that desistance is not an introverted psychological process, but a social activity; again, Willis et al (2010, p 548) locate the importance of social and psychological strengths in achieving aspirations: ‘All human beings require help from other people to acquire and utilize the psychological capabilities and social resources necessary to realize their aspirations whether this involves completing job training, participating in social activities, or remaining crime free’.
McNeill (2012) identifies three separate perspectives on desistance that are increasingly becoming integrated in desistance theory: (1) the significance of age and maturation; (2) life transitions and social bonds; and (3) personal and social identity. Key for the sex offender in making this transition away from offending is community support because, as Willis et al (2010, p 548) note, the move from a treatment environment into the community is difficult. Desistance-based research has informed the development of the Good Lives Model of rehabilitation that is discussed elsewhere in this book (see Chapter Six).
Theological understandings
In the ‘West’, the (Christian) Church defined and dealt with sex crimes until the 19th century (Thomas, 2011, pp 39–59). Kirby (2013) describes the relevant biblical law (Leviticus, ch 20, verses 13–16) concerning sexual behaviour. A prime concern of 19th-century legislators in the UK was ‘vice’ and ‘social purity’ (Thomas, 2011); concerns with obscene publications (Act of 1857) and prostitution (campaigns of the Social Purity Movement) featured prominently. The language of the Bible and Christian morality defined and framed the laws relating to sex crimes in the 19th and 20th centuries; sex offences were seen as acts that contravened the dominant moral code. Acts were criminal because they contravened biblical stipulations about family relations (incest) or other men’s ‘property’ (rape), or because they contravened heteronormative standards of ‘decency’ (indecent assault and gross indecency). Perhaps, partly, because of the harsh sanctions stipulated against victims in Leviticus chapter 20, there was no victim perspective involved in the framing of this legislation. In England and Wales, ‘indecent assault’ and ‘gross indecency’ remained sex crimes until the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (SOA). In many ways, such nomenclature implies that ‘decency’ is the main victim of the crime – decency has been offended – and that the people who were sexually harmed by these acts (the real victims) were an incidental element in the offence. In England and Wales, the SOA revised the terminology and gave victims an active presence in the proceedings.
The law
This section refers to the law as it applies to England and Wales; it does not pretend to provide an exhaustive account (for such an account, see Stevenson et al, 2004; Gerry et al, 2014). Furthermore, legal penalties prescribed by law are discussed in Chapter Three. The SOA announced itself as a ‘comprehensive review of sexual offences’, with three aims: (1) to modernise the catalogue of sexual offences; (2) to render them appropriate for the 20th century; and (3) to protect individuals from sexual crime. The focus of the Act is very clearly on behaviours, offenders and victims. Offences are not described in terms of breaches of moral codes or of decency (with the exception of ss 45–46); consideration is given to the relationship between the victim and the offender (eg familial, breach of trust), and there is a greater awareness of how trafficking links to prostitution, and how both are serious offences against vulnerable victims. The range and nature of crimes identified by the SOA are listed in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Sexual Offences Act 2003 (England and Wales), offences listed by section
In highlighting the SOA, we draw attention to the current focus on offences and offending behaviours, rather than ‘decency’. Sex offence law differs across national jurisdictions; however, one issue central to the operation of sex offence law that is internationally common is ‘attrition’. Jehle (2012, p 151), in his study of attrition in relation to sex offences in Europe, defines attrition as ‘the loss of cases from the level of police to the level of conviction’. We suggest that the ‘loss of cases’ starts before crimes are reported to the police, in that many harmful sexual acts are never reported to authorities. Thereafter, ‘cases’ are lost during investigation, at the decision to prosecute and at court. These processes differ across countries, but attrition is an international phenomenon (Kelly and Lovett, 2009; Jehle, 2012). Approximately, only 10% of cases reported to the police result in a criminal conviction (Kelly et al, 2005; Kelly and Lovett, 2009; Jehle, 2012). Figure 2.2 illustrates the process of attrition in relation to sex offences.
The flow chart in Figure 2.2 outlines key issues in the prevalence, identification and processing of sexual crime. It indicates the numbers involved and how attrition works, and illustrates the limitations of relying on actual criminal convictions as an indicator of prevalence.
Biomedical understandings
Medical understandings of sex crimes are rooted in a socio-biological understanding of human behaviour. This generally assumes an evolutionary perspective that locates sex crimes within a context of the survival of the species. Notions of ‘natural selection’ predominate (see Thornhill and Palmer, 2001), and aggressive sexual conduct is seen as an evolutionary adaptation to ensure the continuation of the species (for a fuller exploration of this perspective, see Thornhill and Palmer, 2000; for feminist critiques of the evolutionary perspective, see Travis, 2003).
The medical perspectives of the 19th and 20th centuries were initially informed by the work of Freud, and the sexologists Krafft-Ebing and Havelock-Ellis (but also later by the work of Kinsey, Masters and Johnson). The sexologists adopted an evolutionary perspective of human sexual behaviour. Krafft-Ebing’s work Psychopathia Sexualis (2011/1886) was first published in 1886 and the 12th and final edition (written by Krafft-Ebing) was published in 1903. The book was influential in both the legal and medical professions, and it established the framework through which sexual behaviours (and sex crimes) were interpreted (for bibliographic information, see Ooesterhuis, 2012). Ooesterhuis (2012, p 134) describes the changing focus of European psychiatry at the end of the 19th century:
[the] main thrust was that in many cases, irregular sexual behaviour should not be regarded as sin and crime but as symptoms of pathology. Since mental and nervous disorders often diminished responsibility, most sex offenders should not be punished but treated as patients.
Figure 2.2: Flow of sexual offence cases from victimisation to conviction
With this shift, Oosterhuis (2012, p 134) notes the growth of diagnostic terminology: ‘homosexual’ and ‘heterosexual’ preceded more specialist terms such as ‘exhibitionism’, ‘voyeurism’, ‘fetishism’, ‘paedophilia’, ‘bestiality’, ‘sadism’ and ‘masochism’; however, ‘paraphilia’ is a key catch-all term. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED, 2015) defines ‘paraphilia’ as ‘Sexual desires regarded as perverted or irregular; spec. attraction to unusual or abnormal sexual objects or practices; an instance of this’. The words ‘perverted’, ‘irregular’, ‘unusual’ and ‘abnormal’ clearly establish the nature of paraphilia against an implied (heterosexual) norm; moreover, this exceptional character is compounded by the word ‘disorder’. The naming of ‘paraphilic disorders’ is, however, in some cases, a controversial process.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) was first published in 1952. Now in its fifth iteration (APA, 2013), it is the diagnostic ‘manual’ for psychiatry in North America, and is influential across the ‘Western’ world. DSM 5 identifies eight paraphilic disorders: exhibitionistic disorder; fetishistic disorder; frotteuristic disorder; paedophilic disorder; sexual masochism disorder; sexual sadism disorder; transvestic disorder; and voyeuristic
