Between Risk and Race: Does Diagnostic Ambiguity Fuel Racial Disparities under Sexually Violent Predator Laws?

• In Event: 20201 - Laws and Criminalization

Abstract

Recent shifts in penal policy have moved from punitive measures to strategies focused on managing future risk. Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) laws exemplify this trend by authorizing indefinite detention based on forensic psychiatric evaluations that determine whether an individual possesses a “mental abnormality” or “personality disorder” linked to future sexual violence. This study investigates whether these evaluations may contribute to racial disparities in the assignment of DSM-IV diagnoses under SVP laws. Using two datasets describing persons detained under Florida’s SVP law, we examine demographic profiles, the distribution of key diagnoses (including “paraphilia, NOS” and pedophilia), and corresponding conviction outcomes for rape and sex offenses involving minor victims. Our findings reveal that Black detainees are disproportionately assigned the ambiguous “paraphilia, NOS” diagnosis, whereas white detainees are more likely to be diagnosed with pedophilia. Comparison with conviction data suggests these diagnostic discrepancies are not solely driven by differences in offending patterns, indicating that subjective evaluation practices may exacerbate racial inequities. Our findings suggest that the ambiguous nature of certain DSM categories may function as a vehicle for unequal treatment within the SVP framework.

Authors

• Trevor Alexander Hoppe, University of North Carolina-Greensboro

• Rebecca Ann DiBennardo, Vera Institute of Justice

• Sayer Davis Van Dyke