Applying Developmental Criminology to Law: Reconsidering Juvenile Sex Offenses

• DOI: 10.3818/JRP.14.1.2012.117
• Published date: 01 June 2012
• Date: 01 June 2012
• Subject Matter: Special Issue on Evidence-Based Policy and Practice





*



ApplyingDevelopmentalCriminologytoLaw: 

 ReconsideringJuvenileSexOffenses

Patrick H Tolan

Tammi Walker

N. Dickon Reppucci

University of Virginia

* Abstract

In this article we apply a developmental psychology analysis to sex offender laws and

policies for adolescents to examine how such laws and policies, derived primarily from

downward extension of adult criminal predatory sexual offender statutes and policies,

serve the early identif‌ication of predators, constraint of such behavior, and/or engage-

ment in rehabilitation. This focus is framed within advances in the past 20 years in the

understanding of neurobiology and the social development of adolescence and in the

understanding of the makeup of the population potentially coming under juvenile sex

offender regulations. We f‌ind a signif‌icant mismatch between the prevailing laws and

policies and the scientif‌ic knowledge about adolescents’ development and the intended

service to public safety. We provide suggestions from the attending empirical knowl-

edge for increasing differentiation in the understanding of and treatment of adolescents

and adult offenders. We also suggest heterogeneity, or subgroup differences, within the

adolescent population now considered offenders are an important contributor to the

mismatch. We discuss the benef‌its of structuring policies and laws so they are grounded

in a developmental understanding of behavior, which will likely lead to a reduction

in recidivism and an increase in public safety. Similarly, important research efforts to

shore up understanding are proposed.

JUSTICE RESEARCH AND POLICY, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2012

© 2012 Justice Research and Statistics Association

Sp e c i a l iS S u e o n ev i d e n c e -Ba S e d po l i c y a n d pr a c t i c e

P



Sex offender registries have existed in this country in some capacity since the 1940s

(

Garf‌inkle, 2003). They were initially used as a means for law enforcement off‌i-

cials to track adults convicted of violent sexual offenses, but in the late 1980s and

the early 1990s the character and purpose of sex offender registries changed in

reaction to a set of shocking high-prof‌ile child rapes and murders. The registries

were established as a central approach to sex-offender management. Registry use

and focus were expanded in scope and intent to include those convicted of non-

violent offenses and juveniles. Additionally, intensive accounts by the media of

rare crimes with a sexual component promoted the belief that increased registry

use and public notif‌ication would protect children through increased awareness

of the whereabouts of offenders, and thus inhibit recidivism. These expectations

led to the establishment of community notif‌ication laws. Community notif‌ication

laws vary greatly from state to state, but essentially require law enforcement of-

f‌icials to register convicted sex offenders and make certain identifying information

available to the public.

In 2006, Congress passed the Sex Offender Registration and Notif‌ication Act

(SORNA; 42 U.S.C. §16911 et seq. [2011]), legislation intended to standardize the

states’ varied registration and community notif‌ication laws. The legislation man-

dates that all states place convicted sex offenders, including juveniles aged 14 or

older, on an online registry available to the public. While intended to improve con-

sistency of information, aid in tracking offenders across jurisdictions, and increase

public awareness and safety, the minimally debated and swiftly passed act brought

substantial consequences that were likely not intended. Accordingly, subsequent

discussion has focused on whether this legislation effectively balances protection

of the public with the criminal processing rights accorded all offenders as well as

the specif‌ic requirements for registration. This discussion has been particularly

active in regard to adolescents because of the recognition that much adolescent

criminal behavior may not ref‌lect patterned habit, but may be impulsive and due

to immature judgment capabilities (Tolan, 2002). Juveniles are less mature, are

more vulnerable to external pressure, and have less fully formed characters than

adults (Brown & Larson, 2009; Eisenberg, Morris, McDaniel, & Spinrad, 2009).

Even among those committing serious offenses and showing potential for repeat

offending, juveniles may be less culpable than adults (Scott & Steinberg, 2008).

Additionally, juvenile sex offenders are a heterogeneous group making it diff‌icult

to identify those few who will persist in sexual offending as adults. SORNA’s reg-

istration requirements, by focusing only on those convicted of sexual offenses, will

capture those convicted juveniles who as a group are at low risk of sexual reof-

fending, and would not capture non-convicted juveniles who may be at high risk

of sexual offending. In so doing it may be that the very thing SORNA proposes to

do—protect the public’s safety—will be compromised.

The purpose of this article is to use a legal and developmental psychology

framework to examine the fairness and effectiveness of SORNA as it applies to

adolescents. The intent is for this discourse along with the suggested modif‌ica-