Uwzględnianie czynników ryzyka recydywy seksualnej przy określaniu i stosowaniu reakcji prawnokarnej
Wybierz format
RIS BIB ENDNOTEData publikacji: 22.09.2025
Problems of Forensic Sciences (Z Zagadnień Nauk Sądowych), 2025, 141, s. 5-20
https://doi.org/10.4467/12307483PFS.25.001.22203Autorzy
Inclusion of risk factors for sexual recidivism in the determination and application of penal response
Introduction: Sexual recidivism risk factors, both static and dynamic stable and acute, can be taken into account when sentencing and influence the penal response to the perpetrator. This can take place at two moments: along with the sentencing of the perpetrator for the committed act (front-end sentencing) or during the enforcement proceedings (back-end sentencing).
Results: The analysis of Polish criminal law and related norms has shown that this takes (in both above-mentioned moments) three forms: (1) comprehensive and explicit consideration of risk factors for sexual recidivism when the act refers to the probability of committing another act, (2) selective and free consideration of risk factors as an element of criminogenic prognosis, and (3) decision-making based on one selected risk factor: sexual preference disorders.
Conclusions: Newer regulations more often than older ones assume a comprehensive assessment of the risk of sexual recidivism by experts, but indirect and fragmentary assessment still dominates. Current solutions of the front-end sentencing type allow for better adjustment of the applied measures than solutions of the back-end sentencing type. Norms concerning the sexual recidivism risk assessment and sex offenders management are scattered in various legal acts and are poorly coordinated.
Recommendations: A coherent system for assessing sexual risk and management of sex offenders is needed. Assessments should be carried out by expert teams and all offenders should be subjected to them immediately after conviction. No measures should be applied based on the identification of a single risk factor.
1. Filar M. Przestępstwa seksualne w polskim prawie karnym. Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK; 1985.
2. Warylewski J. Przestępstwa seksualne. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego; 2001.
3. Mierzwińska-Lorencka J. Karnoprawna ochrona dziecka przed wykorzystywaniem seksualnym. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska; 2012.
4. Mozgawa M (ed.). Przestępstwo zgwałcenia. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska; 2012.
5. Pietryka A. Ściganie przestępstwa zgwałcenia. Aspekty dogmatyczne i praktyczne. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska; 2023.
6. Małecki M. Przestępstwo zgwałcenia po nowelizacji. Komentarz. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska; 2024.
7. Bocheński M. Prawnokarna reakcja wobec sprawców przestępstw z art. 197 KK i art. 200 KK w świetle teorii i badań empirycznych. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck; 2016.
8. Gierowski JK. Apel w związku z wejściem w życie Ustawy z dnia 23 października 2013 r. o postępowaniu wobec osób z zaburzeniami psychicznymi stwarzającymi zagrożenie życia, zdrowia lub wolności seksualnej innych osób oraz wynikającymi z niej dla opieki psychiatrycznej implikacjami organizacyjnymi, diagnostycznymi, terapeutycznymi i opiniodawczymi. Psychiatria Polska. 2013;47(6):967-972.
9. Szumski F, Kasparek K, Gierowski JK. Polish project of a Sex Offenders Registry – a mental health professionals’ perspective. Psychiatr Pol. 2016;50(3):487-96.
10. Andrews D, Dowden C. Risk principle of case. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2006;50(1):88-100.
11. Hanson RK, Bussière, MT. Predictors of sexual offender recidivism: a meta-analysis. (User Report No. 1996 04). Ottawa: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada; 1996.
12. Hanson RK, Morton-Bourgon K. Predictors of sexual recidivism: an updated meta-analysis. Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness; 2004.
13. Hanson RK, Morton-Bourgon KE. The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: a meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies. Psychol Assess. 2009 Mar;21(1):1-21.
14. Craig LA, Browne KD, Stringer I, Beech AR. Sexual recidivism: a review of static, dynamic and actuarial predictors. J Sex Aggress. 2005;11(1):65-84.
15. Broadhurst RG, Maller RA. The recidivism of sex offenders in the Western Australian prison population. Brit J Criminol. 1992;32(1):54-77.
16. Browne KD, Foreman L, Middleton D. Predicting treatment dropout in sex offenders. Child Abuse Rev. 1998;7:402-419.
17. Langström N, Grann M. Risk for criminal recidivism among young sex offenders. J Interpers Violence. 2000;15(8):855-71.
18. Proulx J, Pellerin B, McKibben A, Aubut J, Ouimet M. Static and dynamic risk predictors of recidivism in sexual offenders. Sex Abuse. 1997;9:7-27.
19. Rice ME, Harris GT, Quinsey VL. A follow-up of rapists assessed in a maximum security psychiatric facility. J Interpers Violence. 1990;5:435-448.
20. Thornton D, Travers R. A longitudinal study of the criminal behaviour of convicted sexual offenders. In: Boddis S, editor. Proceedings of the Prison Psychologists’ Conference. London: Great Britain Home Office, Prison Service; 1991. p. 13-22.
21. Worling J, Curwen T. Adolescent sexual offender recidivism: Success of specialized treatment and implications for risk prediction. Child Abuse Negl. 2000;24:965-982.
22. Hanson RK, Scott H, Steffy RA. A comparison of child molesters and non-sexual criminals: risk predictors and long-term recidivism. J Res Crime Delinq. 1995;32(3):325-337.
23. Hanson RK, Steffy RA, Gauthier R. Long-term recidivism of child molesters. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1993;61:646-52.
24. Quinsey VL, Rice ME, Harris GT. Actuarial prediction of sexual recidivism. J Interpers Violence. 1995;10:85-105.
25. McGuire J. Explanations of criminal behavior. In: McGuire J, Mason T, O’Kane A, editors. Behavior, crime and legal processes: A guide for legal practitioners. Chichester: Wiley; 2000. p. 135-159.
26. Rice ME, Harris GT, Quinsey VL. A follow-up of rapists assessed in a maximum security psychiatric facility. J Interpers Violence. 1990;5:435-448.
27. Serin RC, Mailloux DL, Malcolm PB. Psychopathy, deviant sexual arousal, and recidivism among sexual offenders. J Interpers Violence. 2001;16:234-246.
28. Seto MC, Barbaree HE. Psychopathy, treatment behavior, and sex offender recidivism. J Interpers Violence. 1999;14:1235-1248.
29. Worling J. Personality based typology of adolescent male sexual offenders: differences in recidivism rates, victim selection characteristics, and personal victimisation histories. Sex Abuse. 2001;13:149-166.
30. Broadhurst RG, Maller RA. The recidivism of sex offenders in the Western Australian prison population. Brit J Criminol. 1992;32(1):54-77.
31. Hanson RK, Harris AJR. Dynamic predictors of sexual recidivism. Toronto: Corrections Research Department of the Solicitor General Canada; 1998.
32. Thornton D. Constructing and testing a framework for dynamic risk assessment. Sex Abuse. 2002;14:139-153.
33. Beech AR, Friendship C, Erikson M, Hanson RK. The relationship between static and dynamic risk factors and reconviction in a sample of U.K. child abusers. Sex Abuse. 2002;14(2):155-167.
34. Craig LA, Thornton D, Beech A, Browne KD. The relationship of statistical and psychological risk markers to sexual reconviction in child molesters. Crim Justice Behav. 2007;34(3):314-329.
35. Firestone P, Bradford JM, McCoy M, Greenberg DM, Larose MR, Curry S. Prediction of recidivism in incest offenders. J Interpers Violence. 1999;14:511-531.
36. Hanson RK, Harris AJR. STABLE 2000. Unpublished manuscript. Toronto: Department of the Solicitor General Canada; 2000.
37. Prentky RA, Knight RA. Identifying critical dimensions for discriminating among rapists. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1991;59:643-661.
38. Quinsey VL, Harris GT, Rice ME, Cormier CA. Violent offenders: appraising and managing risk. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1998.
39. Beech AR, Ward T. The integration of etiology and risk in sexual offenders: a theoretical framework. Aggress Violent Behav. 2004 Nov [cited 2013 Jan 31];10(1):31-63.
40. Monahan J, Skeem JL. Risk redux: the resurgence of risk assessment in criminal sanctioning. Fed Sentencing Report. 2014;26(3):158-166.
41. Fisher D, Beech AR, Browne KD. The effectiveness of relapse prevention training in a group of incarcerated child molesters. Psychol Crime Law. 2000;6:181-195.
42. Harris AJR, Hanson RK. The Dynamic Supervision Project: improving the community supervision of sex offenders. Correct Today. 2003;65:62-64.
43. Hanson RK, Harris AJR. ACUTE 2000. Unpublished manuscript. Toronto: Department of the Solicitor General Canada; 2000.
44. Craig LA, Browne KD, Beech AR. Assessing risk in sex offenders: a practitioner’s guide. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2008.
45. Monahan J, Skeem JL. Risk assessment in criminal sentencing. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2016;12:1-25.
46. Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission. 2014 Annual Report. Richmond: Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission; 2014.
47. Utah Sentencing Commission. 2014 Annual Report. Salt Lake City: Utah Sentencing Commission; 2014.
48. Harcourt BE. Risk as a proxy for race: the dangers of risk assessment. Fed Sentencing Report. 2015;27:237-243.
49. Holder E. Attorney General Eric Holder speaks at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers 57th Annual Meeting. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice; 2014.
50. Casey PM, Warren RK, Elek JK. Using offender risk and needs assessment information at sentencing: guidance for courts from a National Working Group. Williamsburg: National Center for State Courts; 2011.
51. Elek JK, Warren RK, Casey PM. Using risk and needs assessment information at sentencing: observations from ten jurisdictions. Williamsburg: National Center for State Courts; 2015.
52. Szumski F, Kasparek K, Gierowski JK. High or very high recidivism risk? The possibilities of recidivism risk assessment under the Polish SVP law (the Act of 22 November 2013). Psychiatr Pol. 2020;54(6):1181-1194.
53. Watkins I. The Utility of Level of Service Inventory – Revised ( LSI-R ) Assessments within NSW Correctional Environments. Res Bull Corp Res Eval Stat Correct Serv NSW. 2011;29.
54. Hood R, Shute S, Feilzer M, Wilcox A. Sex offenders emerging from long-term imprisonment: a study of their long-term reconviction rates and of parole board members’ judgements of their risk. Brit J Criminol. 2002;42(2):371-394.
55. Szczepaniec M. Wybór optymalnej kary w świetle sądowych dyrektyw wymiaru kary. Prokuratura i Prawo. 2014;3:32-45.
56. Konarska-Wrzosek V, editor. Kodeks karny. Komentarz. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska; 2012.
57. Hanson RK. Recidivism and age: follow-up data from 4,673 sexual offenders. J Interpers Violence. 2002;17:1046-1062.
58. Wróbel W, Zoll A, editors. Kodeks karny. Część ogólna. Tom I. Część II. Komentarz do art. 53–116. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska; 2016.
59. Budyn-Kulik M, Kozłowska-Kalisz P, Kulik M, Mozgawa M, editors. Kodeks karny. Komentarz. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck; 2017.
60. Przybylczak L. Instytucja warunkowego zwolnienia w nowym k.k. i k.k.w. Prokuratura i Prawo. 1998;9:73-88.
61. Hanson RK, Harris AJR, Helmus L, Thornton D. Highrisk sex offenders may not be high risk forever. J Interpers Violence. 2014;29(15):2792-2813.
62. Beisert M, Bartoszak D, Szumski F, Izdebska A, Zielona-Jenek M. Kompetencje kadr profesjonalistów podejmujących i mogących podejmować interwencje psychologiczne wobec skazanych za przestępstwa przeciwko wolności seksualnej i obyczajności. Prawo w Działaniu. 2024;57:9-41.
Informacje: Problems of Forensic Sciences (Z Zagadnień Nauk Sądowych), 2025, 141, s. 5-20
Typ artykułu: Oryginalny artykuł naukowy
Tytuły:
Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
Polska
Publikacja: 22.09.2025
Otrzymano: 06.05.2025
Zaakceptowano: 04.06.2025
Status artykułu: Otwarte
Licencja: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Udział procentowy autorów:
Korekty artykułu:
-Języki publikacji:
Angielski, PolskiLiczba wyświetleń: 563
Liczba pobrań: 511