Nr XXXVI (2014)

Wykorzystanie seksualne małoletniego pokrzywdzonego w rodzinie - wybrane zagadnienia kryminologiczne i penitencjarne

Małgorzata Szwejkowska
Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie
Dariusz Załuski
Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie

Opublikowane 2014-01-01

Słowa kluczowe

  • przemoc w rodzinie,
  • przemoc wobec dzieci,
  • sexual exploitation,
  • minor,
  • criminology

Jak cytować

Szwejkowska, M., & Załuski, D. (2014). Wykorzystanie seksualne małoletniego pokrzywdzonego w rodzinie - wybrane zagadnienia kryminologiczne i penitencjarne. Archiwum Kryminologii, (XXXVI), 341–362.


Incest is a perennial moral taboo. The word usually denotes sexual relations between close family members, and less frequently, in-laws and adoptees. Prohibitions on engaging in these types of sexual relations can be found in every society. The family members prohibited by the criminal law from engaging in sexual relations with each other might have changed and narrowed over the centuries, but this type of deed remains proscribed by most criminal law systems. It is usually noted, however, that the small number of convictions recorded for this type of crime every year is a sign that a clear majority of perpetrators of incest and similar acts go unpunished. Where the legal provisions concerning incest fall short is in their practical ineffectiveness when it comes to preventing victimisation. A general psychological profile of this type of offender has yet to be created, as has a broader profile of the paedophile. This might be difficult because the nature of what causes sexual preference disorders (e.g. paedophilia, sadism and fetishism) has yet to be determined. The results presented in this paper are intended to reveal the character traits that distinguish offenders who incestuously exploit minors and who have been diagnosed as paraphiliacs. The average age of the offenders surveyed was 43 years. This finding accords with results of the studies presented in the international literature, viz. that people convicted of incest and other sexual offences against minors living with them in the same household are older than rapists and paedophiles whose victims do not live with them in the same household. The survey group was dominated by people with primary (including 5 who had completed “special schools” at primary level) or vocational education (most common among those convicted). A mere 7 people who could produce a diploma to prove they had finished secondary school were recorded and most of these qualifications were vocational. No one in the group had higher education. Their level of education was found to match their current occupations, i.e. trades or manual labour that did not require any special qualifications, and to bear out the fact that most of them were of average IQ. Everyone in the group had been diagnosed with one or more sexual preference disorders and for this reason they were all completing remedial programs while serving prison terms. This category of convicts was dominated by people diagnosed as repeat heterosexual paedophiles. It is also worth noting that many in the group had been diagnosed with other psychiatric disorders – especially alcohol dependence syndrome – in addition to sexual preference disorders. The victims were overwhelmingly female (59 or 85.5% of the total). Thirty six of these girls had been sexually exploited by their biological fathers. The sex of the victim would therefore appear to be of crucial importance in terms of threats from friends and relatives living in the same environment.


  1. Beech A., Mann R., Recent developments in the assessment and treatment of sexual offenders [w:] J. McGuire (red.), Offenders Rehabilitation and Treatment. Effective Programmes and Policies to Reduce Re-offending, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester 2002.
  2. Cortoni F., Ganon T.A., What works with female sexual offenders [w:] L.A. Craig, L. Dixton, T.A. Ganon (red.), What Works in Offender Rehabilitation. An Evidence – based Approach to Assessment and Treatment, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester 2013.
  3. Douglas K.S., Hart S.D., Webster C.D., Belfrage H., Eaves D., HCR – V3 Historical Clinical Risk Management (version3). Professional guidelines for evaluating risk for violence, Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby 2013.
  4. Gelb K., Recidivism of sex Offenders. Research Paper, Sentencing Advisory Council, Melbourne 2007.
  5. Hadson S.M., Ward T., McCormack J. C., Offence pathways in sexual offenders, „Journal of Interpersonal Violence” 1999, t. 14, nr 8.
  6. Hanson R.K., Gizzarelli R., Scott H., The Attitudes of incest offenders sexual entitlement and acceptance of sex with children, „Criminal Justice and Behavior” 1994, t. 21, nr 2.
  7. Hanson R.K., Morton-Bourgon K.E., The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders. A meta- analysis of recidivism studies, „Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology” 2005, nr 73, s. 1154–1163.
  8. Holtfreter K., Cupp R., Gender and risk assessment. The empirical status of the LSI – R for women, „Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice” 2007, nr 23.
  9. Latessa E.J., Listwan S.J., Koetzle D., What Works and doesn’t in Reducing Recidivism, Anderson Publishing, Waltham 2014.
  10. Lipsey M.W., Howell J.C., Kelly M.R., Chapman G., Carver D., Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs. A New Perspective on Evidence – Based Programs, Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, Georgetown University 2010.
  11. MacKenzie D.L., Criminal justice and crime prevention [w:] L.W. Sherman, D. Gottfredson, D.L. Mackenzie, J. Eck, P. Reuter, S. Bushway (red.), Preventing Crime. What Works, what doesn´t, what´s Promising. A Report to the United States Congress. Prepared for the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Washington 1997.
  12. Malamuth N.M., Heavey C.L., Linz D., Predicting men’s antisocial behavior against women. The interaction model of sexual aggression [w:] G.C.N. Hall, R. Hirschman, J.G. Graham, M.S. Zaragoza (red.), Sexual Aggression. Issues in Etiology, Assessment, and Treatment, Taylor & Francis, Washington 1993.
  13. Mann R.E., Shingler J., Schemadriven cognitions in sexual offenders. Theory, assessment and treatment [w:] W.L. Marshall, Y.M. Fernandez, L.E. Marshall, G.A. Serran (red.), Sexual Offender Treatment: Controversial Issues, Jon Wiley & Sons, Chichester 2006.
  14. Marshall W.L., Marshall L.E., Serran G.A., Empathy and offending behavior [w:] M. McMurran, R. Howard (red.), Personality, Personality Disorder and Violence, Jon Wiley & Sons, Chichester 2009.
  15. Podgajna-Kuśmierek M., Pedofilia. Zarys zagadnienia, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, Kraków 2003.
  16. Russel K., Darjee R., Managing the risk posed by personality disordered sex offenders in the community. A model for providing structured clinical guidance to support criminal justice services [w:] C. Logan, L. Johnstone (red.), Managing Clinical Risk. A Guide to Effective Practice, Routledge, New York 2013.
  17. Salter A.C., Pokonywanie traumy, Wydawnictwo Media Rodzina, Poznań 2003.
  18. Smallbone S., Wortley R., Child sexual abuse. Offender characteristics and modus operandi, „Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice” 2001, nr 193.
  19. Snyder H.S., Sexual Assault of Young Children as Reported to Law Enforcement. Victim, Incident, and Offender Characteristics, raport nr 2000, NCJ 182990, Bureau of Justice Statistics. U.S. Department of Justice, 2000, [dostęp: 02.05.2014].
  20. Szwejkowska M., Sitek B., Karnoprawny zakaz stosunków kazirodczych, „Studia Prawnoustrojowe” 2014, nr 23, s. 31-47.
  21. Szwejkowska M., Skazani z zaburzeniami preferencji seksualnych. Studium karnoprawne i kryminologiczne, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego, Olsztyn 2013.
  22. Ward T., Hadson S.M., A self-regulation model of relapse prevention [w:] D.R. Laws, S.M. Hudson, T. Ward (red.), Remaking Relapse Prevention with Sex Offenders: A Sourcebook, Sage, Thousand Oaks 2000.