Male, Female, and Juvenile Sex Offenders: Punishment Difference

Introduction

Criminal justice polies and guidelines since the 1990s have mainly reflected the perceptions general public has about sex offenders. The intensified efforts to punish, control as well as incapacitate particularly those who victimize minors have prompted various studies assessing the situation. However, literature has paid less attention to the issue of discrimination with regard to punishment given to grownup men and women, and juvenile. It is believed that last two groups receive lenient penalties or sentencing whereas adult males get harsher rulings. The aim of this paper is to discuss the difference in punishment given to the three types of sex offenders by using examples of past cases.

Juvenile Sex Offender

In 2018, a group of four high school students engaged in a sexual offense by attacking their younger teammates on their football team. They were indicted on eight counts of rape, attempted rape as well as conspiracy to commit the crime for allegedly sodomizing freshman players in their locker room (Kettrey & Lipsey, 2018). Under the Maryland legislation and being charged as adults initially, the fifteen-year old suspects could have faced lifetime imprisonment. Cases of the three were later taken to the juvenile court.

Despite criticism by the victims’ families, a Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge Steven G. Salant ruled that his case as well belonged in the juvenile court. Looking at the development of this case, it is clear that even the judge is made excuses for the accused individuals. For instance, he claimed that since they were fifteen, their brains were still developing and thus, it would be unfair to condemn them as grownups (Kettrey & Lipsey, 2018). He added, while defending his decision, that the fourth suspect had a mental disorder that the school has never addressed since he was younger. It is stated in the court documents that Abedi underwent undiagnosed and untreated attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

The staff members at his school in the sixth grade maintained their focus on symptoms instead of searching for the root cause. Despite the wrongs committed by the suspects, it can be seen that the court system is showing leniency in how they are handling the case. The outcomes of the cases were geared toward treatment and rehabilitation (Kettrey & Lipsey, 2018). Usually, the punishment is probation with no public conviction on a record. The difference can already be seen as in adult courts, there is a record produced of the proceedings and long sentences for such offenses are normal.

Female Sex Offender

A former Michigan female teacher pleaded a few years ago for having sexual intercourse with a fifteen-year old student. She was sentenced to prison for 15 years after pleading guilty to two counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct. She was arrested for performing the act with the minor at the Bishop Foley High School in Madison Heights, Michigan (Shields & Cochran, 2020). It is reported that the lady utilized the space in her classroom after classes and in between breaks to seduce the student and have sex with him.

Even after starting to serve her sentence, it was investigated and found that she had committed another crime in a different county with the same victim. Even with all this information, it is reported that despite of being eligible of receiving life sentence, she was awarded the 15-years as the charges were reduced to lesser counts of criminal sexual conduct. Lastly, the court documents show that she would be granted a chance at parole after five and half years (Shields & Cochran, 2020). With male offenders with the same accusations, it is safe to state that the sentencing would have been different.

Females and juveniles are held to a different standard when compared to men. This is clear in the justice system whereby they are subjected to less harsh punishments. It has been suggested that the main reason behind female adults receive leniency is due to their care and nurturing ability. This is a wrong way of looking at the matter (Shields & Cochran, 2020). For instance, in the case of the female teacher, she does not show that she is a loving and tender being. Rather, she exploits the weakness, innocence, and ignorance of her male student who is only fifteen years old (Shields & Cochran, 2020). Additionally, being in her position, she cannot claim that the victim gave consent since she is at a position of influence. Therefore, all this negates the notion that the female gender should be treated to a different standard and given less sentence or time in prison due to their gentle character.

For the case of the juveniles, it is right for the criminal justice system to hold them to a different standard than other people. The reason behind this is due to the fact that a minor is someone who is still learning and developing. The majority of the activities they participate in either legal or illegal are motivated by childish tendencies of exploring (Lillard et al., 2020). Additionally, most of them are a point where they do not understand the impact of the actions they may perform on others. However, the punishment should be expanded to something that would scare others from committing any crimes in future. For instance, simply seeking treatment and probation is not enough (Lillard et al., 2020). The state governments in collaboration with parents and guardians can find means of correcting the children in a manner that will still consider their age but firm.

Comparison of the Two Groups to Male Sex Offenders

Whereas sentences for criminal activities such as possessing firearms or drugs have been reduced, sex offender legislation continues to expand since the Megan’s Law’s adoption in 1996. This legislation dictates that all states should have a sex offender registry and notification system for the public when someone previously convicted is released from psychiatric facility or prison (Rydberg et al., 2018). Additionally, it mandates that a repeat offender receives a life in prison punishment, even though the cases are not all the same. As with other crimes, there are different degrees of offense. Despite all this information available, the male offenders are always on the receiving end of the harshest penalties or punishments. Statistics indicate that men have a greater chance of getting the life sentence in a court than women, even if they committed similar wrongs.

A female sex offender receives a shorter incarceration sentence than men due to their gender. They are charged less strictly than their male counterparts as they are viewed as caring and nurturing. There are legislations already in working in eight states that allow castration as punishment for sex offenders. The laws are expected to give the judges the full authority to enforce the extreme penalty (Rydberg et al., 2018). In the state of California, Louisiana, Georgia, Montana, and Wisconsin, the act can only be applied to those convicted of se wrongdoings against children below the age of eighteen years.

Supporters of castration claim that it is proper as well as justified. Particularly, they argue that it can control someone’s irresistible urge to molest or rape again. The opponents state that forced castration is a violation of the protection against cruel and unusual punishment as evidenced in the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution (Bedarf, 2019). Additionally, there are possible side effects of the act, including serious allergic reactions and life-threatening blood clots, thereby defeating the initial purpose of castration. All this provides adequate information to prove that the strictest punishment with regard to sex offenses, is reserved for the male gender (Bedarf, 2019). Lastly, it has been established earlier that children under the age of eighteen years are not punished in the same manner as adults, as in the case of the four high school students.

The issue of discrimination has drawn much attention to an extent groups consisting of attorneys are forming in support of equality in the criminal justice system. It is safe to state that the United States is the most impacted by the bias in the ruling or decisions made during such cases (Lillard et al., 2020). In other countries, including European nations, the act of molesting a minor is met with similar consequences regardless of gender of the offender (Lillard et al., 2020). One can even argue that women are punished harder than males since they are naturally given the responsibility of caring for children.

Conclusion

The paper has discussed the difference in punishment given to adult male and female sex offenders as well as juveniles. The criminal justice policies and guidelines appear to care and protect the female gender more than men regardless of the fact that they may have committed similar crimes. The increased efforts in finding ways to punish, control, and incapacitate those victimizing minors have resulted in various investigations trying to assess the situation. The strictest seem to be directed toward the male sex offenders. For instance, there are efforts and plan to allow castration in eight states as punishment for sex offenders. In addition, the judges in those jurisdictions will have the full power to enforce that penalty.

As much as it appears an act of trying to protect the community from sex offenders, such punishments only affect males. Supporters of castration claim that it is proper as well as justified. Particularly, they argue that it can control someone’s irresistible urge to molest or rape again. In the paper, it has been stated that a female teacher who repeatedly performed sexual intercourse in different counties would be eligible for parole after five and half years from the time of sentencing. This is unfair as men receive even stricter reprimands while committing the same crimes. For the case of juveniles, the case of four high school students is a clear indication that minors regardless of crime receive more leniency than adults. A judge in the case even suggested treatment and probation for crimes that would greatly impact the lives of their victims for a long time.

References

Bedarf, A. R. (2019). Examining sex offender community notification laws. In Shame Punishment (pp. 355-409). Routledge.

Kettrey, H. H., & Lipsey, M. W. (2018). The effects of specialized treatment on the recidivism of juvenile sex offenders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 14(3), 361-387. Web.

Lillard, C. M., Cooper‐Lehki, C., Fremouw, W. J., & DiSciullo, V. A. (2020). Differences in psychosexual development among child, peer, and mixed juvenile sex offenders. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 65(2), 526-534. Web.

Rydberg, J., Cassidy, M., & Socia, K. M. (2018). Punishing the wicked: Examining the correlates of sentence severity for convicted sex offenders. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 34(4), 943-970. Web.

Shields, R. T., & Cochran, J. C. (2020). The gender gap in sex offender punishment. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 36(1), 95-118. Web.

ular, theoretical arguments about citizens’ perceptions of sex offenders sug-gest that gender may exert an especially salient influence on court punishment decisions for sex offenders (e.g., Denov 2001; Mellor and Deering 2010). The sex offender litera-ture suggests that the typical social construction of a sex offender or sex predator is a man (Denov 2001; Gakhal and Brown 2011). This aligns in part with actual offending.

For example, sexual abuse perpetration is disproportionately male (Smith et al. 2017). And, when women do perpetrate sex crimes, they and their offenses are perceived as less threatening or harmful compared to those committed by men (Denov 2003; Denov and Cortoni 2006; Mellor and Deering 2010). Studies of public perceptions suggest that these views about gender and culpability apply across sex offense types despite the fact that research indicates that, like male-perpetrated crimes, female sex offenses regularly involve child victims (Williams and Bierie 2015) and exert similar mental.