internet? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

After the age of 10, how many times have you seen
over
1-5 6-25 26-50 51-100 101-500 500
Never times times times times times times

25. Naked adults in photographs? 0 2 3 4 5 6

26. Naked adults in movies? 0 2 3 4 5 6
27. Naked adults in person? 0 2 3 4 5 6
28. Naked adults on the web or internet? 0 2 3 4 5 6
29. Naked children in photographs? 0 2 3 4 5 6
30. Naked children in movies? 0 2 3 4 5 6
31. Naked children in person? 0 2 3 4 5 6
32. Naked children on the web or internet? 0 2 3 4 5 6
33. Adults having sex in photographs? 0 2 3 4 5 6
34. Adults having sex in movies? 0 2 3 4 5 6
35. Adults having sex in person? 0 2 3 4 5 6
36. Adults having sex on the web or
internet? 0 2 3 4 5 6
37. Adults forcing adults to have sex in
photographs? 0 2 3 4 5 6
38. Adults forcing adults to have sex in
movies? 0 2 3 4 5 6
39. Adults forcing adults to have sex in
person? 0 2 3 4 5 6
40. Adults forcing adults to have sex on
the web or internet? 0 2 3 4 5 6
41. Adults having sex with children in
photographs? 0 2 3 4 5 6

42. Adults having sex with children in 0 2 3 4 5 6

 158

movies?

43. Adults having sex with children in

person? 0 2 3 4 5 6
44. Adults having sex with children on the
web or internet? 0 2 3 4 5 6
45. Children having sex with children in
photographs? 0 2 3 4 5 6
46. Children having sex with children in
movies? 0 2 3 4 5 6
47. Children having sex with children in
person? 0 2 3 4 5 6
48. Children having sex with children on
the web or internet? 0 2 3 4 5 6
 159

The following section asks you to think back to

the time just before you were last arrested. It

might help to think of where you lived, who

your friends were, where you went to school and

what you did with your time before that arrest.

Please answer the following questions while

thinking about the period just before that

arrest.
 160

IPPA
Thank you for agreeing to complete this questionnaire. It asks you about your relationships with importar
people in your life, your mother, your father, and your close friends. Please answer the following questioi
and read the directions to each part carefully. Your time and effort is really appreciated.
Parti
The following statements ask you about your feelings about your mother or the person who has acted as
your mother. If you have more than one person acting as your mother (e.g. a natural mother and a step-
mother) answer the questions for the one you feel has most influenced you.
Please read each statement and put an 'X' next to the ONE number that tells how true the statement is for you now.
Almost Not Very Some- Often Almost
Never or Often True times True True Always or
Never True Always
True
1. My mother respects my feelings. 2 3 4 5
2. I feel my mother does a good job as my
2 3 4 5
mother.
3. I wish I had a different mother. 2 3 4 5
4. My mother accepts me as I am. 2 3 4 5
5. I like to get my mother's point of view
2 3 4 5
on things I am concerned about.
6. I feel it is no use letting my feelings
2 3 4 5
show around my mother.
7. My mother can tell when I'm upset about
2 3 4 5
something.
8. Talking over my problems with my
mother makes me feel ashamed or 2 3 4 5
foolish.
9. My mother expects too much from me. 2 3 4 5
10. I get upset easily around my mother. 2 3 4 5
11. I get upset a lot more than my mother
2 3 4 5
knows about.
12. When we discuss things, my mother
2 3 4 5
cares about my point of view.
13. My mother trusts my judgment. 2 3 4 5
14. My mother has her own problems, so I
2 3 4 5
do not bother her with mine.
15. My mother helps me to understand
2 3 4 5
myself better.
16.1 tell my mother about my problems and
2 3 4 5
troubles.
17.1 feel angry with my mother. 2 3 4 5
18. I do not get much attention from my
2 3 4 5
mother.
19. My mother helps me to talk about my
2 3 4 5
difficulties.
20. My mother understands me. 2 3 4 5
 161

21. When I am angry about something, my

1 2 3 4 5
mother tries to be understanding.
22. I trust my mother. 1 2 3 4 5

Almost Not Very Some- Often Almost

Never or Often True times True True Always or
Never True Always
True
23. My mother doesn't understand what I am
1 2 3 4 5
going through these days.
24. I can count on my mother when I need to
1 2 3 4 5
get something off my chest.
25. If my mother knows something is
1 2 3 4 5
bothering me, she asks me about it.
Part II
This part asks about your feelings about your father, or the man who has acted as your father. If you
have more than one person acting as your father (e.g. natural and step-father) answer the question for the
one you feel has most influenced you.
Almost Not Very Some- Often Almost
Never or Often True times True True Always or
Never True Always
True
1. My father respects my feelings. 2 3 4 5
2. I feel my father does a good job as my
2 3 4 5
father.
3. I wish I had a different father. 2 3 4 5
4. My father accepts me as I am. 2 3 4 5
5. I like to get my father's point of view on
2 3 4 5
things I am concerned about.
6. I feel it is no use letting my feelings
2 3 4 5
show around my father.
7. My father can tell when I'm upset about
2 3 4 5
something.
8. Talking over my problems with my
2 3 4 5
father makes me feel ashamed or foolish.
9. My father expects too much from me. 2 3 4 5
10. I get upset easily around my father. 2 3 4 5
11. I get upset a lot more than my father
2 3 4 5
knows about.
12. When we discuss things, my father cares
2 3 4 5
about my point of view.
13. My father trusts my judgment. 2 3 4 5
14. My father has his own problems, so I do
2 3 4 5
not bother him with mine.
15. My father helps me to understand myself
2 3 4 5
better.
 162

16. I tell my father about my problems and

2 3 4 5
troubles.
17.1 feel angry with my father. 2 3 4 5
18. I do not get much attention from my
2 3 4 5
father.
19. My father helps me to talk about my
2 3 4 5
difficulties.
20. My father understands me. 2 3 4 5

Almost Not Very Some- Often Almost

Never or Often True times True True Always or
Never True Always
True
21. When I am angry about something, my
1 2 3 4 5
father tries to be understanding.
22. I trust my father. 1 2 3 4 5
23. My father doesn't understand what I am
1 2 3 4 5
going through these days.
24. I can count on my father when I need to
1 2 3 4 5
get something off my chest.
25. If my father knows something is
1 2 3 4 5
bothering me, he asks me about it.
Part III
This part asks about your feelings about your relationship with your close friends. Please read each
statement and circle the ONE number that tells how true the statement is for you now.
Almost Not Very Some- Often Almost
Never or Often True times True True Always or
Never True Always
True
1. I like my friends' points of view on
2 3 4 5
things I am concerned about.
2. My friends can tell when I'm upset about
2 3 4 5
something.
3. When we discuss things, my friends care
2 3 4 5
about my point of view.
4. Talking over my problems with friends
2 3 4 5
makes me feel ashamed or foolish.
5. I wish I had different friends. 2 3 4 5
6. My friends understand me. 2 3 4 5
7. My friends encourage me to talk about
2 3 4 5
my difficulties.
8. My friends accept me as I am. 2 3 4 5
9. I feel the need to be in touch with my
2 3 4 5
friends more often.
10. My friends do not understand what I am
2 3 4 5
going through these days.
163
 164

Almost Not Very Some- Often Almost

Never or Often True times True True Always or
Never True Always
True
11. I feel alone or apart when I am with my
1 2 3 4 5
friends.
12. My friends listen to what I have to say. 2 3 4 5
13.1 feel my friends are good friends. 2 3 4 5
14. My friends are easy to talk to. 2 3 4 5
15. When I am angry about something, my
2 3 4 5
friends try to understand.
16. My friends help me to understand myself
2 3 4 5
better.
17. I feel angry with my friends. 2 3 4 5
18.1 can count on my friends when I need to
2 3 4 5
get something off my chest.
19. I trust my friends. 2 3 4 5
20. My friends respect my feelings. 2 3 4 5
21. I get upset a lot more than my friends
2 3 4 5
know about.
22. It seems as if my friends are irritated
2 3 4 5
with me for no reason.
23. I can tell my friends about my problems
2 3 4 5
and troubles.
24. If my friends know something is
2 3 4 5
bothering me, they ask me about it.
 165

MRNI
This set of questions also asks about how you felt about a number of opinions before you
were arrested.
Strongly Disagree Slightly No Slightly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Opinion Agree Agree Agree
2 3 4 5 6 7

1. It is disappointing to learn that a famous athlete 2 3 4 5 6 7

is gay.

2. If necessary a man should sacrifice personal 2 3 4 5 6 7

relationships for career advancement.

3. A man should do whatever it takes to be admired 2 3 4 5 6 7

and respected.

4. A boy should be allowed to quit a game if he is 2 3 4 5 6 7

losing.

5. A man should prefer football to needlecraft. 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. A man should never count on someone else to 2 3 4 5 6 7

get the job done.

7. Men should be allowed to kiss their fathers. 2 3 4 5 6 7

8. A man should not continue a friendship with 2 3 4 5 6 7

another man if he finds out that the man is a
homosexual.

9. Hugging and kissing should always lead to 2 3 4 5 6 7

intercourse.

10. A man must be able to make his own way in the 2 3 4 5 6 7

world.

11. Nobody likes a man who cries in public. 2 3 4 5 6 7

12. It is important for a man to take risks, even if he 2 3 4 5 6 7

might get hurt.

13. Men should make the final decision involving 2 3 4 5 6 7

money.

14. It is important for a man to be good in bed. 2 3 4 5 6 7

15. It is OK for man to ask for help changing a tire. 2 3 4 5 6 7

16. A man should try to win at any sport he 2 3 4 5 6 7

participates in.
 166

17. Men should always be realistic. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

18. One should not be able to tell how a man is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

feeling by looking at his face.

19. A man who takes a long time and has difficulty 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

making decisions will usually not be respected.

20. Men should be allowed to wear bracelets. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

21. A man should not force the issue if another man 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

takes his parking space.

22. In a group, it's up to the man to get things 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

organized and moving ahead.

23. A man should love his sex partner. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

24. It is too feminine for a man to use clear nail 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

polish on his fingernails.

25. Being called "faggot" is one of the worst insults 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

to a man or boy.

26. Jobs like firefighters and electrician should be 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

reserved for men.
Strongly Disagree Slightly No Slightly Strongl)
Disagree Disagree Opinion Agree Agree Agree
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

27. When physically provoked, men should not 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

resort to violence.

28. A man should be able to openly show affection 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

to another man.

29. A man doesn't need to have an erection in order 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

to enjoy sex.

30. When the going gets tough, men should get 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

tough.

31. Housework is a woman's work. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

32. It is not particularly important for a man to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

control his emotions.

33. Men should not be too quick to tell others that 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

they care about them.
 167

34. Boys should prefer to play with trucks rather 2 3 4 5 6 7

then dolls.

35. It's OK for a man to buy a fast, shiny sports car 2 3 4 5 6 7

if he wants, even if he may have to stretch
beyond his budget.

36. A man should never doubt his own judgment. 2 3 4 5 6 7

37. A man shouldn't have to worry about birth 2 3 4 5 6 7

control.

38. A man shouldn't bother with sex unless he can 2 3 4 5 6 7

achieve an orgasm.

39. A man should avoid holding his wife's purse at 2 3 4 5 6 7

all times.

40. There are some subjects which men should not 2 3 4 5 6 7

talk about with other men.

41. Men should always take the initiative when it 2 3 4 5 6 7

comes to sex.

42. Fathers should teach their sons to mask fear. 2 3 4 5 6 7

43. Being a little down in the dumps in not a good 2 3 4 5 6 7

reason for a man to act depressed.

44. A man should always be ready for sex. 2 3 4 5 6 7

45. Boys should not throw baseballs like girls. 2 3 4 5 6 7

46. If a man is in pain, it's better for him to let 2 3 4 5 6 7

people know than to keep it to himself.

47. Men should think things out logically and have 2 3 4 5 6 7

good reasons for what he does.

48. For a man, sex should always be spontaneous, 2 3 4 5 6 7

rather than a pre-planned activity.

49. A man who has no taste for adventure is not very 2 3 4 5 6 7

appealing.

50. It is not important for men to strive to reach the 2 3 4 5 6 7

top.

51. For men, touching is simply the first step toward 2 3 4 5 6 7

sex.
 168

52. Men should be detached in emotionally charged 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

situations.
 169

SRD
This section of the survey deals with some of your behaviors. The information you share here will not
be reported to your treatment team, your families, the police, or the courts. Please give your best
estimate or guess of the exact number of times you've done each thing during the year before you
came to prison. Put a check in the most appropriate box.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Did Once Once Once 2-3 Once 2-3

not a every a times a times
Before 1 w a s do month 2-3 week a day a day
weeks week
arrested 1...

1. Purposely damaged or
destroyed property
belonging to my parents
or other family members. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
2. Purposely damaged or
destroyed other property
that did not belong to me
(not counting family or
work property). (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
3. Stole or tried to steal a
motor vehicle such as a
car or motorcycle. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
4. Stole or tried to steal
something worth more
than $100 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
5. Knowingly bought, sold,
or held stolen goods (or
tried to). (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
6. Purposely set fire to a
building, a car, or other
property (or tried to). (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
7. Carried a hidden
weapon. (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
 170

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Did Once Once Once 2-3 Once 2-3
not do a every a times a day times a
Before 1 w a s month 2-3 week a day
weeks week
arrested 1...
8. Stole or tried to steal things
worth $100 or less. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
9. Attacked someone with the
idea of seriously hurting or
killing that person. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
10. Was paid for having sexual
relations with someone. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
11. Paid someone to have
sexual relations with me. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
12. Was involved in gang
fights. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
13. Sold
marijuana/pot/weed/hash. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
14. Stole money or other
things from my parents or
other members of my
family. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
15. Had or tried to have sexual
relations with someone
against their will. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
16. Hit or threatened to hit one
of my parents. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
 171

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Did not Once Once Once 2-3 Once 2-3
do a every a times a a day times
Before 1 was month 2-3 week week a day
weeks
arrested 1 . . .
17. Hit or threatened to hit
my supervisor or another
employee. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) '(7)
18. Used alcohol or other
liquor. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
19. Smoked cigarettes or used
tobacco products. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
20. Sold hard drugs such as
heroin, cocaine, and LSD. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
21. Used inhalants such as
glue. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
22. Took a vehicle for a ride or
drive without the owner's
permission. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
23. Used
pot/hash/weed/marijuana. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
24. Used force or strong-arm
methods to get money or
things from people. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
25. Was drunk in a public
place. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
26. Used Cocaine, Coke or
Crack. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
27. Broke or tried to break
into a building or vehicle
to steal something or just
look around. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
 172

28. Begged for money or

things from strangers. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Did Once a Once Once 2-3 Once 2-3
not month every a times a day times a
Before 1 was do 2-3 week a day
arrested 1... weeks week
29. Used or tried to use
credit cards without
the owner's
permission. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
30. Made obscene
telephone calls (such
as calling someone
and saying dirty
things). (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
31. Used other types of
drugs. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
32. Engaged in any kind
of occult practices. (If
yes describe below.) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

33. Did you ever use alcohol or drugs in your criminal offenses (e.g. "got them
drunk or high....")?

YES NO DOES NOT APPLY (I did not sexually abuse anyone)

(1) (0)
 173

The following section asks you to think

about your thoughts and behaviors at the
present time. Please answer the following
questions while thinking about how you feel
today.
 174

BIDR
This section asks about several of your thoughts, behaviors and beliefs. If the question does not apply to you, answer the
way you believe you would act if it did apply to you. Read each statement carefully, decide just how much you
disagree or agree with it at the present time, and then put your answer on the answer sheet.
Some-
Not what Very
True True True
1. My first impressions of people
usually turn out to be right. 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. It would be hard for me to break any
of my bad habits. 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. I don't care to know what other
people really think of me. 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. I have not always been honest with
myself. 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. I always know why I like things. 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. When my emotions are aroused, it
biases my thinking. 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. Once I've made up my mind, other
people can seldom change my opinion 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. I am not a safe driver when I exceed
the speed limit. 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. I am fully in control of my own fate. 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. It's hard for me to shut off a
disturbing thought. 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. I never regret my decisions. 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. I sometimes lose out on things
because I can't make up my mind 2 3 4 5 6 7
soon enough.
13. The reason I vote is because my vote
can make a difference. 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. My parents were not always fair
when they punished me. 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. I am a completely rational person. 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. I rarely appreciate criticism. 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. I am very confident of my
judgments. 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. I have sometimes doubted my ability
as a lover. 2 3 4 5 6 7
19. It's alright with me if some people
happen to dislike me. 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. I don't always know the reasons why
I do the things I do. 2 3 4 5 6 7
 175

21 My last romantic partner was perfect

forme 2 3 4 5 6 7

Some-
Not what Very
True True True
i -
22. I sometimes tell lies if I have to. 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. I never cover up my mistakes. 2- 3 4 5 6 7
24. There have been occasions when I
have taken advantage of someone. 2 3 4 5 6 7
25. I never swear. 2 3 4 5 6 7
26. I sometimes try to get even rather
than forgive and forget. 2 3 4 5 6 7
27. I always obey laws, even if I'm
unlikely to get caught. 2 3 4 5 6 7
28. I have said something bad about a
friend behind his/her back. 2 3 4 5 6 7
29. When I hear people talking
privately, I avoid listening. 2 3 4 5 6 7
30. I have received too much change
from a salesperson without telling 2 3 4 5 6 7
him/her.
31. I sometimes stole things when I was
young. 2 3 4 5 6 7
32. I have never dropped litter on the
street. 2 3 4 5 6 7
33. I sometimes drive faster than the
speed limit. 2 3 4 5 6 7
34. I never read sexy books or
magazines. 2 3 4 5 6 7
35. I have done things that I don't tell
other people about. 2 3 4 5 6 7
36. I never take things that don't belong
to me. 2 3 4 5 6 7
37. I have taken sick-leave from work or
school even though I wasn't really 2 3 4 5 6 7
sick.
38. I have never damaged a library book
or store merchandise without 2 3 4 5 6 7
reporting it.
39. I have pretty awful habits. 2 3 4 5 6 7
40. I don't gossip about other people's
business. 2 3 4 5 6 7
 176

41. If I'm in a romantic relationship I

can forget about any problems in my 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
life.
 177

TSC
How often have you experienced each of the following in the last two months?
In the past 2 months I have experienced... Never Often
1. Headaches 0 1L 2 3
2. Insomnia (trouble getting to sleep) 0 1I 2 3
3. Weight loss (without dieting) 0 ]L . 2 3
4. Stomach problems 0 1L 2 3
5. Sexual problems 0 ][ 2 3
6. Feeling isolated from others 0 1I 2 3
7. "Flashbacks" (sudden, vivid, distracting memories) 0 1I 2 3
8. Restless sleep 0 1I 2 3
9. Low sex drive 0 ][ 2 3
10. Anxiety attacks 0 1[ 2 3
11. Sexual over activity (overactive thoughts or masturbation) 0 1[ 2 3
12. Loneliness 0 ][ 2 3
13. Nightmares 0 1[ 2 3
14. "Spacing out" (going away in your mind) 0 1i 2 3
15. Sadness 0 1I 2 3
16. Dizziness 0 1[ 2 3
17. Not feeling satisfied with your sex life 0 ][ 2 3
18. Trouble controlling your temper 0 ]I 2 3
19. Waking up early in the morning and can't get back to sleep 0 11 2 3
20. Uncontrollable crying 0 I 2 3
21. Fear of men 0 1I 2 3
22. Not feeling rested in the morning 0 ]L 2 3
23. Having sex or masturbation that I didn't enjoy 0 I 2 3
24. Trouble getting along with others 0 I 2 3
25. Memory problems 0 I 2 3
26. Desire to physically hurt myself 0 I 2 3
27. Fear of women 0 I 2 3
28. Waking up in the middle of the night 0 I 2 3
29. Bad thoughts or feelings during sex or masturbation 0 I 2 3
30. Passing out 0 I 2 3
31. Feeling that things are unreal 0 I 2 3
32. Unnecessary or over-frequent washing 0 I 2 3
33. Feelings of inferiority (feel less worthwhile than others) 0 I 2 3
34. Feeling tense all the time 0 1 2 3
35. Being confused about my sexual feelings 0 I 2 3
36. Desire to physically hurt others 0 I 2 3
37. Feelings of guilt 0 I 2 3
38. Feelings that I am not always in my body 0 I 2 3
39. Trouble breathing 0 1 2 3
 178

40. Sexual feelings when I shouldn't have them 0 1 2 3

41. Unexpected outbursts of anger 0 1 2 3
42. Feelings of rage and desire to hurt someone 0 1 2 , 3
 179

HAQ
Instructions: These are ways that a person may feel or behave in relation to a staff
person. Consider carefully your relationship with your staff overall and then mark each
statement according to how strongly you agree or disagree. Please mark every question.

Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly

Disagree Agree
Disagree Disagree Agree Agree
1. I feel I can depend upon most of 2 3 4 5 6
the staff.
2. I feel that most of the staff 2 3 4 5 6
understand me.
3. I feel that most of the staff want me 2 3 4 5 6
to achieve my goals.
4. At times I distrust staffs judgment. 2 3 4 5 6
5. I feel I am working together with the 2 3 4 5 6
staff in a joint effort.
6. I believe we have similar ideas about 2 3 4 5 6
the nature of my problems.
7. I generally respect the staffs views 2 3 4 5 6
about me.
8. The procedures used in my therapy 2 3 4 5 6
are not well suited to my needs.
9. I like most of the staff as people. 2 3 4 5 6
10. In most sessions, the staff and I find a
way to work on my problems 2 3 4 5 6
together.
11. The staff relate to me in ways that
slow up the progress of the therapy. 2 3 4 5 6
12. A good relationship has formed with 2 3 4 5 6
my staff.
13. The staff appears to be experienced in 2 3 4 5 6
helping youth.
14. I want very much to work out my 2 3 4 5 6
problems.
15. The staff and I have meaningful 2 3 4 5 6
exchanges.
16. The staff and I sometimes have 2 3 4 5 6
unprofitable exchanges.
17. From time to time we both talk about 2 3 4 5 6
the same important events in my past.
18.1 believe that most of the staff like me 2 3 4 5 6
as a person.
19. At times the staff seems distant. 2 3 4 5 6
 180

CHI

Please answer the following questions. Mark either YES or NO for each question.

I want to grow up because I think things will be better. YES NO

I might as well give up because I can't make things better for myself. YES NO

When things are going badly, I know that they won't be bad all of the time. YES NO

I can imagine what my life will be like when I 'm grown up. YES NO

I have enough time to finish the things I really want to do. YES NO

Someday, I will be good at doing the things that I really care about. YES NO

I will get more of the good things in life than most other kids. YES NO

I don't have good luck and there's no reason to think I will when I grow up. YES NO

All I can see ahead of me are bad things, not good things. YES NO

I don't think I will get what I really want. YES NO

When I grow up, I think I will be happier than I am now. YES NO

Things just won't work out the way I want them to. YES NO

I never get what I want, so it's dumb to want anything. YES NO

I don't think I will have any real fun when I grow up. YES NO

Tomorrow seems unclear and confusing to me. YES NO

I will have more good times than bad times. YES NO

There's no use in really trying to get something I want because I probably YES NO
won't get it.
 181

MACI
True False
1. I would much rather follow someone than be the leader. T F
2. I'm pretty sure I know who I am and what I want in life. T F
3. I don't need to have close friendships like other kids do. T F
4. I often resent doing things other people expect of me. T F
5. I do my very best not to hurt people's feelings. T F
6. I can depend on my parents to be understanding of me. T F
7. Some people think of me as a bit conceited. T F
8. I would never use drugs, no matter what. T F
9. I always try to do what is proper. T F
10.1 like the way I look. T F
11. Although I go on eating binges, I hate the weight I gain. T F
12.Nothing much that happens seems to make me either happy or sad. T F
13.1 seem to have a problem getting along with other teenagers. T F
14.1 feel pretty shy telling people about how I was abused as a child. T F
15.I've never done anything for which I could have been arrested. T F
16.1 think everyone would be better off if I were dead. T F
17.Sometimes, when I am away from home, I begin to feel tense and T F
panicky.
18.1 usually act quickly, without thinking. T F
19.1 guess I'm a complainer who expects the worst to happen. T F
20.It is not unusual to feel lonely and unwanted. T F
 182

21 .Punishment never stopped me from doing whatever I wanted. T F

22.Drinking seems to have been a problem for several members of T F
my family.
23.1 like to follow instructions and do what others expect of me. T F
24.1 seem to fit in right away with any group of new kids I meet. T F
25.So little of what I have done has been appreciated, by others. T F
26.1 hate the fact that I don't have the looks or brains I wish I had. T F
27.1 like it at home. T F
28.1 sometimes scare other kids to get them to do what I want. T F
29.Although people tell me I'm thin, I still feel overweight. T F
True False
30. When I have a few drinks I feel more sure of myself. T F
31 .Most people are better looking than I am. T F
32.1 often fear I'm going to panic or faint when I'm in a crowd. T F
33.1 sometimes force myself to vomit after eating a lot. T F
34.1 often feel as if I'm floating around, sort of lost in life. T F
35.Most other teenagers don't seem to like me. T F
36.When I have a choice, I prefer to do things alone. T F
37.Becoming involved in other people's problems is a waste of time. T F
38.1 often feel that others do not want to be friendly to me. T F
39.1 don't care much what other kids think of me. T F
40.1 used to get so stoned that I did not know what I was doing. T F
41.1 don't mind telling people something they won't like hearing. T F
 183

42.1 see myself as falling short of what I'd like to be. T F

43.Things in my life just go from bad to worse. T F
44. As soon as I get the impulse to do something, I act on it. T F
45.I've never been called a juvenile delinquent. T F
46.I'm often my own worst enemy. T F
47.Very few things or activities seem to give me pleasure. T F
48.1 always think of dieting, even when people say I'm underweight. T F
49.1 find it hard to feel sorry for people who are always worried T F
about things.
50.It is good to have a routine for doing most things. T F
51.1 don't think I have as much interest in sex as others my age. T F
52.1 don't see anything wrong with using others to get what I want.
T F
53.1 would rather be almost anyplace except home. T F
54.1 sometimes get so upset that I want to hurt myself seriously. T F
55.1 don't think I was sexually molested when I was a young child. T F
56.1 am a dramatic and showy sort of person. T F
57.1 can hold my beer or liquor better than most of my friends T F
58.Parents and teachers are too hard on kids who don't follow the T F
rules.
True False
59.1 like to flirt a lot. T F
6O.T0 see someone suffering doesn't bother me. T F
61.1 don't seem to have much feeling for others. T F
 184

62.1 enjoy thinking about sex. T F

63.1 worry a great deal about being left alone. T F
64.1 often feel sad and unloved. T F
65.I'm supposed to be thin, but I feel my thighs and backside are T F
much too big.
66.1 often deserve it when others put me down. T . F
67.People put pressure on me to do more than is fair. T F
68.1 think I have a good body. T F
69.1 feel left out of things socially. T F
70.1 make friends easily. T F
71.I'm a somewhat scared and anxious person. T F
72.1 hate to think about some of the ways I was abused as a child. T F
73.I'm no different from lots of kids who steal things now and then. T F
74.1 prefer to act first and think about it later. T F
75.I've gone through periods when I smoked pot several times a T F
week.
76.Too many rules get in the way of doing what I want. T F
77. When things get boring, I like to stir up some excitement. T F
78.1 will sometimes do something cruel to make someone unhappy. T F
79.1 spend a lot of time worrying about my future. T F
80.1 often feel I'm not worthy of the nice things in my life. T F
81.1 sort of feel sad when I see someone who's lonely. T F
82.1 eat little in front of others; then I stuff myself in private. T F
 185

83.My family is always yelling and fighting. T F

84.1 sometimes feel very unhappy with who I am. T F
85.1 don't seem to enjoy being with people. T F
86.1 have talents that other kids wish they had. T F
87.1'm very uncomfortable with people unless I'm sure they really T F
. like me.
88.Killing myself may be the easiest way of solving my problems. T F
True False
89.1 sometimes get confused or upset when people are nice to me. T F
90.Drinking really seems to help me when I'm feeling down. T F
91.1 rarely look forward to anything with much pleasure. T F
92.1'm very good at making excuses to get out of trouble. T F
93.It is very important that children learn to obey their elders. T F
94. Sex is enjoyable. T F
95.No one really cares if I live or die. T F
96.We should respect our elders and not think we know better. T F
97.1 sometimes get pleasure by hurting someone physically. T F
98.1 often feel lousy after something good has happened to me. T F
99.1 don't think people see me as an attractive person. T F
lOO.Socially, I'm a loner and I don't mind it. T F
101.Almost anything I try comes easy to me. T F
102.There are times when I feel that I'm a much younger person than T F
I actually am.
 186

103.1 like being the center of attention. T F

104.1f I want to do something, I just do it without thinking of what
might happen. T F
105.I'm terribly afraid that no matter how thin I get, I will start to T F
gain weight if I eat.
106.1 won't get close to people because I'm afraid they may make T F
fun of me.
107.More and more often I have thought of ending my life. T F
108.1 sometimes put myself down just to make someone else feel
better. T F
109.1 get very frightened when I think of being all alone in the world. T F
1 lO.Good things just don't last. T F
I l l .I've had a few run-ins with the law. T F
112J'd like to trade bodies with someone else. T F
113.There are times when I wish I were much younger again. T F
114.1 have not seen a car in the last ten years. T F
115.Other people my age seem more sure than I am of who they are T F
and what they want.
116.Thinking about sex confuses me much of the time. T F
True False
117.1 do what I want without worrying about its effect on others. T F
118.Lots of things that look good today will turn out bad later. T F
119.Others my age never seem to call me to get together with them. T F
120.There have been times when I could not get through the day T F
without some pot.
 187

121.1 make my life worse than it has to be. T F

122.1 prefer being told what to do rather than having to decide for T F
myself.
123.1 have tried to commit suicide in the past. T F
124.1 go on eating binges a couple times a week. T F
125.Lately, little things seem to.depress me. T F
126.1 flew across the Atlantic 30 times last year. T F
127.There are times when I wish I were someone else. T F
128.1 don't mind pushing people around to show my power. T F
129J'm ashamed of some terrible things adults did to me when I was T F
young.
130.1 try to make everything I do as perfect as possible. T F
131.1 am pleased with the way my body has developed. T F
132.1 often get frightened when I think of the things I have to do. T F
133.Lately, I feel jumpy and nervous almost all the time. T F
134.1 used to try hard drugs to see what effect they'd have. T F
135.1 can charm people into giving me almost anything I want. T F
136.Many other kids get breaks I don't get. T F
137.People did things to me sexually when I was too young to T F
understand.
138.1 often keep eating to the point that I feel sick. T F
139.1 will make fun of someone in a group just to put them down. T F
140.1 don't like being the person I've become. T F
 188

141.1 seem to make a mess of the good things that come my way. T F
142.Although I want to have friends, I have almost none. T F
143.1 am glad that feelings about sex have become a part of my life T F
now.
144.1'm willing to starve myself to be even thinner than I am. T F
,
True False
145.1'm very mature for my age and know what I want to do in life. T F
146.1n many ways I feel very superior to most people. T F
147.My future seems hopeless. T F
148.My parents have had a hard time keeping me in line. T F
149.When I don't get my way, I quickly lose my temper. T F
150.1 often have fun doing certain unlawful things. T F
151.1 guess I depend too much on others to be helpful to me. T F
152.When we're having a good time, my friends and I can get pretty T F
drunk.
153.1 feel lonely and empty most of the time. T F
154.1 feel pretty aimless and don't know where I am going. T F
155.Telling lies is a pretty normal thing to do. T F
156.1've given thought to how and when I might commit suicide. T F
157.1 enjoy starting fights. T F
158.There are times when nobody at home seems to care about me. T F
159.lt is good to have a regular way of doing things so as to avoid T F
mistakes.
 189

160.1 probably deserve many of the problems I have.

Thank you for your time and effort!