Sexual offences: A focus on victims with intellectual disability, a vulnerable population
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Victims of sexual offences who have intellectual disabilities (IDs) face many challenges when formal charges are laid. When seeking a just outcome, the legal fraternity relies on valid and reliable testimony in order to prosecute alleged perpetrators. This review article discusses some of these challenges, which could include other comorbid medical and psychiatric conditions, firstly defining ID together with a classification of severity. The authors then provide some insights into the victim assessment unit at Sterkfontein Hospital with regard to the history of the outpatient unit, procedure, methods of assessment, and reporting to the courts. Finally, some important ethicolegal considerations are considered, emphasising the facilitation of legal processes and ensuring justice while preserving autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence. The review concludes with a recommendation for an analysis of all victims who have been referred to the unit to date.
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The SAJBL is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
How to Cite
References
1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Boston: Pearson, 2013.
2. Pasca R. Person-environment fit theory. In: Michalos AC, ed. Encyclopaedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Dordrecht: Springer, 2014:4776-4778. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2155
3. Mahour P, Panday S. Changes in intellectual disability in DSM-5. Int J Contemp Issues Behav Sci 2015;1(2):46-50.
4. Carson D, Lindsay WR, Holland AJ, et al. Sex offenders with intellectual disability referred to levels of community and secure provision: Comparison and prediction of pathway. Leg Criminol Psychol 2014;19(2):3. https://doi. org/10.1111/lcrp.12005
5. Committee to Evaluate the Supplemental Security Income Disability Program for Children with Mental Disorders; Board on the Health of Select Populations; Board on Children, Youth, and Families; Institute of Medicine; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Boat TF, Wu JT, eds. Clinical characteristics of intellectual disabilities. In: Mental Disorders and Disabilities Among Low-Income Children. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2015:9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/books/NBK332877/ (accessed 7 April 2026).
6. Wehmeyer M, Chapman TE, Little TD, Thompson JR, Schalock R, Tasse MJ. Efficacy of the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS) to predict extraordinary support needs. Am J Intellect Dev Disabil 2009;114(1):3-14. https://doi.org/10.1352/2009.114:3-14
7. Dell’Armo K, Tassé MJ. Diagnostic overshadowing of psychological disorders in people with intellectual disability: A systematic review. Am J Intellect Dev Disabil 2024;129(2):116-134. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-129.2.116
8. Tyrer P, Tyrer F, Hanney M, Tyrer S. Measuring outcomes, including the use of rating scales and instruments in people with intellectual disability. In: Bhaumik S, Alexander R, eds. Oxford Textbook of the Psychiatry of Intellectual Disability. Oxford: Oxford Academic, 2020:43-54. https://doi.org/10.1093/ med/9780198794585.003.0005
9. O’Hara J. Attending to the health needs of people with intellectual disability: Quality standards. Salud Publica Mex 2008;50(Suppl 2):154-159. https://doi. org/10.1590/s0036-36342008000800008
10. South Africa. Domestic Violence Amendment Act 14 of 2021. https://www. gov.za/documents/acts/domestic-violence-amendment-act-14-2021-english- afrikaans-28-jan-2022 (accessed 7 April 2026).
11. South Africa. Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007. https://www.gov.za/documents/criminal-law-sexual-offences- and-related-matters-amendment-act (accessed 7 April 2026).
12. South Africa. Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 13 of 2021. https://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/2021-013.pdf (accessed 7 April 2026).
13. Deane T. Why focus on gender-based violence and femicide. In: Gender-Based Violence and Femicide in South Africa. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature, 2024:49-63. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61053-0_3
14. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. ‘Mini-Mental State’: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975;12(3):189-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6
15. Hobson J. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Occup Med (Lond) 2015;65(9):764-765. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqv078
16. South Africa. Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. https://www.justice.gov.za/ legislation/acts/1977-051.pdf (accessed 7 April 2026).
17. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 8th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
18. Jansen van Vuuren J, Aldersey HM. Stigma, acceptance and belonging for people with IDD across cultures. Curr Dev Disord Rep 2020;7(3):163-172. https://doi. org/10.1007/s40474-020-00206-w