Determining Sexual Offender Profiles From Life Trajectories

Abstract

To study qualitatively the development of a heteroaggressive behavior, we applied retrospective analytical method based on categorization of life events. The aim of this study was to establish the life trajectories of sexual offenders through interviews with second sources: the inmate’s relatives and psychologists. The life trajectories of incarcerated sexual offenders were retraced to build individual life charts. These life charts grouped individual life events into four main domains: health, life events, the relational sphere, and the judicial and prison sphere. In a sample of 40 inmate participants, four different profiles of sex offenders and therefore life trajectories were identified according to the abovementioned domains: (a) “Early life events and behavior disorders” (n = 14), (b) “Abandonment issues” (n = 4), (c) “Behavior and socioaffective disorders” (n = 9), and (d) “Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness” (n = 13). Expert judges classified the life trajectories with satisfactory interjudge agreement (k = 0.70). This research has clinical implications for integrating different life events into developmental trajectories and focusing psychological support for the individual.

Keywords

life trajectories sexual offender profiles informants

Introduction

Many studies have tended to identify the profiles of sexual offenders¹ according to the dangerousness or recidivism potential (Brouillette-Alarie & Hanson, 2015), the types of therapies offered to sexual offenders (Glickman, Lemere, & Smith, 2013), the types of mental processes associated with the act and in connection with feelings of loneliness, hostility and sexual fantasies (DiGiorgio-Miller, 2007), or the nature of the transgressive sexual behavior (e.g., Finkelhor’s precondition theory of 1984 about “child sexual abusers”).

Within the context of typologies centered on the type of sexual aggression and the ages of the victims, Knight (1988) suggested a typology of the aggressors based on the degree of fixation (sexual attraction for children and its importance) and the social competence of the criminal. This model was later improved by adding an evaluation of the significance of the link to the child and the level of violence perpetrated in the act (Knight, Carter, & Prentky, 1989). In addition to such classifications based on the transgressive sexual behavior, other risk factors for the development of sexual offender profiles have been identified but not integrated into these models.

Most of these studies focused on only some aspects of sexual offenses and did not consider the development of these factors and their role in sexual assault (Grady, Levenson, & Bolder, 2017; Lussier, 2017; Ward & Siegert, 2002). Sexual assault could result from dysfunctional mechanisms at the relational, emotional, sexual, and cognitive levels, which could be influenced by other acquired biological, cultural, or environmental factors of vulnerability (Ducro & Pham, 2017). Thus, risk factors could continuously accumulate and lead to the act, as suggested by the integrated theory of sexual offending (ITSO; Ward & Beech, 2006), which provides an overview of the risk factors associated with the act. In this model, the sexual assault would correspond to the culmination of a set of risk factors (genetic, psychological, contextual, and experiential) that interact with each other. Certain factors of the ITSO model have been studied separately in different research. The first factor concerns the mental health of aggressors and corresponds to psychopathological and psychiatric risk factors. Senon and Manzanera (2008) reported that 1% to 5% of sex offenders exhibit a psychiatric pathology, in particular, psychosis and mood disorders. These disorders may be associated with comorbidities such as substance abuse (Moroge, Paul, Milan, Perez, & Pilard, 2014). In addition, compared with perpetrators of nonsexual assaults, sex offenders exhibit more personality disorders such as schizoid, obsessive-compulsive characteristics, and an avoidant personality (Fazel, Hope, Donnell, & Jacoby, 2002). Moreover, a negative personal and family history (Moroge et al., 2014; O’Toole & Jeglic, 2014) are thought to affect the individual’s development (development of an insecure anxious attachment, disorders of behavioral or emotional capacities of regulation, disorders of capacities of mentalization) and are factors that contribute to a vulnerability to psychopathological disorders (Schneck, Bowers, & Turkson, 2012). Another factor concerns socioaffective and relationship abilities (relationship and contextual dimension) and, in particular, impairment in emotional processes. From this perspective, a lack of empathy (Hanson, 2003; Ward & Durrant, 2013) has been identified, not only in determining the emotions of others but also in perceiving nonconsent and the consequences of their own actions on the victim. This lack of empathy implies relationship difficulties and a feeling of loneliness (Ward, Keenan, & Hudson, 2000), which could lead to social isolation.

In addition to these two main risk factors, the aggressive act can be associated with negative events experienced by individuals during different phases of their lives (adverse events). For example, Moroge et al. (2014) identified additional risk factors in a population of incestuous fathers, such as antecedents of abuse during childhood and previous sexual abuse. A meta-analysis by Jespersen, Lalumière, and Seto (2009) showed that child sexual offenders have experienced more sexual abuse during childhood, whereas adult sex offenders have more often been victims of physical abuse. In the same way, Pham and Ducro (2008) evaluated the relationship between the prevalence of previous physical and sexual abuse and the quality of parenting. Sex offenders were differentiated from a control group (nonoffenders) by their history of having experienced more physical abuse and a worse parental relationship (especially more antipathy from the father). Moreover, perpetrators of assaults on children outside the family presented with more antecedents of sexual abuse in comparison with other sex offenders (perpetrators of assaults on children within the family and on adults). Levenson, Willis, and Prescott (2016) reported that sexual offenders experience 3 times more adversity during childhood than a control population. The authors also highlighted other events such as the divorce of parents, verbal abuse, or domestic violence in the parental home.

With this type of developmental approach, the ITSO model brings to the fore the limitations of studies that only focus on some aspects of sexual offending at the expense of other risk factors, thus providing only a partial view of the sex offender (Thakker & Ward, 2012). An integrated approach is based on three different levels of analysis: the first level concerns the etiology of sexual assault and the evaluation of risk factors, the second level involves the study of interactions and the mechanisms that are operating inside the sex offender, and finally, the third level allows us to look at the sex offender’s evolution across time.

Thus, Cale, Smallbone, Rayment-McHugh, and Dowling (2016) have studied life trajectories of adolescent sex offenders (ASOs) and have identified four profiles: the Rare Offenders, the Late-Bloomers, the Low-Rate Chronic individuals, and the High-Rate Chronic individuals. These profiles can be distinguished according to (a) criminal involvement whatever the nature of the crime, (b) the onset of offending, and (c) the characteristics of sexual deviant behaviors (acting in a group or alone, victimology, etc.).

Moreover, the developmental approach allows for the study of the environmental influence on the occurrence of risk factors (Lussier & Cale, 2016) and on the exposure of the sex offender to events in his life (van Den Berg, Bijleveld, & Hendriks, 2017). The accumulation of adverse events, such as a history of abuse or violence in the family, would be predictive of deviant sexual behavior (Levenson & Socia, 2016; Pullman, Leroux, Motayne, & Seto, 2014). In studying sex offenders, the aim of the developmental approach is to extend the studies to include certain factors, how they interact and how they develop (Lussier, 2017; Lussier & Cale, 2016).

Aims

In this context, we proposed to move from a conceptual model of the sexual offender based on the criminal sexual behavior to a focus on the life trajectory of the individual in different areas of their life and to place the act within a temporal trajectory. Thus, the core of the study consisted of identifying the life trajectories of sex offenders currently in prison. The analysis of life trajectories is a qualitative tool that integrates a temporal dimension into the evolution of behaviors (Séguin, Beauchamp, Robert, Di Mambro, & Turecki, 2014; Séguin, Di Mambro, & Desgranges, 2012) and provides better visibility of the temporal relationships between different factors that favor the occurrence of the criminal act (Fortune, Stewart, Yadav, & Hawton, 2007). This method of investigation and data processing has already been applied to other clinical populations, especially with people who have committed suicide (Shneidman & Farberow, 1957). The method attempts to get closer to understanding the act (Henry & Greenfield, 2009). A retrospective analysis of the evolution of a life must be constructed from a behavioral, emotional, and even a relational point of view (INSERM, 2008; Séguin et al., 2006). Applying this method to a subgroup of newly imprisoned individuals with depressive disorders, Ribadier, Roustit, and Varescon (2014) characterized the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in prison and the preponderance of some life events in this population (previous family history, violence, etc.).

Method

Participants

Forty incarcerated sex offenders were recruited (M = 51.92 years old; SD = 11.67); 47.5% of the participants were separated or divorced, 32.5% were married or lived in a couple, 15% were single, and 5% were widowed. A total of 77.5% of the inmate participants had children. Almost all had contact with the outside world and had received counseling during their incarceration. Thirty percent had exhibited previous autoaggressive behaviors (suicide attempt, self-mutilation) during their incarceration, and 22.5% had been hospitalized in a psychiatric unit while in prison.

Regarding their incarceration, half of participants were offenders against related children (n = 21), 30% committed sex crimes against unrelated children (n = 12), and 17.5% were rapists against adult women (n = 7). Thirty percent of our participants had already been incarcerated (n = 12): Nine participants had previous incarcerations for the same sex crimes with the same victimology, one participant had been incarcerated for the same sex crime with different victimology, and two participants had been incarcerated for nonsex crimes. The average length of incarceration was 10.47 years (SD = 3.95) with at least a minimum of 3 years and at most a maximum of 20 years. More than half of the inmate participants had been sentenced to 10 years or less (55%, n = 22). However, the time spent in prison was variable because the French justice system has procedures that allow for a reduction in sentences from the beginning of the detention, special reductions in sentences once a year, and the possibility of requesting an early release under certain conditions. The average time spent in prison was 6.28 years (SD = 2.70).

Procedure

Recruitment of participants

To study the life trajectories of the sex offenders, we followed the methodology of Séguin et al. (2007) and Séguin, Renaud, Lesage, Robert, and Turecki (2011) of questioning the informants (i.e., the individuals with a close relationship with the sex offender in different areas of life, such as family members, caregivers, and friends; Fortune et al., 2007). Our study was approved by the Ethical Committee of Lille (region of Hauts de France). The recruitment consisted of two steps: First, a random sample of inmates was recruited from those incarcerated for sexual crimes in Bapaume prison in the north of France (region of Hauts de France). The majority of prisoners in Bapaume prison are incarcerated for sexual offenses and are sentenced to long sentences. In the second time, a maximum of three informants were interviewed (Informant 3) with inmate agreement: two family members or friends (Informants 1 and 2) and the clinical psychologist of the participant in detention (Informant 3). The “Relatives and friends” informants were contacted first by the inmate participant and then by the investigator. The “Psychologist” informants were recruited from the prison infirmary. A semistructured interview was carried out with each informant using a manual designed for the study. The interviews with the “Relatives and friends” informants were conducted by phone, and those with the “Psychologist” informants were performed in the medical unit. During the interview, the psychologist also used the medical file and the judiciary file. In our sample, there was an average number of 1.38 informants per inmate. We interviewed one informant for 72.5% of our participants, two informants for 17.5% of our participants, and three informants for 10% of our participants. For all the participants, we interviewed their psychologist (n = 40). For 27.5%, in addition to the psychologist, we interviewed family or close friends (n = 11).

Semistructured interviews

Our semistructured interview manual was based on items of the SCID II (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II disorders; Bouvard et al., 1999, translated by Cottraux & Cottraux, 1999), the MINI (Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview; French revised version by Sheehan et al., 1998), and the STAI-Y (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Form Y; Spielberger, Bruchon-Schweitzer, & Paulhan, 1993). We used items from borderline, narcissistic, paranoid, schizotypal, schizoid, dependent, and negativistic dimensions of the SCID II and the A and G domains of the MINI. The different items selected were changed and reformulated in the third person leaving the answers to the items open. For example, the SCID-II item “Have you often done things impulsively?” became “Has he done things impulsively?” and “Does it often happen?” The STAI-Y scoring was retained, paying attention to the different results for items that needed to be reversed.

Each item was divided into different fields that examined some aspects of the sex offender’s life. These included (a) the criminal history, with previous incarcerations, the sex crime committed for the current detention, and the experience of incarceration from a judiciary point of view (permissions, activities, isolation measures, disciplinary measures, etc.); (b) the medical history, the presence of any somatic pathologies the patient suffered such as diabetes, heart problems, or cancer; (c) several psychological and psychiatric factors such as social phobias, anxiety, impulsivity, frustration intolerance, depressive symptomatology, delirious ideas, and hallucinations; (d) the life events (accidents, abuse, bereavement, etc.); (e) the antecedents of dependence (addiction history), with or without substances; and (d) previous autoaggressive behaviors, more precisely suicidal history.

Finally, the inmate participant’s relational sphere was explored during two distinct periods: before and during their incarceration. The first part of the relationships enabled an evaluation of the inmate participant’s relational functioning with others, while the second part investigated the relationships with his parents or substitutes, his partner, his children, his friends, and his peers (fellow prisoners).

Data Analysis

Our results need several steps described here.

Categorization Into Thematic Trees

First, a content analysis was performed that provided a categorization of the interview content referring to the described methodology by Bardin (2001). This categorization is “a classification operation of constitutive elements of a set by differentiation then by [analogies]” (Bardin, 2001, p. 152). Two levels were distinguished: the first level is composed of raw data obtained during the semistructured interviews with the informants and thus allows for the identification of variables (e.g., changing relationships with partners, death of a father, alcohol consumption, depressive mood, physical abuse, etc.).

The second level groups the variables into 10 categories as developed by Fortune et al. (2007) and Séguin et al. (2007, 2011). Our categories “gather a [variables] group under a generic title . . . done because of common characteristics of these [variables]” (Bardin, 2001, p. 152). These include (a) somatic complaints (sleep disorders, physical injuries, etc.), (b) behavior disorders (substance abuse, frustration intolerance, etc.), (c) mood disorders (depressive symptomatology, anxiety, etc.), (d) relationships with family (conflictual relationship with father, absence of relationships with siblings, etc.), (e) relationships with extended family (changing relationships with partner, few contacts with children, etc.), (f) interpersonal relationships using the sex offender’s relational dynamics (social isolation, few close relations, etc.), (g) judiciary and prison domain (trial, threats in detention, etc.), (h) reason of incarceration, (i) adverse life events (physical abuse, sexual abuse, etc.), and (j) losses and separations (divorce, death of a close relation, etc.).

In this way, four thematic trees were created (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Data categorization into thematic trees.

Data Modeling in Life Charts

We chose to describe the sex offender’s life using a modeling approach with a temporal line on which the categories listing the collected elements or events appeared (Fortune et al., 2007). In the interviews, we asked the informants to date their answers when possible. Thus, to build temporal lines, all the collected and categorized data were placed according to the temporality of the events. In this way, two distinct periods were uncovered: (a) “Childhood-Adolescence-Early adulthood” (0-20 years old) and (b) “Adulthood before incarceration” (from 20 years old to the beginning of the current incarceration).

Characterization by Frequency of Occurrences

To better specify the main dimensions, the frequencies of each abovementioned category were integrated.

The frequency levels depended on two main criteria: the number of occurrences of the event and its length. Thus, for an occurrence ≤1, the frequency was low; for occurrences of 2 or 3, the frequency was moderate; and for occurrences >3, the frequency was high. For example, if the person suffered physical abuse from his parents, several sexual abuse incidents from a family member, and was the victim of a road accident, these data were found in the category “Adverse life events,” the number of occurrences would be >3, and the frequency would be high.

When a collected fact continued over time, the frequency was high. For example, if “relational difficulties with his mother from childhood to adulthood” was present in the category “Relationships with nuclear family,” the frequency level would be high.

Interrater Agreement

First, three judges classified all the life charts, grouping them into four different profiles using a method of consultation between judges (Encrenaz et al., 2015; Fortune et al., 2007; Séguin et al., 2007). This classification was then tested by six new independent judges (psychologists and researchers) who classified the life charts blindly according to predefined characteristics. The 40 life charts were categorized into four profiles by six independent judges. The agreement between the six judges was determined with a Fleiss’s kappa. According to the interpretation table (Landis & Koch, 1977), our interjudge agreement was satisfactory (κ = 0.70). The overall agreement mean was p = .79.

Although most of the categorizations tended toward unanimity among the six judges, four life charts stood out in two different ways. First, for two life trajectories, the judges did not choose a dominant profile, but rather divided them into three different profiles. For the two other life trajectories, a specific profile could not be distinguished because the two profiles were equal. The final decision was referred back to the first three judges who studied the particulars of the trajectories and attributed a profile to each one.

The “Early life events and behavior disorders” and “Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness” profiles each applied to 1/3 of our participants and were the most common profiles in our sample (n = 14 and n = 13, respectively). The “Behavior and socioaffective disorders” profile represented less than one quarter of our sample (n = 9). The least assigned profile, and thus the least common in our sample, was the “Abandonment issues” profile (n = 4).

Results

Classification of Profiles

To enable an optimal understanding of the sexual behavior, we focused on the first two periods highlighted by the modeling in life charts, that is, “Childhood-Adolescence-Beginning of adulthood” (0-20 years old) and “Adulthood before incarceration” (from 20 years old to the beginning of the current incarceration). The data from the period “Adulthood during incarceration” are not used in this article.

Four sexual offender profiles differed in the appearance of each category of variables and their frequency (Table 1).

Table 1.

Classification of Profiles According to the Life Trajectory and Frequency Level of the Categories of Variables.

Early life events and behavior disorders	Abandonment issues	Behavior and socioaffective disorders	Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness
Lifelong negative events (moderate to high frequency)	Series of losses/separations and negative events (moderate to high frequency)	Lifelong negative events and losses/separations (moderate to high frequency)	Few or no negative events and late losses/separations (low frequency)
Few or no mood disorders (low frequency)	Associated mood disorders (moderate to high frequency)	Lifelong mood disorders (high frequency)	Few or no mood disorders (low frequency)
Dominant behavior disorders (high frequency)	Few or no behavior disorders apart from current criminal sexual behavior (low frequency)	Lifelong behavior disorders (high frequency)	Behavior disorders occurring in adulthood (moderate frequency)
Relationship problems with nuclear family and extended family (moderate frequency)	Relationship problems (high frequency)	Relationship problems with extended family (moderate frequency)	Interpersonal relationship problems (high frequency)

“Early life events and behavior disorders” profile (Figure 2)

The “Early life events and behavior disorders” profile was one of the two most common profiles in our sample. This profile revealed the presence of negative events (sexual abuse, physical abuse, witness of conflict/violence between the parents) throughout the sexual offender’s life (moderate to high frequency) and that they occurred early in the person’s life, before 10 years old. The behavioral sphere was predominant: The “behavior disorders” category was found at a high frequency (e.g., heteroaggression, substance abuse, pedophilic urges) and took hold over time. On the contrary, the sexual offender presented few or no “mood disorders” (low frequency). There were many incarcerations with the first one taking place at the beginning of adulthood. Relational difficulties with the nuclear and extended family were also found (moderate frequency).

Figure 2.

Example of “Early life events and behavior disorders” profile.

“Abandonment issues” profile (Figure 3)

This was the least common of our profiles. The sex offenders found in this profile experienced a succession of losses and negative events throughout their life, such as parent substance abuse, fostering, or violence in the nuclear family (moderate to high frequency). Mood disorders were also associated with these events (depressive symptomatology, anxiety, suicidal ideas; moderate to high frequency). Apart from the transgressive sexual behavior, there were few or no behavior disorders in this profile (low frequency). However, there were relational difficulties with the nuclear family, the extended family, and interpersonal relationships (high frequency). The first incarceration took place after the age of 40 and soon after the criminal behavior.

Figure 3.

Example of “Abandonment issues” profile.

“Behavior and socioaffective disorders” profile (Figure 4)

In this profile, there were constant losses, separations and other negative events (physical abuse, sexual abuse, etc.) in the person’s life (moderate to high frequency). There were also mood disorders such as suicidal ideas, major depressive phases or anxiety (moderate to high frequency), and behavior disorders (suicide attempt, substance abuse, aggressiveness, etc.; high frequency). Interpersonal difficulties were mainly found between the extended family (partners and children; moderate frequency). The incarceration took place at different times of the individual’s life and soon after the act.

Figure 4.

Example of “Behavior and socioaffective disorders” profile.

“Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness” profile (Figure 5)

The inmate participants presented few or no negative events (low frequency) or mood disorders (low frequency). Losses and separations appeared later in life, and behavior disorders occurred during adulthood (moderate frequency). The main characteristic of this profile was difficulties in interpersonal functioning (high frequency).

Figure 5.

Example of “Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness” profile.

Victimology

Different types of aggressive behaviors were observed in each profile of our sample (against related children, against unrelated children, and against adult women; Table 2).

Table 2.

Repartition of Victimology in Each Profile.

	“Early life events and behavior disorders” profile	“Abandonment issues” profile	“Behavior and socioaffective disorders” profile	“Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness” profile
Offenders against related children	50% (n = 7)	25% (n = 1)	67% (n = 6)	54% (n = 7)
Offenders against unrelated children	29% (n = 4)	50% (n = 2)	11% (n = 1)	38% (n = 5)
Offenders against women	21% (n = 3)	25% (n = 1)	22% (n = 2)	8% (n = 1)

Discussion

Our study is part of the school of developmental criminology theories designed to understand the emergence of transgressive sexual behaviors (Lussier, Leclerc, Cale, & Proulx, 2007). Unlike other research, the profiles were not defined according to the characteristics of the crime (age of the victim, intra- or extra-familial; Cale et al., 2016; McCuish, Lussier, & Corrado, 2016) but were based on the overall life trajectory of the sexual offender. Our profiles were defined according to other factors such as mood disorders, relationships, and adverse events observed throughout the offender’s life. The profiles that we identified are partially in agreement with the literature in that adverse life events were found in every sexual offender profile (Jespersen et al., 2009). The prevalence of mood disorders (anxiety, depression, negative emotions, etc.; Gillespie, Mitchell, Fisher, & Beech, 2012; Leue, Borchard, & Hoyer, 2004; Stinson, Becker, & Tromp, 2005) and behavior disorders (impulsiveness, substance abuse, etc.; Baltieri & De Andrade, 2008) have all been classically observed in sexual offenders and, although our data confirmed these results, the frequency of their occurrence varied according to the profile drawn from the life trajectory.

Profiles

The “Early life events and behavior disorders” profile confirms that the individuals with violent behaviors (sexual or not) seem to have experienced more negative life events during childhood (Reavis, Looman, Franco, & Rojas, 2013). The relationships within the family domain (with parents, siblings, partners, or children) appear to have been conflictual, which could imply dysfunctional family patterns (such as violent transactions). This profile can be especially associated with a transgenerational transmission of violence, either physical, psychological, or sexual (Bartlett, Kotake, Fauth, & Easterbrooks, 2017). The characteristics of this profile may be compared to the ASO profile observed by Cale et al. (2016): the Late-Bloomers, the Low-Rate Chronic individuals, and the High-Rate Chronic individuals. Similar to the “Early life events and behavior disorders” profiles, these ASO profiles present with a history of criminal behavior (sexual and nonsexual) of earlier onset (middle or beginning of adolescence). They also appear jointly with the first incarceration in the early part of adulthood (from 20 years old).

In the second profile “Abandonment issues,” our observations are in agreement with the study by McMackin, Leisen, Cusack, LaFratta, and Litwin (2002), which found a high exposure rate to negative events in juvenile sex offenders, especially during childhood and adolescence. We use the term “abandonment issues” to imply that the interpersonal difficulties are linked with the absence of family relationships (nuclear or extended family) and the feeling of loneliness and rejection (Tewksbury & Connor, 2012; van Den Berg, Beijersbergen, Nieuwbeerta, & Dirkzwager, 2018). The transgressive act seems to be one of the only behavioral expressions in this profile. We assume that the act functions as a mechanism developed in response to emotional distress, breaking the isolation and reducing internal tensions. The transgressive sexual behavior would then act as a mechanism of noninternalized emotional regulation to maintain a homeostatic state (Burk & Burkhart, 2003). In this case, the incarceration occurs between 30 and 40 years of age and soon after the crimes. This profile is underrepresented in the population of sex offenders in the place where the inclusions took place. In addition, the profile is close to the “Behavior and socioaffective disorders” profile that deals with relationship difficulties and mood disorders. This profile needs to be further investigated with a larger sample.

In the third profile, “Behavior and socioaffective disorders,” the sexual offender seems to lack composure and exhibits internal tensions that cannot be contained and are expressed at every level: affective, behavioral, and relational (Jeglic, Spada, & Calkins Mercado, 2013; Ward, McCormack, & Hudson, 1997). The criminal sexual behavior occurs at different periods and soon leads to incarceration. In this profile, the difficulties occurring in all the domains could correspond both to dysfunction of emotions discrimination/identification (Ward & Durrant, 2013) or difficulties in inhibition processes (Joyal, Black, & Dassylva, 2007). This leads to relational difficulties especially in maintaining stable relations and in creating new connections.

Finally, sexual offenders with a “Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness” profile seem to be socially, emotionally, and psychologically adapted: They have a family, and affective and behavioral problems are not apparent. Losses and separations occur late and are observed in the life charts during a period close to the criminal behavior. In fact, behavioral disorders, such as suicide attempts or substance abuse, as well as difficulties at the relational level (e.g., social isolation, troubled relationship with partner) are observed during the last part of the life of these individuals. The “Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness” profile is characterized by few negative events and psychological troubles and by a criminal evolution that is slower than that in other profiles. In this way, the profile is comparable to the Rare Offenders observed in ASO (Cale et al., 2016). However, the absence of elements before the period of “separations” in our life charts for the “Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness” profile does not seem to imply the absence of negative events experienced by the sexual offender, but rather represents the individual’s hyperadaptation and affective coldness when faced with negative stimuli. Thus, the “separation” period would bring about the crystallization of internalized difficulties and lead to the transgressive sexual act. Together with the “Early life events and behavior disorders” profile, it is the most common profile in our sample.

Unlike the “Early life events and behavior disorders” profile, the three other profiles seem to apply only to sex offenders without a history of criminal acts. The individuals in the “Early life events and behavior disorders” profile are the only ones who have been confronted with the judicial system for other acts. Moreover, the temporality of the profiles is not similar. The life trajectory of the “Early life events and behavior disorders” profile primarily differs from the “Abandonment issues” and the “Behavior and socioaffective disorders” profiles by the presence of behavior disorders and the absence of mood disorders. The violent behaviors can be considered a way to outsource the internal tensions and are used very early in the development of the individuals. For the offenders with “Abandonment issues” and the “Behavior and socioaffective disorders” profiles, they may have more of an ability to internalize and mentalize, which could explain the later onset of deviant sexual behaviors. Finally, the hyperadaptation of “Behavioral hyperadaptation and coldness” could act as a “protective factor” sustaining the sexual predator until the act.

Three different kinds of aggressive behaviors have been observed in our sample: against related children, unrelated children, or adult women. We found these three sorts of aggressive behaviors in each of our profiles, which could mean that the life trajectory does not correspond to only one type of aggressive behavior. This finding differs from victim-based typologies and beckons us to deepen our knowledge of the sex offender’s life course and our understanding of the mechanism of sexual assault (McCuish & Lussier, 2017; Thakker & Ward, 2012; Ward & Beech, 2006).

Our results demonstrate that the study of sex offenders through life trajectories questions the evolution of risk factors and their interactions over time. These methods also highlight the contribution of relational, familial, and environmental dimensions in the development of such aggressive behaviors.

Limitations

Although these results provide a qualitative characterization of life trajectories, the study has some limitations. For example, even though our procedure focuses on the close relationships in the sex offender’s life and investigates the close informants before detention and the informant psychologist in prison, the different data were collected from a secondary source and not from the inmate participant, which can limit their quality and accuracy. Moreover, although the inmate’s psychologist (Informant 3) was interviewed for each inmate participant, it was difficult to interview the sex offender’s family and friends. Three main reasons limited the numbers of Informants 1 and 2 (“Relatives and friends”): (a) the inmate participant did not want the investigator to question relatives, (b) the relatives did not want to be interviewed, and (c) the inmate participant was isolated and had no contact with people outside the prison. Furthermore, the number of informants was not homogeneous in our sample, which constitutes both a limit to our study and a variable that should be addressed in future research. It would be interesting to supplement our data by including information provided by the inmate participant to optimize the collected data. A study comparing life trajectories compiled by informants with those constructed directly by sexual offenders would help to understand the type of life reconstruction performed. Moreover, it will be useful to specify the profiles by studying the role of other factors such as ethnicity, social economic status, psychopathy, or antisocial behaviors (Krstic et al., 2018; McCuish, Lussier, & Corrado, 2015; Netland & Miner, 2012). Finally, because our study included only male inmates, it will be important to verify whether the observed profiles are similar for female sexual offenders.

Clinical Perspectives

Despite these limitations, this study of sexual offender life trajectories highlights different profiles that will help to orient the psychotherapies offered to these patients. Whether it be cognitive-behavioral psychotherapies (Keeling & Rose, 2006) or medical interventions (Thibaud, 2011), the main objective of such therapies for sexual offenders is the reduction of recidivism risk, which involves an evaluation of the risk and a focus on the deviant behavior. In contrast, our study suggests widening the perspective of clinicians to promote a global perception of the individual by studying his life trajectory. Moreover, focusing on the person by using the life chart as a therapeutic tool will enable clinicians and patients to apply other models such as, for example, the Good Lives Model. This model leads the sex offender to live according to his needs, his values, and his experiences (Harkins, Flak, Beech, & Woodhams, 2012; Willis & Ward, 2011). The life chart builds a link between the different life events and their social or psychological consequences, at both the affective and the behavioral level. In psychotherapy, the development of mentalization abilities, in particular, the possibility of identifying one’s own emotional or social difficulties, and the individual trajectory through which the individual has passed guide the therapeutic work to be carried out. A better understanding of oneself and how one has come to commit the criminal act provides the avenue through which work on recidivism can be accomplished. In addition, the psychologist could work with the sex offender not only to identify risk factors of recidivism but also the protection factors needed to maintain a “good life.” With the awareness of some life events (sometimes normalized), such as intrafamilial violence or bereavement, sexual offenders could connect their life events and engage mentalization processes.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

References

Baltieri

De Andrade

(2008). Drug consumption among sexual offenders against females. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 52(1), 62-80.

Bardin

(2001). L’analyse de contenu, 10ème éd [Content Analysis, 10th edition]. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France (PUF).

Bartlett

Kotake

Fauth

Easterbrooks

(2017). Intergenerational transmission of child abuse and neglect: Do maltreatment type, perpetrator, and substantiation status matter? Child Abuse & Neglect, 63, 84-94.

Bouvard

Fontaine-Buffe

Cungi

Adeleine

Chapoutier

Durafour

. . . Cottraux

(1999). Etude préliminaire d’un entretien structuré des troubles de la personnalité [Preliminary study of the structured diagnostic interivew for personality disorders: the SCID-II]. L’encéphale, 25, 416-421.

Brouillette-Alarie

Hanson

R. K.

(2015). Comparaison de deux mesures d’évaluation du risque de récidive des délinquants sexuels [Comparison of two risk assessment measures for recidivism sex offenders]. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 47, 292-304.

Burk

Burkhart

(2003). Disorganized attachment as a diathesis for sexual deviance: Developmental experience and the motivation for sexual offending. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 8, 487-511.

Cale

Smallbone

Rayment-McHugh

Dowling

(2016). Offense trajectories, the unfolding of sexual and non-sexual criminal activity, and sex offense characteristics of adolescent sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 28, 791-812.

DiGiorgio-Miller

(2007). Emotional variables and deviant sexual fantasies in adolescent sex offenders. The Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 35, 109-124.

Ducro

Pham

T. H.

(2017). Les théories qui expliquent l’agression sexuelle des enfants [Theories explainning the sexual abuse of children]. In Cortoni

Pham

T. H.

(Eds.), Traité de l’agression sexuelle (1st ed., pp. 33-52). Belgium: Editions Mardaga.

10.

Encrenaz

Miras

Contrand

Galera

Pujos

Michel

Lagarde

(2015). Inmate-to-inmate violence as a marker of suicide attempt risk during imprisonment. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 22, 20-25.

11.

Fazel

Hope

Donnell

I. O.

Jacoby

(2002). Psychiatric, demographic and personality characteristics of elderly sex offenders. Psychological Medicine, 32, 219-226.

12.

Finkelhor

(1984). Child sexual abuse: New theory and research. New York, NY: The Free Press.

13.

Fortune

Stewart

Yadav

Hawton

(2007). Suicide in adolescents: Using life charts to understand the suicidal process. Journal of Affective Disorders, 100, 199-210.

14.

Gillespie

Mitchell

Fisher

Beech

(2012). Treating disturbed emotional regulation in sexual offenders: The potential applications of mindful self-regulation and controlled breathing techniques. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 333-343.

15.

Glickman

Lemere

Smith

(2013). Engaging deaf persons with language and learning challenges and sexual offending behaviors in sex offender-oriented mental health treatment. Journal of the American Deafness and Rehabilitation Association, 48, 168-221.

16.

Grady

Levenson

Bolder

(2017). Linking adverse childhood effects and attachment: A theory of etiology for sexual offending. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 18, 433-444.

17.

Hanson

R. K.

(2003). Empathy deficits of sexual offenders: A conceptual model. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 9(1), 13-23.

18.

Harkins

Flak

Beech

Woodhams

(2012). Evaluation of a community-based sex offender treatment program using a Good Lives Model approach. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 24, 519-543.

19.

Henry

Greenfield

(2009). Therapeutic effects of psychological autopsies. Crisis, 301(1), 20-24.

20.

INSERM. (2008). Autopsie psychologique, outil de recherche en prévention [Psychological Autopsy, research tool in prevention]. Paris, France: Les Editions INSERM.

21.

Jeglic

Spada

Calkins Mercado

(2013). An examination of suicide attempts among incarcerated sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 25(1), 21-40.

22.

Jespersen

Lalumière

Seto

(2009). Sexual abuse history among adult sex offenders and non-sex offenders: A meta-analysis. Child Abuse & Neglect, 33, 179-192.

23.

Joyal

Black

Dassylva

(2007). The neuropsychology and neurology of sexual deviance: A review and pilot study. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 19, 155-173.

24.

Keeling

Rose

(2006). The adaptation of a cognitive-behavioural treatment program for special needs sexual offenders. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 110-116.

25.

Knight

(1988). A taxonomic analysis of child molesters. In Prentky

Quinsey

(Eds.), Human sexual aggression: Current perspectives (Vol. 528, pp. 2-20). New York: The New York Academy of Sciences.

26.

Knight

Carter

Prentky

(1989). A system for the classification of child molesters: Reliability and application. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 4, 3-23.

27.

Krstic

Neumann

Roy

Robertson

Knight

Hare

(2018). Using latent variable- and person-centered approaches to examine the role of psychopathic traits in sex offenders. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 9, 207-216.

28.

Landis

J. R.

Koch

G. G.

(1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174.

29.

Leue

Borchard

Hoyer

(2004). Mental disorders in a forensic sample of sexual offenders. European Psychiatry, 19, 123-130.

30.

Levenson

Socia

(2016). Adverse childhood experiences and arrest patterns in a sample of sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31, 1883-1911.

31.

Levenson

Willis

Prescott

(2016). Adverse childhood experiences in the lives of male sex offenders: Implications for trauma-informed care. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 28, 340-359.

32.

Lussier

(2017). Juvenile sex offending through a developmental life course criminology perspective: An agenda for policy and research. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 29(1), 51-80.

33.

Lussier

Cale

(2016). Understanding the origins and the development of rape and sexual aggression against women: Four generations of research and theorizing. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 31, 66-81.

34.

Lussier

Leclerc

Cale

Proulx

(2007). Developmental pathways of deviance in sexual aggressors. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(11), 1441-1462.

35.

McCuish

Lussier

(2017). Unfinished stories: From juvenile sex offenders to juvenile sex offending through a developmental life course perspective. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 37(71), 71-82.

36.

McCuish

Lussier

Corrado

(2015). Examining antisocial behavioral antecedents of juvenile sexual offenders and juvenile non-sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 27, 414-438.

37.

McCuish

Lussier

Corrado

(2016). Criminal careers of juvenile sex and nonsex offenders: Evidence from a prospective longitudinal study. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 14, 199-224.

38.

McMackin

Leisen

Cusack

LaFratta

Litwin

(2002). The relationship of trauma exposure to sex offending behavior among male juvenile offenders. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 11(2), 25-40.

39.

Moroge

Paul

Milan

Perez

Pilard

(2014). Eclairages historiques, épidémiologiques et psychopathologiques concernant l’inceste: entre crime et pathologie?[Epidemiologic, psychopathologic and historic lighting about incest: between crime and pathology?] Annales Médico-Psychologiques, 172, 437-442.

40.

Netland

Miner

(2012). Psychopathy traits and parental dysfunction in sexual offending and general delinquent adolescent males. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 18(1), 4-22.

41.

O’Toole

Jeglic

(2014). The relationship between childhood family environment and adult sexual offending in a sample of sexual offenders. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, 19, 173-182.

42.

Pham

T. H.

Ducro

(2008). Childhood adversity among adult sex offenders using a retrospective questionnaire. Annales Médico-Psychologiques, 166, 580-584.

43.

Pham

T. H.

Ducro

Martin

Pihet

(2010). Project for the ongoing evaluation of the offence characteristics, diagnostic aspects, social environment and treatment of sex offenders by specialized healthcare teams in the Walloon region of Belgium. Annales Médico-Psychologiques, 168, 458-461.

44.

Pullman

Leroux

Motayne

Seto

(2014). Examining the developmental trajectories of adolescent sexual offenders. Child Abuse & Neglect, 38, 1249-1258.

45.

Reavis

Looman

Franco

Rojas

(2013). Adverse childhood experiences and adult criminality: How long must we live before we possess our own lives? The Permanente Journal, 17(2), 44-48.

46.

Ribadier

Roustit

Varescon

(2014). Etude de la dépression, des événements de vie, de l’impulsivité et du lieu de contrôle au sein d’une population nouvellement incarcérée [Study of depression, life events, impulsivity and locus of control in a newly incarcerated population]. Annales Médico-Psychologiques, 172, 245-351.

47.

Schneck

Bowers

Turkson

(2012). Sex-role orientation and attachment styles of sex offenders. Psychological Reports, 110, 624-638.

48.

Séguin

Beauchamp

Robert

Di Mambro

Turecki

(2014). Developmental model of suicide trajectories. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 205, 120-126.

49.

Séguin

Di Mambro

Desgranges

(2012). L’apport de la recherche en psychologie dans la compréhension complexe de l’étiologie du suicide [The contribution of research in psychology in the complex comprehension of the etiology of suicide]. Santé Mentaleau Québec, 37, 95-105.

50.

Séguin

Lesage

Chawky

Guy

Daigle

Girard

Turecki

(2006). Suicide cases in New Brunswick from April 2002 to May 2003: The importance of better recognizing substance and mood disorder comorbidity. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 51, 581-586.

51.

Séguin

Lesage

Turecki

Bouchard

Chawky

Tremblay

. . . Guy

(2007). Life trajectories and burden of adversity: Mapping the developmental profiles of suicide mortality. Psychological Medicine, 37, 1575-1583.

52.

Séguin

Renaud

Lesage

Robert

Turecki

(2011). Youth and young adult suicide: A study of life trajectory. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 45, 863-870.

53.

Senon

J.-L.

Manzanera

(2008). Psychiatrie et justice: de nécessaires clarifications à l’occasion de la loi relative à la rétention de sûreté [Psychiatry and Justice: Necessary clarifications on the occasion of the law on detention of security]. AJ Pénal, 4, 176-180.

54.

Sheehan

Lecrubier

Sheehan

Amorim

Janavs

Weiller

. . . Dunbar

(1998). The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.): The development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 59(20), 22-33.

55.

Shneidman

Farberow

(1957). Clues to suicide. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

56.

Spielberger

Bruchon-Schweitzer

Paulhan

(1993). Inventaire d’anxiété Etat-Trait Forme Y (STAI-Y) [State-Trait anxiety inventory STAI-forme y]. Paris, France: Les Editions du Centre de Psychologie Appliquée.

57.

Stinson

Becker

Tromp

(2005). A preliminary study on findings of psychopathy and affective disorders in adult sex offenders. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 28, 637-649.

58.

Tewksbury

Connor

D. P.

(2012). Incarcerated sex offenders’ perceptions of family relationships: Previous experiences and future expectations. Western Criminology Review, 13, 25-35.

59.

Thakker

Ward

(2012). An integrated theory of sexual reoffending. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 19, 236-248.

60.

Thibaud

(2011). Pharmacological treatment of sex offenders. Sexologies, 20, 166-168.

61.

van Den Berg

Beijersbergen

Nieuwbeerta

Dirkzwager

. (2018). Sex offenders in prison: Are they socially isolated? Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 30, 828-845. Retrieved from https://journals-sagepub-com-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/doi/abs/10.1177/1079063217700884

62.

van Den Berg

Bijleveld

Hendriks

. (2018). The juvenile sex offender: Criminal careers and life events. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 29(1), 81-101.

63.

Ward

Beech

(2006). An integrated theory of sexual offending. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11, 44-63.

64.

Ward

Durrant

(2013). Altruism, empathy, and sex offender treatment. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 8(3-4), 66-71.

65.

Ward

Keenan

Hudson

(2000). Understanding cognitive, affective, and intimacy deficits in sexual offenders: A developmental perspective. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(1), 42-62.

66.

Ward

McCormack

Hudson

(1997). Sexual offenders’ perceptions of their intimate relationships. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 9(1), 57-74.

67.

Ward

Siegert

R. J.

(2002). Toward a comprehensive theory of child sexual abuse: A theory knitting perspective. Psychology, Crime & Law, 8, 319-351.

68.

Willis

Ward

(2011). Striving for a good life: The good lives model applied to released child molesters. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 17, 290-303.