THUR, Oct 7 \ 11.30-13.30 \ Psychopathology, Volition & Biology

053
A COMPARISON OF DEVELOPMENTAL AND BEHAVIOURAL FACTORS IN SEX OFFENDERS, CONTROLS AND SEXUAL HOMICIDE OFFENDERS

Llian Alys, Clare J Wilson
University of Kent at Canterbury, England
John Clarke, Peter Toman
New South Wales Police, Australia & Sex Offender Treatment and Assessment Programme, Adelaide, Australia
la21@kent.ac.uk

Marshall and Barbaree (1990) proposed an integrated theory of the aetiology of sex offenders. This approach integrates theories and research on biological, sociological and psychological factors which may play a role in the development of sex offending. The aim of this study was to examine in light of Marshall and Barbaree's theory, the perceived developmental and behavioural experiences of a sample of sex offenders. The study sought to compare their responses with a control group's, to see whether these experiences are equally prevalent in populations other than sex offenders. Burgess, Hartman, Ressler, Douglas and McCormack (1986) proposed a motivational model of sexual homicide which discusses psychosocial and developmental factors similar to those included in Marshall and Barbaree's integrated theory of sex offending. As such, a sample of sexual homicide offenders was included to examine whether these offenders are similar to the sex offenders who do not kill. Participants completed a Developmental History and Adulthood Behaviours questionnaire. 20 male sex offenders in a Sex Offender Treatment and Assessment Programme were compared with 20 male students and 20 male incarcerated sexual homicide offenders. In general, more of the sexual homicide offenders reported the experiences than both sex offenders and controls. The percentages of the sex offenders to report these experiences tended to be more similar to the controls' than the sexual homicide offenders', and in some cases the frequencies of the control group were higher than the sex offenders'. Possible explanations for the findings and their implications are discussed.

054
ARE CHILD MOLESTERS REALLY DIFFERENT? A CRITICAL REAPPRAISAL OF THE METHODOLOGICAL STATUS OF CHILD MOLESTER RESEARCH

Steven Feelgood, Jürgen Hoyer
Dresden University of Technology, Berlin, Germany
steven.feelgood@arcor.de

Exact defining and operationalizing of the categories under study delivers the basis of scientific endeavour and determines the impact of its findings. Although clinical psychology and psychiatry both have developed valid psychological, psychometric, and psychopathological categories, sexual offender research often refers to more simple categories, namely, types of offences. The present study analyses to what extent empirical child molester research used criminological (offences) versus psychopathological categories, and discusses the methodological consequences of both strategies.
Based on a systematic PsycInfo search, 659 empirical studies on child molesters from 1961 to 2004 were analysed with regard to the categories and diagnostic procedures used. The search terms molest* and pedophil* were utilized..
The majority of studies used a grouping procedure based on an offence related criterion (child molesters vs. others), others used idiosyncratic (although often empirically derived) typologies, whereas only a few referred to categorizing and valid methodology developed in clinical psychology and psychiatry.
Methodological procedures used in sexual offender research differ from those in related sciences such as clinical psychology or psychiatry. Severe critical consequences of this approach are discussed with regard to comparability of studies, heterogeneity of study groups, theory development, and, particularly, the interpretability of sexual offender treatment research.

055
DECISION-MAKING ABOUT THE NOTION OF SEX OFFENDER VOLITIONAL IMPAIRMENT IN LEGAL CONTEXTS

Cynthia Calkins Mercado, Ph.D., M.L.S.
Monash University, Clayton, Australia
Cynthia.Mercado@med.monash.edu.au, cc_mercado@yahoo.com

The Kansas v. Hendricks (1997) decision, in which the United States Supreme Court authorized post-sentence civil commitment for certain sex offenders, appeared to have been constitutionally legitimized by limiting the class of offenders eligible for this special form of civil commitment to those who are "unable to control" their dangerousness. Similarly, the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Bill (2003) in Queensland, Australia provides for the preventive detention of sex offenders who are “incapable of exercising proper control over their sexual instincts.” Unfortunately, neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor the Queensland legislators chose to elucidate what they meant by this long-confused notion of volitional impairment.
Given the impact an ill-defined notion may have on sexual predator decision-making, this study sought to examine factors that legal professionals, psychologists, and jurors deem relevant to a determination of sex offender volitional impairment. Participants, who were randomly assigned to a sexual predator commitment or an insanity hearing context, read a series of 16 vignettes which described a pedophilic offender and included a combination of variables that may be relevant to decisions about volitional impairment. After reading the vignettes, participants made judgments about ability to control conduct, mental disorder, and likelihood of future violence.
Results suggest that participants across groups considered verbalization of control, history of sexual violence, and the context of the hearing as highly relevant to determinations of volitional impairment, though results suggest uncertainty with regard to the importance of planning an offence. Implications of these findings are discussed.

056
TWO ENDOCRINE STUDIES OF ADULT MALE SEX OFFENDERS

Lea H. Studer, A. Scott Aylwin, & John R. Reddon
Phoenix Program, Alberta Hospital Edmonton
lea.studer@amhb.ab.ca

This paper reports findings of two studies examining results of endocrine tests on convicted adult male sex offenders. As part of a routine battery of tests (serum testosterone, prolactin, FSH, LH, and sex hormone binding globulin) on new admissions to the Phoenix Program, interesting endocrine anomalies were observed. Study 1) A sample of 245 offenders was separated by race and testosterone levels were examined. After controlling for BMI and age, mean serum testosterone levels among 192 Caucasians and 53 North American Indians revealed a statistically significant difference of 22.3 nmol/L vs. 26.6 nmol/L respectively (p<.0005). Study 2) In a sample of 503 successive admissions to the voluntary inpatient sex offender treatment program at Alberta Hospital Edmonton, serum prolactins were obtained. It was noted that a substantial number of patients were displaying a prolactin level above the normal range. According to the normal distribution curve, the number of people showing a prolactin level greater than 21 should be only 2.5% of the adult male population. In this sample, fully 10.3% of the men showed an elevated prolactin level, ranging as high as 41.0 ug/l. None of these individuals had clinical manifestations of prolactinoma. Implications of these findings and further research questions will be discussed.