Sexually Abusive Females: Exploring Psychopathology behind Perpetration

Abstract

Conventionally, women are conceived as practicing high-standard domestic and child-care planning where the possibility of being sexually abusive seems to be a far-fetched reality. Therefore, very little information is available about the pathological predisposition behind female perpetration, as literature also portrays a less cohesive picture. Recent offender typologies recognized that females often perpetrate alone or peripherally in a pair with another male. Whether perpetration is coerced by the male or not, females are certainly physically and sexually abusive, even often facilitating abuse. Abundant evidence of self-reported sexual aggression against males, childhood sexual abuse history, greater exposure to sexual abuse during childhood, physical and emotional abandonment, mental illness, parental divorce, or having unmarried parents often contributes to future sexual offenses upon children. The chapter aims to explain all the nuances regarding contributing psychopathological factors, gender role stereotypes, and factors behind female sexual offenses.

1. Introduction

About 30 years ago, the deleterious effect and the wide prevalence of child sexual abuse were realized and supported the profound impact both during childhood and in later span of life. Although the general conceptualization and awareness of female perpetrators of child sexual abuse (CSA) has recently increased, there are almost no evidence-based guidelines or other consensus on the most suitable technique to work with them. Significant resources have been invested in studying and assessing male sex offenders and applying a proper treatment plan, whereas such information is scarce on female offenders of child sexual abuse. Also, it is unclear if the techniques used and findings could be generalized to female offenders.

2. Characteristics of female sexual offenders

Prevalence of female-perpetrated sexual offense has been found to be considerably lower than that of male sexual perpetrators, although female-perpetrated cases yield quite a number of victims as well as offenders who would need constant clinical attention. Female sexual offenses considerably receive less concern in comparison with male perpetrated offenses which is consistent with the general perception to portray women as nurturers and caregivers who conform when men dictate [1]. Thus, the true representation of the prevalence of female perpetration never gets revealed. Even after the gap in the literature regarding the common risk factors causing the repetition of the same offense, clinical research shows some observable characteristics. In this section, I will discuss the most emerging characteristics of female-perpetrated child sexual abuse.

2.1 Adverse childhood experiences of female sexual offenders

Adverse childhood experiences have been contributing to the further emergence of sexual perpetration. There is ample evidence that childhood maltreatment as well as early household dysfunction is having deleterious effect, causing poorer mental health outcomes in adulthood including substance use disorder, dissociation, attention deficits and hyperactivity, anger, posttraumatic stress disorder, and personality disorders [2, 3, 4]. Apart from all these psychopathological consequences, a history of child abuse often predicts future orientation toward criminal behavior. Researchers as well as clinicians often raised this concern that abused and victimized children have an increased risk of inflicting violence on close family members, especially toward their own children and also within intimate partner relationships [5, 6]. There has been a range of conceptual frameworks proposing the mechanisms underlying early childhood sexual victimization and later emergence of criminal behavior. Drawn from the Social Learning theory [7], the “Cycle-of-Violence” framework suggests that through observation, abused children learn violence to be an appropriate and effective option to achieve a desired goal and are more inclined to model such behaviors in the future [8]. It is convenient for children exposed to sexual abuse to observe and imbibe those abusive behaviors and consequent antisocial attitudes regarding the acceptability of such behaviors, which in turn can increase the likelihood of practicing sexual offenses in the future. On the other hand, attachment theory proposes that early childhood exposure, especially by primary and secondary caregivers, can distort the formation of secure attachment and induce aggression and aversion [9]. The developmental psychopathology model explains how childhood sexual exposure can disrupt the normal developmental process, which is mostly followed by rapid and some multifaceted bio-psycho-social changes. Thus, exposure to abuse is argued to reduce the child’s attempts to develop a range of developmental tasks and achieve developmental milestones like – affect and behavior regulation, self-esteem, interpersonal attachment, social competency, and understanding of sexual needs [10, 11]. Such disruption may pervert the natural developmental course and would leave the individual susceptible to getting involved with crime and violence. The Ecological and Transactional theory states that it is the combination of risks, as well as protective factors across individual, social and environmental domains often interplay between experiencing child sexual abuse (CSA) and future perpetration [12]. Thus, accumulating risk factors would determine the extent to which sexually abused children would get indulged in further perpetration. The Life-Course Perspective extends the ecological perspective by saying that it is the interplay between the different ecological and dynamic functioning that determines the child abuse – offending association [13].

The history of CSA not only predicts further criminal indulgence but personality disorders as well. Not only sexual abuse, but exposure to physical violence by male caregivers can lead to personality disorders. A study [14] reported that almost two-thirds of incarcerated females reported sexual victimization where, in most cases, CSA was committed by a close relative, other than a paternal figure. Abused females are often diagnosed as developing into Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) Cluster B personality disorders. Studies [15, 16] comparing the trauma histories of female sexual abusers and female nonsexual abusers revealed that female sexual offenders had more frequent and prolonged experiences of childhood sexual abuse; moreover, they had greater exposure to physical and psychological abuse and physical neglect. Research [17] suggests three subtypes of female offenders based on their criminal history analysis. The first subtype (generalists, consisting 27% of the total sample) showed a criminal variability including sexual and other violent offenses and having a history of CSA often being a co-offender with an intimate partner. The second type (specialists, 57%) showed a history of conducting multiple offenses and, most of the time, having a history of physical violence. Finally, the third subtype of once-only offenders (16.3%) are never specialists or generalists.

Cumulative impact of abusive exposure in childhood often leads toward socio-emotional-cognitive impairment and complexity which may induce a tendency to adopt high-risk behaviors as a maladaptive coping process [18]. Such maladaptive adaptation may contribute to the development of physical as well as mental health difficulties and other psychosocial maladjustments. Early traumatic experiences induce overstimulation of stress hormones, which in turn stimulates hyperarousal and anxiety, causes deficits in affect regulation, difficulties in social attachment and cognitive processing [19]. Abusive experiences induce a sense of betrayal by a very much trusted individual, gross infringement of hierarchical restrictions, distorting the ideal conceptualization of life, and someway reinforcing the behavior and belief pattern of the perpetrator [20]. It is often confusing for the victim, leaving them undecided whether to alter or leave the relationship, enervating dynamics that shape an individual’s expectation toward the world. Such breach of trust and parental inability to provide protection and nurturance can develop hostility, insecure attachment, and mistrust, which can induce a sense of social deficits, loneliness, negative peer interaction, and, most importantly, delinquency [21].

Early adverse sexual exposure often shapes the mindset and the pathway to further criminal behavior. After escaping sexual abuse, dysfunctional family, and poverty, women often need to deal with economic deprivation, the risk of developing substance dependence, liaison with violent activities, and adapting maladaptive coping as a survival resort [22, 23]. Deficits in developing intimacy in early family dynamics can develop impersonal, selfish, and adversarial adult relational patterns and can further contribute to developing criminality and sexually abusive perpetration in the future. Authors have acknowledged the need to identify the significance of the CSA history of female sex offenders to enhance knowledge about the etiology and development of treatment efforts [23]. The main concern is how to formulate differential diagnoses and treatment plans where women report complex developmental trauma during their childhood.

2.2 Cultural belief and gender role stereotypes

In order to explore the reasons behind female sexual abuse perpetrators being under-recognized, the most common explanations are related to the influence of sociocultural factors which are contingent with sexual biases and stereotypes. The common cultural standpoint of perceiving women as the epitome of providing nurturance care, always promoting the well-being of children, and as those who would unlikely exhibit aggression and harmful behaviors toward children often causes ignorance and a tendency to neglect the incidence and consequences of female perpetrated cases. The book – “A House Divided: Suspicions of Mother–Daughter Incest” [24] is a classic example of this rarity hypothesis where the story of a well-educated mother sexually molesting her daughter is depicted. The case has revealed how the accusation against the mother has been removed in due course, and the child has been sent back to the mother’s care. Most surprisingly, the primary author, who has also been a sex psychologist with over 30 years of practice experience, has argued how mother–daughter incest could be nonexistent, deceptive, and misleading [24].

In a national sample [25], female-perpetrated sexual violence has been depicted as containing 9.9% female perpetrators, and a quarter of adult perpetrators were the mother figure of victims. Though epidemiological data suggests that female perpetration is less frequent, denying the capacity of female perpetrators will only reinforce silencing the victim’s experiences and suffering. Sociocultural factors often cause child and adolescent victims to feel restrained that if they disclosed, their sexual orientation would be questioned [26]. Adolescent boys who went through sexual abuse perpetrated by females often fear being questioned about their masculinity and feel emasculated. Sometimes, the female perpetrated sexual abuse on male victims often perceived as a graceful passage into adulthood [26]. Historically, sexual abuse has been perceived as a male-dominated and controlled act where the most significant characteristics are the sexual gratification of the perpetrator and penile penetration of the victim [27, 28]. The prevailing conceptualization of pedophilia has been predominantly concentrated on male perpetrators, negating the involvement of females in this [28]. Incidents of female perpetration have often been characterized as not due to sexual arousal but because of unclear boundaries, hating her own body, acting out on the child who could be perceived as an extension of the perpetrator herself, and surprisingly, female sexual offenders (FSO) often receive less severe sentences than male offenders [28, 29, 30].

Societal bias often shapes the perception of female perpetration of CSA, often suggesting that female perpetration would cause less trauma [31], often conceived as serious in comparison with male-perpetrated cases [32]. In cases where females are allegedly reported being sexually abused by females, they may suffer confusion regarding their gender orientation and identity, are more susceptible to developing difficulty in secure attachment, and have difficulty developing a sense of self [28, 33]. Thus, making judgments regarding the severity and seriousness of the abusive incident based on the gender of the perpetrator would be misleading.

2.3 Female perpetrator typologies

Research on female sexual offenses (FSO) is often plagued with methodological as well as analytical discrepancies as there is a lack of reported incidents and evidence, though innovative paradigms have been identified in due course [26, 34]. With the newly developed, more explicit methods of functional imaging techniques, there has been renewed interest in the neurobiology behind defiant, aggressive, and impulsive behaviors [26, 35]. A comprehensive study revealed that sex offenders often exhibit deficits in verbal skills, response inhibition, sustained attention, anterior cerebral or frontotemporal disturbances, and anomalies in basal inferior frontotemporal neural circuitry [36].

Typological framework suggests an important distinguishing feature of FSOs that is whether females are solo offenders or with an accomplice (co-offending). A recent study [37] explored that victims whose relatives were sexually abused were more likely to accuse their mother as the perpetrator. The study also reported that typical incidents of FSOs are often found to encourage the sexual act of “doing nothing” (i.e., not involved in the act but at the same time not resisting or revolting against it), and committing sexual intercourse in front of the victim. The importance of the co-offender in developing typologies of FSOs reveals that co-offenders tend to have multiple previous sexual as well as nonsexual offenses, and are relatives of the victim [37]. Female solo offenders tend to have a younger male victim, whereas female co-offenders have more female victims [38]. Females with co-offenders are more likely to get arrested than solo offenders. Female co-offenders have been found to develop a dependent personality disorder, posing more susceptibility to being manipulated and coerced into deviant sexual acts [39]. Female co-offenders are more likely to be “specialists”, i.e., those who have committed several sexual abuse cases, rather than committing a sexual crime “once only”. “Specialists” have been found to victimize both male and female children, especially those who are acquaintances.

The cognitive and motivational pattern of FSOs has been identified. Offense-supportive thinking patterns have been attempted to identify among female perpetrators. Such offense-supportive cognition or “implicit theories” (ITs) are identified as complex and integrated sets of desires that are often unconsciously used to predict the world around them [40]. According to the implicit theories, children are often viewed as – (a) capable of desiring and enjoying sex, (b) living in a dangerous world, (c) living in an uncontrollable world, (d) certain sexual acts would be beneficial for them, and would not inflict any harm, and (e) entitled to satisfy the needs of some people who are superior to those children. Solo offenders exhibit a greater presence of personal vulnerabilities including substance abuse and mental health issues, whereas co-offenders reported the presence of other environmental factors such as keeping liaison with a known sex offender and associating with antisocial peers [41]. Moreover, solo offenders, in comparison with co-offenders, are more likely to receive a diagnosis of mood disorder [39]. Females with a male co-offender are more likely to perpetrate a female victim, children who are dependent and within their family [42]. Offense-supportive cognition of FSOs thus often include gender-explicit content such as sexual abuse inflicted by the female is not very harmful, co-offenders need satisfaction is more important than the victim’s suffering, etc. [43]. The presence of male co-offenders has been associated with supportive cognitions of FSOs [44]. Biological mothers are often more accounted for committing sexual perpetration, and it has been those biological mothers who have been mostly identified as bystanders.

3. Recidivism and jurisdictional factors

The gross underreporting of female-perpetrated offenses hinders the development of a proper treatment process. Recidivism rates of FSOs are very low. Researchers have identified several predictive factors responsible for the recidivism of both male and female sexual offenders. Factors such as having a history of criminal acts, having an overall pro-criminal approach, family history, and substance abuse are prominently associated with a general tendency of recidivism [44]. Recidivists have been accused of endorsing or patronizing child trafficking and prostitution. Recidivism has been a severe concern for criminal justice practitioners and has demanded even more emphasis recently. Recidivism has been defined as the repetition of a criminal offense by an individual who has previously been convicted of a criminal offense, signifying the failure of the accused to abide by the social rules and regulations as well as the failure of the social justice system to correct the individual’s criminal mindset [45]. It is the recurrence of unlawful actions after experiencing legal actions and correctional initiatives to prevent it from happening again. Unfortunately, recidivism has been difficult to measure, particularly for sex offenders. Meta-analysis on recidivism rates of female perpetrators reveals that about 2% of female perpetrators recidivate within 6 years on average [46]. Prior research has portrayed females committing prostitution-related offenses as having a higher likelihood of recidivism in comparison with females committing other kinds of sexual abuses [47].

Again, there is very little information about the recidivism of FSOs. There have been two perspectives responsible for such offending. The first is the presence of offense-specific risk factors such as unusual sexual interest associated with sexual crimes. The second perspective explains sexual offense as a part of varied patterns of delinquency and a manifestation of antisocial tendencies [48]. Despite representing a very low percentage, women are coming to the vigilance of the justice system therefore portraying the need to implement proper assessment. A few factors have been identified as increasing vulnerabilities linked to sexual offending behaviors, such as extensive experiences of victimization, and social and psychological estrangement [49]. Perceptions of prostitution-related offenses have often been linked with the inflated sexual recidivism cases among female offenders. In contrast with female offenders, prostitution-related offenses by male offenders are often not perceived as sexual offenses, hence focusing on the need to standardize the definition of sexual offenses by females. More precisely, it is very much needed to distinctively discriminate between prostitution-related offenses and sexual offenses committed by females directed toward children or adults disinclined to consent.

3.1 Risk and protective factors

To provide appropriate intervention to female sexual offenders, it is necessary to explore the dynamic risk and protective factors associated with repeated sexual offenses. For the risk and protective factors, both individual and social characteristics are responsible [50]. These factors could be more inert or dynamic in nature; these factors are often addressed in the offender intervention sessions. Static risk factors could be the intelligence of previous offenses, whereas dynamic risk factors would be an inclination toward criminality, impulsivity, parental negligence on truancy, etc. Parental support and vigilance of good social skills could be the dynamic protective factors [51]. An intervention to prevent recidivism becomes fruitful when the dynamic factors are addressed. Studies [52] show how a few dynamic risk factors are exclusive to females, and both male and female offenders share some risk factors. Examples of shared risk factors could be an association with antisocial peer groups, poor parent–child attachment, educational backwardness, dispositional difficulties, etc. Not much is known about the protective factors that work as a buffer against the possibility of criminal behavior. In order to understand which intervention program would be the most effective for female sexual or nonsexual offenders, it is required to differentiate between the risks and protective factors responsible for general recidivism and sexual offenses. If factors associated with nonsexual offenses are similar to those of nonsexual offenses, then the same intervention technique would be appropriately applicable for the females of both general and sexual offenders. The risks and protective factors related to family and aggression domains are relevant, whereas attitudinal aspects would be important as risk or protective factors responsible for general recidivism [50].

4. Victim’s perspectives

The construction of abuse implies a hierarchy of susceptibility [53] where children are perceived to be most vulnerable, followed by women. As the male victim’s position in this hierarchy is the least vulnerable to sexual abuse, a male victim of sexual abuse, especially by a female perpetrator, confuses the underlying hierarchy of vulnerability. Identifying oneself as a victim requires the victim to perceive himself as worthy enough of being victimized. It is because of the vague status that the victims of female sexual abuse have in the contemporary discourse that the opportunity for an individual subjected to female-inflicted sexual offenses to take up the perspective and stance of a victim has often been restrained. A feeling of immense shame and a sense of alienation is very much salient in the survivors of mother–daughter incest. Survivors report that the stigmatization they experience due to being abused by their mother or a female caregiver often contributes to their shame and powerlessness. Denial or inability to acknowledge an incident of sexual abuse inflicted by females, especially a mother, intrigues the sense of shame and distorts the efforts that victims put into disclosing incidents. Childhood maltreatment, especially sexual abuse, has often been experienced as a shared secret that the child victim refuses to disclose, fearing the possible re-traumatization that they may face during the disclosure process to the jurisdictional authorities, and the family tries to avoid any social alienation [54, 55].

Given cultural definitions of motherhood and the general perception of the protective nature of a woman, victims often report experiencing a sense of betrayal and beaching of trust by their mother or a female caregiver. Interestingly, for male-perpetrated incestuous abuse, the victim blames the mother for drifting from her responsibilities, whereas fathers have been rarely blamed for their persistent absence and irresponsibility [56]. Studies reveal that most of the female perpetrators have been biological mothers or stepmothers who sexually perform the usual activities [57, 58]. Male victims of male sexual perpetrators have been found to experience and exhibit higher levels of fear of attack, induced levels of neuroticism, posttraumatic stress, and dissociative symptoms [59], hindering the victim’s capability to cope with the long-term impact of such trauma. Whereas, in cases of male victims of female sexual perpetrators, sexual intimacy with a female, even after being considered inappropriate, is more acceptable to males as it conforms to social norms. Eventually, during the developmental process, such intimacy is anticipated [60]. Male victims of female-perpetrated abuse have reported experiencing extraversion, agreeableness, and abandonment, impacting their coping mechanisms. As a means of coping with the trauma, victims of female-perpetrated sexual offenses employ maladaptive defenses like identification with the perpetrator introjections rather than developing posttraumatic stress. Contrast with the traditional discourse regarding the prevalence of boys being sexually abused, especially by females, may be greater than we assume. The feminist efforts have heightened the scenario of female children and adults being abused by males, but the fact that boys could be possibly abused and females could be abused has been faintly addressed.

5. Conclusion

The reported cases of CSA by female perpetrators have been unacknowledged for long. Indeed, it can be seen that social welfare workers are less likely to authenticate cases involving male victims, especially when the perpetrator is a female. Thus, CSA victims might never be able to disclose and get a resolution [61]. Studies [26, 28, 29, 30] have revealed that the gender of the perpetrator is the identifying factor in the profile of CSA victims; thus, clinical intervention should be selectively provided on that basis. CSA particularly perpetrated by females, might be difficult to identify as it takes place in an apparently intact family environment with little or no visible evidence of struggle or anguish. Indeed, the intimacy between a mother and a female caregiver is classically perceived as a loving, caring relationship that rarely evokes any suspicion, especially when the victim’s coping process is rarely observable. Female-perpetrated sexual abuse has not been immensely studied compared to male-perpetrated sexual offenses [62]. The few existing studies provide information on specific characteristics of FSO factors responsible for child sexual offending. Irrespective of the gender of the offender, traumatic childhood histories significantly have predicted sexual offenses in adulthood. Instances of early childhood sexual exposure, family instability, physical or emotional abandonment, and family instability have been associated with sexual offending behavior. Such exploration adds relevant information to the existing policy implications. Treatment goals should involve trauma therapy to deal with recidivism, and early intervention should be employed for those who have early childhood experiences of sexual abuse [63]. Therefore, more research would be needed to break the ever-existing taboo on recognizing females as having the potential to commit sexual offenses and empowering victims to disclose.

Acknowledgments

I am thankful to the University of Haifa, Israel, for supporting me with the relevant recently published articles on the topic. I am grateful to the Amity University Kolkata. I am immensely obliged to Dr. Shiladitya Chattopadhyay, JIS University Kolkata, for his encouragement and guidance.

The author did not receive any funding for this book chapter.

The author contributed substantially to the conception of the work, drafting and revising the content.