Preferential offender
The preferential offender might be male or female and may have an age-appropriate partner , but prefers a child as a sexual partner . Not just any child ; typically , a child of a particular gender and age range . The preferential offender has no visual profile — he or she looks like you and me . Jerry Sandusky and Larry Nassar , for example , are preferential offenders ; neither was identified as a risk by a visual profile . The preferential offender represents over 90 % of the problem . This explains a commonly accepted statistic : that 90 % of children are victimized by someone they know and trust .
The preferential offender is the problem in ministry contexts , but ministry protocols related to child sexual abuse risk are designed to protect children from the abduction offender — the snatch and grab scenarios . Because the preferential offender has no visual profile , he or she must be recognized by behavior , known as the grooming process .
“ Sadly , most ministries continue to build the wrong fence . For the sake of our children , it ’ s time to get to work building the right fence .”
The grooming process
The grooming process of the preferential offender involves two significant efforts : grooming the child and grooming the gatekeepers . It includes patterns of identifiable behavior , including :
• Gaining access to children within an age and gender of preference
• Selecting a specific child ( or children )
• Introducing nudity and sexual touch
• Keeping the child quiet to ensure secrecy
Grooming the child
Grooming of the child will vary depending on the child ’ s age , gender and situation . When the targeted child is a teen male , common grooming behaviors will include pornography , alcohol , marijuana and horseplay . If the targeted child is a teen girl , common grooming behaviors will include texting , social media communication and sexual discussion . If the targeted child is under 8 , common grooming behaviors will include tickling and forms of playful touch , gravitating toward places of isolation .
Grooming the gatekeeper A gatekeeper is anyone responsible for protecting a child : parents , teachers , youth workers , coaches or babysitters . The preferential offender works hard to appear helpful , trustworthy and responsible to disarm a child ’ s gatekeepers . Why ? Molesters are looking for trusted time alone to groom a child for sexual touch .
Both Sandusky and Nassar were effective at grooming children and gatekeepers . Neither had past criminal convictions , both would have passed a criminal background check , and neither had a visual profile . Conversely , if program leaders had understood the grooming process of the preferential offender , both Sandusky and Nassar would have been identified as a serious risk several years — and several victims — earlier .
What now ?
For any church leader , the first step in addressing child sexual abuse risk is selfcritical analysis . Ministry leaders must shake off the delusion that this is an insignificant issue or someone else ’ s problem , or that this risk is effectively addressed by criminal background checks and a child check- in system . Conservative studies indicate that less than 10 % of sexual abusers will encounter the criminal justice system , ever . The child check-in system will not negate or identify the behaviors of the preferential offender . By clearly understanding the actual risk , ministry leaders are better prepared to protect children in their care .
The next article will explore the grooming process of the preferential offender , and describe an effective safety system addressing the risk of child sexual abuse in ministry programs — the foundational elements of the right fence .
Is there any good news in this ? Yes . The offender ’ s grooming process is predictable — and what is predictable is preventable .
Next Article : CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE IN MINISTRY The Grooming Process and an Effective Safety System
Kimberlee Norris and Gregory Love are partners in the Fort Worth , Texas law fi rm of Love & Norris [ https :// www . lovenorris . com ] and founders of MinistrySafe [ https :// ministrysafe . com ], providing child sexual abuse expertise to ministries worldwide . After representing victims of child sexual abuse for more than two decades , Love and Norris saw recurring , predictable patterns in predatory behavior . MinistrySafe grew out of their desire to place proactive tools into the hands of ministry professionals . Love and Norris teach the only graduate-level course on Preventing Sexual Abuse in Ministry as Visiting Faculty at Dallas Theological Seminary .
Why ‘ the list ’ fails
Criminal Background Checks — No Silver Bullet
Less than 10 % of sexual abusers will encounter the criminal justice system , ever .
More than 90 % of abusers have no record to find ; and they know it .
Further , getting and understanding criminal records that do exist continues to challenge ministry leaders .
Child Check-In Systems
The effectiveness of a child checkin system can only be evaluated when ministry leaders understand the difference between the abduction offender and the preferential offender . A ministry ’ s child check-in system might be effective related to the abduction offender , who constitutes 4-5 % of the risk . Generally , a child check-in system is useless as it relates to the preferential offender — who represents over 90 % of the risk .
Further , the child check-in system is completely ineffective in reducing the risk of peer-to-peer sexual abuse .
Policies & Procedures Policies are what you DO , not what you SAY you do . Policies and procedures are the written expression of what is and is not appropriate behavior in a ministry program .
If a ministry leader does not understand the preferential offender , it is unlikely that he or she is familiar with the grooming process of the preferential offender .
To effectively address child sexual abuse risk , policies must clearly identify and prohibit grooming behaviors within the ministry program . churchexecutive . com STOP CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE • CHURCH EXECUTIVE 5