Linda7NJ- I feel for you and what you went through with the child you adopted and what your child is going through due to being his victim, but not every child has the same history nor the same outcome. Everything I have read about this child we are refering to in this particular thread does not seem to match what you went through with the child that you adopted. Again, I am so sorry that your family and your child was victimized- it is a
horrible thing!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I understand a lot of you want to believe that this child is beyond hope but that is not necessarally the case! Please, read this page- It offers
quite a bit of information on Juvenile sex offenders.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/report_juvsex_offend/sum.html
I found the entire page interesting but I thought I'd snip this particular section and paste it here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Risk Assessment
Few empirical studies have investigated sexual reoffense rates among juveniles or risk factors associated with recidivism. Two retrospective studies that investigated the frequency of offenses prior to the referral offense found relatively high offense rates (Awad and Saunders, 1991; Fehrenbach et al., 1986).
Rates of recidivism. The results of research investigating recidivism after juveniles were referred for sex offenses typically reveal relatively low rates of sexual recidivism (8 to 14 percent) (Kahn and Chambers, 1991; Miner, Siekert, and Ackland, 1997; Rasmussen, 1999; Schram, Milloy, and Rowe, 1991; Sipe, Jensen, and Everett, 1998; Smith and Monastersky, 1986). The studies also find higher rates of nonsexual recidivism (16 to 54 percent). Methodological variations clearly influence recidivism rates (Prentky et al., 1997). Nevertheless, in an extensive review of studies investigating recidivism rates among juvenile sex offenders, Weinrott (1996, p. 67) noted:
"What virtually all of the studies show, contrary to popular opinion, is that relatively few [juvenile sex offenders] are charged with a subsequent sex crime."
Factors associated with recidivism. Various studies have described characteristics identified in juveniles who have sexually offended. However, Weinrott (1998b) reported that very few characteristics have actually been empirically associated with sexual recidivism. He noted that these characteristics include the following: psychopathy, deviant arousal, cognitive distortions, truancy, a prior (known) sex offense, blaming the victim, and use of threat/force. Weinrott also reported that, contrary to common belief, factors such as social skills deficits, lack of empathy, or denial of offense or sexual intent either have not been empirically associated with sexual recidivism or have simply not been investigated. (This is not to say that interventions designed to address such factors, such as efforts to reduce social skills deficits or educate offenders about victim impact, are not effective in reducing sexual recidivism, only that there is no empirical evidence indicating they are effective.).....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And another portion I found interesting-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment Approaches
Overview. Primary goals in the treatment of juveniles who have sexually offended have been defined variously as community safety (NAPN, 1993), helping juveniles gain control over their abusive behaviors and increase their prosocial interactions (Cellini, 1995), and preventing further victimization, halting development of additional psychosexual problems, and helping juveniles develop age-appropriate relationships (Becker and Hunter, 1997). To accomplish these goals, highly structured interventions are recommended (Morenz and Becker, 1995). Treatment approaches include individual, group, and family interventions. Although group therapy often is described as the treatment of choice and cotherapy teams also are recommended (NAPN, 1993), empirical evidence of the superiority of these approaches is lacking. Advantages and disadvantages of these approaches have been described elsewhere (e.g., Marshall and Barbaree, 1990; Henggeler, Melton, and Smith, 1992). The first step in treatment typically involves helping the juvenile accept responsibility for his or her behavior (Becker and Hunter, 1997). Recommended treatment content areas typically include sex education, correction of cognitive distortions (cognitive restructuring), empathy training, clarification of values concerning abusive versus nonabusive sexual behavior, anger management, strategies to enhance impulse control and facilitate good judgment, social skills training, reduction of deviant arousal, and relapse prevention (Becker and Hunter, 1997; Hunter and Figueredo, 1999; NAPN, 1993). Many other relevant interventions also have been documented. Leaders in the treatment field have argued that programs designed to focus exclusively on sex-offending behaviors are of limited value and have recommended a more holistic approach (Goocher, 1994).
Addressing deviant arousal. Most programs that address deviant arousal do so through covert sensitization, a treatment approach that teaches juveniles to interrupt thoughts associated with sex offending by thinking of negative consequences associated with abusive behavior (Becker and Kaplan, 1993; Freeman-Longo et al., 1994). Other techniques include various forms of behavioral conditioning and are much more invasive and aversive. Such techniques raise concerns regarding practicality, effectiveness, and/or ethics. Vicarious sensitization (VS) is a relatively new technique that involves exposing juveniles to audiotaped crime scenarios designed to stimulate arousal and then immediately showing a video that portrays the negative consequences of sexually abusive behavior. Preliminary research findings suggest VS may be an effective approach for reducing deviant arousal in juveniles who are sexually aroused by prepubescent children (Weinrott, Riggan, and Frothingham, 1997).
Involving families. Rasmussen (1999) argued that adequate family support can help reduce recidivism and that treatment programs that involve families are likely to be more effective than others that do not. As Gray and Pithers (1993) observed, however, families vary in terms of their motivation and ability to effectively facilitate their child's treatment. Gray and Pithers described strategies that can engage the cooperation of family members and reported approaches that parents found useful.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I know some do not agree with me but I think family involvement is an important factor in whether a child re-offends! I still firmly believe we cannot throw our children away... for any reason!
