Juvenile Sexual Offending: An EU Prevalence and State Response Study: Study Protocol

Juvenile Sexual Offending: An EU Prevalence and State Response Study: Study Protocol Etain Quigley1*, Shane Conaty1, Katie Kirkwood1 1 Department of Law, New House, Maynooth University, Maynooth, Co. Kildare, Ireland Abstract Background: Juvenile sexual offending is an area that has been largely under-researched to date and this has resulted in very little and sometimes conflicting research being published in the area. The dearth of empirical data in the space is concerning as it suggests that policy may not be underpinned by an empirical framework and this has far reaching implications for the development of laws, intervention programmes and the management of young people accused/convicted of a juvenile sexual offence. Moreover, the lack of an evidence-based framework has the potential to contribute to misinformation amongst the public who may be relying upon anecdotal news reports and exaggerated media representations. Methods/Design: This study will use a survey to collect the same data from each European member state with the aim of generating comparable data. The first step in the design process was to design a typology of juvenile sexual offences so the data collected represents the same offences across each jurisdiction. The second step in the design process is to design a survey, using the typology, to collect data across each member country. Discussion: This study aims to take a first step towards generating comparable data across each member state. As such this project will be the first to generate accurate comparable data on the prevalence of juvenile sexual offending across each EU Member State and data on how each Member State reacts to juvenile sexual offending. Keywords: Juvenile sexual offending, juvenile sexual offending programmes, young offenders, sexual offending 1. Background Within criminal justice systems the term juvenile is used to refer to individuals who have not reached adulthood. The age span related to the term juvenile varies across jurisdictions and indeed has varied across time. For example, in Ireland under the 1908 Act the age of criminal responsibility, that is the age at which a child was deemed to have capacity to know right from wrong and thus could be held accountable for their offending behaviour, was 7 years of age. This changed with the enactment of the Children Act 2001, which resulted in the age of criminal responsibility in Ireland being raised to the age of 12 years of age. Only to change again in 2006 with an amendment to the 2001 Act which reduced the age of criminal responsibility to 10 years for more serious offences whilst leaving it at 12 years for all other * Correspondence to Dr Etain Quigley, Department of Law, Maynooth University, Ireland Email: Social Science Protocols, July 2021, 1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.7565/ssp.v4.5353 1 offences. In Ireland, and according to the 2001 Act, the age at which a young person is deemed to be an adult before the law is eighteen. The term juvenile is used in the majority of international, European, and national instruments to describe an individual under 18 years of age (Dunkel, 2014). This is due to those under 18 years of age as having been identified as not being fully emotionally or behaviourally developed (ibid). However, contemporary neuroscience suggests that emotional and behavioural maturity is not reached until much later, approximately 25 years (Berryessat et al, 2020), and indeed this science is increasingly being used as evidence before the criminal courts (Shen, 2012). This applies equally to juvenile sexual offending whereby Vitacco et al (2009) discuss the developmental changes experienced by young people, arguing that this must be considered when dealing with juveniles who sexually offend. There is a gradual shift in this space, for example, Germany treats young offenders up to the age of 21 years of age differently when compared to adults. However, such instruments as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, an international instrument ratified by all EU Member States, continues to recognise a child as an individual under 18 years of age (UNCRC, 1989). The above section highlights the variation and complexity in terms of age of criminal responsibility and age at which a juvenile is no longer considered a juvenile and is treated like an adult in the various criminal justice systems across the EU. How a jurisdiction defines a juvenile has serious implications for how a juvenile offender is treated within the system, in terms of both progression through the system and sentencing for the offence committed. Indeed, the more serious the offence the greater the implications. Juveniles who commit sexual offences are particularly vulnerable within the system due to the seriousness of the offence. Sexual offending is defined as ‘any sexual interaction with person(s) of any age that is perpetrated (a) against the victim’s will (b) without consent or (c) in an aggressive, exploitative, manipulative, or threatening manner’ which includes actions such as molesting, rape, voyeurism, exhibitionism, or ‘obscene communications’ which includes actions committed through the internet e.g. unwanted explicit pictures or messages (Ryan et al, 2010). Thus, a juvenile sexual offender can be defined as a legally categorised minor who commits any sexual act with a person of any age, against the victim’s will, without consent, or in an aggressive, exploitative, manipulative, or threatening manner (Gerardin & Thibaut, 2004). Ryan emphasises, however, that this definition is not always easily transferable in relation to juveniles with issues regarding peer-to-peer relationships for example which have resulted in juveniles being exposed to charges of child pornography and/or sexual relations with a minor (Ryan et al, 2010). Ryan calls for further exploration into juvenile sexual offending and the way in which it is legislated, particularly in the area of peer-to-peer relationships, adding that particular attention needs to be paid to the concepts of consent, equality, and coercion (ibid). Juvenile sexual offending has traditionally been under researched and to date there has been a dearth of EU wide comparative research. The lack of robust and comparative data has led to sometimes conflicting scholarly reports, for example, Aebi et al (2012) report that some studies suggest the need for specialised treatment for juvenile sexual offenders due to the differences setting them apart from general delinquents, while other studies found that specialised intervention is not needed and suggest that family and social intervention may be more successful. Aebi et al (2012) concluded simply, that more research needed to be conducted in the area. Some scholars have highlighted the rise in internet usage, Fortin and Paquette (2018) note that by 2015 almost half of the world’s population was connected to the internet, as having led to a new form of juvenile sexual offending and this change potent (...truncated)