Example Of Sexual Assault Offenders

The researchers used purposive sample but did not give any explanation as to why this choice sampling was made. It is essential to describe the sampling process in a research where this facilitates the reader to distinguish any bias in the whole sampling process. In studies using participants, the process of how to select, access, inform and retain research participants requires considerable thought. Sampling is a key issue, because it is

Within society, there is an engrained belief of what makes a person a legitimate victim and often their status as a ‘victim’ is questioned. This is especially true if the victim does not fit the typical stereotype of who is considered to be a legitimate victim. This is most widely illustrated in cases involving male victims of sexual assault.

According to Acharya, Prakash, Saxena, and Nigam (2013), sampling designs are classified into two categories: probability sample and non-probability sample. Probability sampling aids in the generalizability of the results because individuals in the population have an equal chance of being selected to participate in the study (Acharya et al., 2013). With the non-probability sampling method, every individual does not have the same chances of being included (Frankfort-Nachmias, & Nachmias,

Probability sampling, also known as random sampling, requires that every member of the study population have an equal opportunity to be chosen as a study subject. For each member of the population to have an equal opportunity to be chosen, the sampling method must select members randomly. Probability sampling allows every facet of the study population to be represented without researcher bias. Four common sampling designs have been developed for selection of a random sample: simple random sampling, stratified random sampling, cluster sampling, and systematic sampling (Burns & Grove,

Most research indicates that about ninety percent of juvenile sex offenders are male. However, there is also research indicating there may be a considerable underrepresentation of the female juvenile offender in data. According to Schwartz, Cavanaugh, Pimental, and Prentky, although the vast majority of sexually aggressive youth are male, the proportion that is female appears to be much greater than is commonly observed among adult sex offenders, which may indicate that abuse by adolescent females is reported at a significantly lower rate than abuse by male adolescents (2006). One explanation for this is that the general public tends to struggle with the idea that a young woman could be capable of such perverse behavior. It should also be considered that male victims may have more difficulty reporting a sexual crime against them when the perpetrator is someone that society has taught them is the inferior gender (Hendriks, Bijleveld 2006). As a whole, female abusers have been researched very little, and juvenile female abusers have been virtually ignored in the field of criminological study.

There is a significant portion of juvenile offenders who do end up incarcerated in a juvenile justice facility. Researchers in Australia measured variables such as childhood abuse and neglect, psychiatric disorders and substance use, and juvenile offending and antisocial behavior in

“I thought it was a progressive school. I thought the resources they advertised from the beginning were real resources I could count on. I felt even more betrayed when they failed me and then refused to acknowledge my earnest desires and pleas for them to evaluate what was happening to me” said Emma Sulkowicz, a student at Columbia University who was sexually assaulted and protested the lack of punishment the man who attacked her received by carrying around a 50 pound mattress, of her frustrations and disappointments towards her university (qtd. in Kim). The FBI says that rape is the second most serious crime, after murder (Mantel). Sadly, about twenty to twenty five percent of women will experience some form of sexual assault during the time

By doing research on individuals that represent this population, allows one to have a better understanding, with the ability to decreases the personal biases that we may have as a challenge in counseling or psychology, when working with this group. In my undergraduate study I did a research

The conclusion of the case study is that sexual offenders that score 23 or higher on the limbic system checklist indicates that they have dysfunction disorder on the limbic system. If an offender has 23 or less on the limbic checklist indicates that they are less likely to be sex offender. The outcome of the case study is 33 percent of the inmates was found to have dysfunction disorder on the limbic system. MMI report the inmates that are in the f category has mental problems and dysfunctions of the limbic system. Some of the mental problems of the inmates are schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Sexual offenders with this disorder are most likely to commit the same crime again (Pallone & Voelbel, 2011).

Just like adult offenders with mental health, we also are faced with youth in the justice systems that have mental health issues as well. Seeing as mental health for youth reaches such a broad spectrum for young offenders and their brains are still maturing, unlike in adults, it is tricky to pinpoint main causes in a precise definition across the board. Being so, mental health is often misdiagnosed in young offenders. Some behaviours that are similar to adolescence growing up such as acting out are not taken serious nor seen to be a mental health disorder. In reality these corresponding behaviours could be underlying symptoms of mental health issues. Not only can these disorders be a genetic trait but they could also stem from traumatic experiences. These youth who seem to present or maybe sometimes not present with mental health often end up in our youth detention centres. These youth with mental health make up an extensive subgroup in our justice system. For a long time this has been a crisis because our courts were unaware of the impact and also don’t know how to address this issue. Trying to balance the needs of these youth, keeping their

The Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offense Recidivism (ERASOR 2.0) (see appendix D), often referred to simply as the ERASOR, is an empirically guided tool that relies on the clinical judgment of professionals (Worling & Curwen, 2001, Miccio-Fonseca, 2013). Like the J-SOAP-II, the ERASOR 2.0 is also public domain. The ERASOR 2.0 is designed for use with juveniles, ages 12-18, whom must have committed a sexually based offense or assault (Worling & Curwen, 2001). Like the J-SOAP-II, the evaluator completes the ERASOR 2.0 independently after examining as much collaborative information as possible (Worling & Curwen, 2001). The ERASOR 2.0 is a 25-item tool with items falling in five categories: Sexual Interests, Attitudes, and Behaviors category; Historical Sexual Assaults category; Psychosocial Functioning category; Family/ Environmental Functioning category; and the Treatment category (Worling &

This article discuss assessing sex offenders but not all of the participants did a written consent. The authors did not collaborate on ethnics, which is used at all times. If a offender is locked up and does not sign a consent form stating that they understand the study and the purpose of the study than it is

This sampling would require that the sampling is relevant to the topic that we are trying to research and that there is an identifiable distribution among the population being interviewed. This would be required if you were to sample males versus females, one would have to be sure to determine the exact distribution level. It would be important to ensure that it was calculated that there were 45 males and 50 females and that information would have to be evaluated based on those measures rather than an equal amount of each. This could also be said if one were to interview different religious groups. If you were going to interview several different religious groups, it would be imperative to ensure that you have allowed all the numbers of the groupings that you have done.

The participants of clearly the individuals from three separate cohorts, however the researchers do no specify if all individuals in each of the three cohorts are sampled or if only a portion of them participated in the research. This is an important issue that needs to be addressed by the researchers, although the number and sex of participants from each cohort is reported, the differences in sampling selections could present a significant difference in the conclusions obtained from the research data.

According to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009), in research questions where it would be impracticable for researchers to colect data from the entire population, it is necessary to select a sample. Sampling is “the process of selecting a sufficient number of the right elements from the population, so that a study of the sample and an understanding of its properties or