Aim:

This study aimed to identify whether clinicians' gender, clinical experience, and personal attitudes influenced their perception of criminality of specific sexual behaviours, their judgments about criminal liability if mentally disordered, and the need for treatment as part of criminal settings for those having ICD-11 paraphilic disorders.

Method:

In a secondary analysis of data only vignettes with the least (do not meet paraphilic disorder diagnostic requirements) and most extreme (met paraphilic disorder diagnostic requirements) descriptions of ICD-11 frotteuristic, coercive sexual sadism, and exhibitionistic arousal patterns and related behavior were randomly presented to participants. A total of 1,101 clinicians rated one to three vignettes (a total of 1,884) answering questions regarding diagnosis, criminal features, and their own attitudes.

Results:

The ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines were adequately used to distinguish paraphilic disorders from non-pathological arousal patterns.Vignette severity was the most important predictor for clinicians' determination that a crime was committed. Results showed an interaction of the classification of paraphilic disorders, clinicians' gender, and personal attitudes with judgments about concepts associated with criminality, criminal liability if a diagnosis was indicated, and the need for treatment in forensic settings.

Conclusions:

Increased formal education, clinical training about these disorders, and evidence-based treatment guidelines are required to avoid biases that may come from preconceived ideas and personal attitudes. Laws and policies that unnecessarily restrict the treatment of these patients in non-forensic settings—for example, when the individual is distress about the arousal pattern but no crime has been committed—should be examined.