27
INCEST OFFENDERS VS. CHILDREN: CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENSE
27 March 2009
by
admin
Filed under
Men's Health-Erectile Dysfunction
The average (median) offender was a little more than thirty-four years old at the time of his offense; the range is from the midtwenties to the late fifties. Some 4 per cent of the men were, at that time, separated, divorced, or widowed. The others were married, although in 9 per cent of the cases the wife was away from the home.
For a moderate number (64 per cent) this was their first sex offense, but for 30 per cent (the third largest percentage) it was their second. Very few had more than two.
Seven per cent had been neurotic or psychotic prior to the offense. This is the fourth largest percentage. However, alcohol was a more important factor: about 31 per cent were drunk at the time of the offense. Once again this percentage is the third largest. No incest offender vs. children was under the influence of any drug when he committed his offense. No other adult males were involved.
The great majority of offenses were premeditated; most incest offenses are repetitious, rather than one lone event, and therefore all but perhaps the first are premeditated. Our best calculations indicate that about 30 per cent involved contacts limited to a period of one month or less; 18 per cent extended over two to six months; 12 per cent seven months to one year; 18 per cent up to two years; and 19 per cent lasted three or more years. Very few (3 per cent) of the offenses were classed as truly opportunistic—only two other sex-offense groups had fewer opportunistic offenses. On the other hand the percentage of offenses in which the man was non compos mentis (usually from alcohol) was relatively large—about 8 per cent, the same as that of the incest offenders vs. minors.
As one would anticipate, the place of offense was virtually always the joint residence of the offender and the child-daughter.
The average girl was between nine and ten years old at the time of offense. There is a definite tendency for incest offenders to prefer their older daughters: while 16 per cent offended against daughters aged six and less, and 26 per cent turned to daughters aged seven to eight, some 34 per cent of the offenses involved girls aged nine to ten, and nearly one quarter involved girls of eleven. These daughters were, as a group, older than the girls approached by the nonincest offenders vs. children and somewhat older than those victimized by aggressors.
With such young and related objects, coitus was seldom performed (9 per cent) or attempted (9 per cent). While both coitus and attempted coitus were more common than among the offenders vs. children, they were much less common than among the aggressors vs. children. A correspondingly large number used genital manipulation (42 per cent, third in rank) and mouth-genital contact (39 per cent, again third in rank). Their high ranking with reference to mouth-genital contact in the offense behavior is in keeping with the great emphasis on such oral activity in their nonoffense sexual behavior.
Since under the law a child cannot give or withhold consent, the official records usually do not mention whether or not the child joined in the sexual activity voluntarily. Consequently, we have only 23 instances in which we have the official account, as well as the offender’s account, of the participation of the child. In eight cases both agree that the child resisted, and in another eight that the child encouraged the behavior. Of the remaining seven, in three the record speaks of resistance while the offender claims the child was passive or encouraging, and in four the record says that the child encouraged the behavior while, mirabile dictu, the offender stated she was passive.
Examining these incest offenses for evidence of force or threat, we find no evidence of duress in the great majority of cases (84—88 per cent). In the minority of instances where force or threat were employed, they were employed chiefly in conjunction with mouth-genital contact. One third of the offenses involving mouth-genital contact also involved such duress, as opposed to one eighth of the coital offenses and two sevenths of the cases of attempted coitus. The incest offenders vs. children were bound to encounter children who regarded mouth-genital contact with some degree of fear or revulsion, and it was in these cases that force or threat was used as a last resort.
Apprehension of the offender depended, of course, on whether or not the child told anyone of the activity. If she did so, she usually told her mother. In a substantial number of cases one gets the impression that the mother was already suspicious and inveigled the information from the child. We know that in nearly two thirds of the offenses the wife was the one who complained to the police. In no other type of sex offense did a larger percentage of wives draw their husbands’ behavior to the attention of the authorities. This is not, as one might suppose, a matter of the outraged mother springing immediately to the defense of her young. In the majority of cases it seems that the wife was quite ambivalent in her feelings, balancing the loss of husband and breadwinner against the protection of the child. Some wives did not report the husband until he had broken his promise not to repeat the incestuous behavior. One gains the impression that still other wives tried to blind themselves to what was going on, and did nothing until reality was forced upon them by some blatant act or insistent confession.
Aside from the wife, the next commonest (23 per cent) person to report to the authorities was a relative or friend of the child’s, including teachers.
Between three fifths and two thirds of the incest offenders vs. children made full admissions of their guilt, and another 7 to 12 per cent made qualified admissions. While many incest offenders denied their guilt, this group did so the least: about one fifth denied it to the authorities and one eighth denied it to us. In addition, 9 per cent were so emotionally upset and/or drunk at the time of offense that they claimed to be unable either to deny or confirm their offense behavior.
*133\161\2*
