Evaluating Female Sex Offenders Without Prejudice

Friedman et al. (2023) wrote an editorial highlighting gender bias associated with female sex offenders.

They conclude that "[i]In the past few decades, the literature on male sexual offending has grown exponentially. Evidence-based tools are now the standard of care in determining a male sex offender's risk of committing a future sexual offense. In contrast, the literature on female sexual offending is in its infancy. As a result, there is no standard of care in evaluating female sexual offenders, estimation of risk of recidivism, or treatment modalities. Women who engage in sexually abusive behaviors have largely been overlooked. The societal gender bias and tendency to see women as nurturing, not violent, and less sexual compared with male counterparts have obscured the path to understanding female sexual offending. Women who sexually offend should not be presumed to be mentally ill. One answer to this problem lies in gender-specific research to examine female offending, taking into account gender-specific understandings. This research approach, together with what we know about male sexual offenders, should lead to an evidence-based understanding of female sexual offenders".

They suggest that:

"1) Understand the literature about the specific gender differences for female sexual offenders.

2) Be cautious about making risk assessment determinations based on male sexual offending risk factors.

3( Know the difference between traditional female sex offenders and females who commit prostitution-related offenses

4) Recognize the bias in reporting female sexual offenses, and strive for thorough evaluations that do not minimize the impact of female sexual offending.

5) Evaluate for paraphilic disorders, despite the scant data on paraphilic disorders in females.

6) Recognize that female sexual offending often goes unnoticed and that relying on others to supervise or acknowledge the behavior is insufficient".