Are Civilly Detained and Committed Sexually Violent Persons Released After Age 60 Low Risk?

• Published date: 01 July 2021
• DOI: 10.1177/0093854820972448
• Date: 01 July 2021
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2021, Vol. 48, No. 7, July 2020, 981 –998.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820972448

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2020 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

981

ARE CIVILLY DETAINED AND COMMITTED

SEXUALLY VIOLENT PERSONS RELEASED

AFTER AGE 60 LOW RISK?

GINA AMBROZIAK

RACHEL E. KAHN

JAMES C. MUNDT

Sand Ridge Research Unit

KERRY L. KEISER

Sand Ridge Research Unit

Innovenn, Inc.

DAVID THORNTON

Forensic Assessment, Training, & Research, LLC

Older age is a well-established protective factor against sexual recidivism. However, research on the effects of aging in

individuals considered for civil commitment as sexually violent persons (SVPs) is limited. The current study investigated 53

such individuals released after age 60: 15 were released following dismissal of the civil commitment petition, and 38 were

discharged following civil commitment. Recidivism outcomes, including details of the release environment, were examined

and the groups were compared on recidivism risk and age-related factors. The sexual recidivism rate across both groups was

7.5% over an average follow-up of about 9 years. The rate of sexually violent offenses was 3.8%. Results suggest that age-

related protective effects apply to older SVPs. However, the groups differed in total time institutionalized and release environ-

ments. Findings highlight the potential impact of release type and environments on observed recidivism rates. Risk

management implications for older individuals released from SVP programs are considered.

Keywords: sexually violent persons; civil commitment; recidivism; risk; age; supervision

Aging is associated with decreased criminal behavior, and sexual offending is no excep-

tion (Farrington, 1986; Hanson, 2002). The mitigating effect of aging for sexual recidi-

vism has been studied for decades (e.g., Barbaree & Blanchard, 2008; Hanson & Bussiere,

1998; Thornton, 2006). In a large multisite study, individuals with a history of sexual

offending released over age 60 had a recidivism rate of just 3.8%, whereas the overall rate

across all age bands was 17.5% (Hanson, 2002). Consequently, the relevance of an indi-

vidual’s age at release has been emphasized in actuarial assessments of sexual reoffense

AUTHORS’ NOTE: The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those

of the Wisconsin Department of Health Services. Correspondence concerning this article should be

addressed to Gina Ambroziak, Sand Ridge Research Unit, 301 Troy Drive, Building 14, Madison, WI 53704;

e-mail: gina.ambroziak@dhs.wisconsin.gov.

972448CJBXXX10.1177/0093854820972448Criminal Justice and BehaviorAmbroziak et al. / SEXUALLY VIOLENT PERSONS RELEASED AFTER AGE 60

research-article2020

982 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

risk. In the original Static-99 (Hanson & Thornton, 1999), the age item consisted of two age

categories: individuals released prior to age 25 and those released after. Subsequent research

found this dichotomization overestimated recidivism risk for individuals released after age

60. Age-related scoring criteria were revised for the Static-99R, substantially improving

recidivism estimates associated with release after age 60, even after controlling for other

static risk factors (Helmus et al., 2012).

Roughly, 85% of individuals released after their 60th birthday fell into the low risk

Static-99R category in the Helmus et al. study. This is relevant because aging individuals

from highly select samples, such as those considered for civil commitment as sexually vio-

lent persons (SVPs), may manifest higher risk for reoffending than individuals representa-

tive of routine normative samples. Potential differences between older individuals with

more recent histories of sexual offending (due to release after serving their index offense

sentences) and those released at older ages following lengthier periods of institutionaliza-

tion (due to extended confinement under civil commitment laws) have not been examined.

Protective effects of advanced age at the time of release may, or may not, apply to older

individuals identified as SVPs warranting extended confinement under civil commitment

statutes.

SVP CIVIL COMMITMENT

In the 1990s, many states enacted modern civil commitment statutes to manage and treat

individuals at a high risk to reoffend due to predisposing mental disorders (Meloy et al.,

2007). Individuals committed under such statutes are referred to as Sexually Violent

Persons/Predators. As of 2019, nearly 5,000 individuals were civilly committed as SVPs

across 16 programs that responded to an annual survey of SVP programs (Schneider et al.,

2019). Variations in structure and statutory criteria exist among programs, but civil commit-

ment as an SVP typically requires three criteria to be met: (a) history of a qualifying sexual

offense, (b) diagnosis of a mental disorder that predisposes the individual to offend sexu-

ally, and (c) a high likelihood of reoffending sexually. In Wisconsin, the statutory threshold

is “more likely than not to reoffend” and is operationally defined as a reoffense risk greater

than 50%. Multistage procedures are used to screen and manage individuals identified as

possible SVPs. Initial processes cast a wide net, considering all individuals with qualifying

offenses. Predisposing mental disorders and reoffense risks are evaluated at subsequent

stages, narrowing the number identified as potentially meeting commitment criteria (Sandler

& Freeman, 2017). Typically less than 3% of individuals initially screened are civilly com-

mitted (e.g., Boccaccini et al., 2009).

Use of systematic screening procedures and strict statutory criteria identify individuals

for SVP commitment who are distinguishable from others with past histories of sexual

offenses in notable ways. Consideration for SVP commitment is often based on factors

like high actuarial risk scores and indicators of sexual deviance (Boccaccini et al., 2009;

Freeman & Sandler, 2012; Levenson, 2004; Lu et al., 2015). Paraphilic disorders are

prevalent in SVP populations (Elwood et al., 2010; Levenson, 2004) and may be indica-

tive of entrenched traits that are less amenable to protective aging effects (Diagnostic and

Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [5th ed.; DSM-5]; American Psychiatric

Association [APA], 2013; Fazio et al., 2017; Seto, 2012). Compared with other sexual

offending samples, individuals committed under SVP statutes have high densities of