This study looks at the demographic characteristics and psychiatric diagnoses of minor perpetrators of sexual abuse. Subjects of the study were all minor perpetrators seen at the Child Protection Unit of the University of the Philippines - Philippine General Hospital from March 1997 to September 1998. Of the seventeen subjects seen by the psychiatrists of the unit, majority were in their adolescence (11-14 years) with 5-10 year of age difference from their victims. All were known to the victim as relatives, playmates or neighbors. One third of the minor perpetrators denied committing the abuse. Among those admitted the abuse, no common reason for the act was obtained. Majority of the perpetrators did not have an existing psychiatric disorder at the time of the abuse and majority attended school. Three of the seventeen minor perpetrators had conduct disorder with two having a co-existing mental retardation. Five of the seventeen had an adjustment disorder with depressed mood following the incident.
Human ; Adolescent ; Child ; MINORS ; SEX OFFENSES

Objectives: This study described the demographic and clinical profile, mental health problems, prevalence of psychiatric conditions, psychosocial interventions used, and outcomes of the management of mental health problems among in-patients admitted to non-psychiatry units of tertiary hospitals referred to mental health care providers; and described gender-disaggregated data related to mental health care providers and patients receiving psychosocial interventions in tertiary hospitals. Methods: This study employed a mixed-method design, using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies following the convergence model of triangulation. The following were the data sources: (1) cross-sectional review of charts of patients referred for psychosocial problems using the ICD-10 classification; (2) a survey of mental health service providers; (3) key informant interviews of mental health service providers; and (4) focus group discussions of mental health providers. All data were collated, compared, and contrasted, then analyzed using the convergence model of triangulation design. Results: Among the 3,502 patients in the chart review, 1,870 (53.40%) were males. The median age was 46.08 years and 92.06% were adults. The most common diagnosis among the patients were mood disorder (744, 21.25%) and organic mental disorder (710, 20.27%). Combination treatment of psychosocial intervention and pharmacology was the most common strategy received by patients. There was a higher proportion of patients admitted to public hospitals (996, 45.27%) who received psychosocial interventions only compared to those admitted to private hospitals (235, 18.05%). There were 3,453 out of 3,502 in-patients referred for psychiatric intervention. Of these 2,420 (70%) received psychoeducation, 2,365 (68.5%), received supportive psychotherapy/counseling, 535 (15.5%) family therapy, and 286 (8.3%) behavior modification. There were more patients given psychosocial interventions 2,541 (72.56%) who were discharged with instruction to follow-up, while around one in 10 (456, 13.02%) was not instructed to do a follow-up consultation. The types of interventions across all data sources were similar. Conclusion The most common type of management for psychosocial problems of in-patients in tertiary hospitals was a combination of psychosocial intervention and pharmacotherapy. Psychoeducation, supportive psychotherapy/ counseling, and family therapy were the most often given psychosocial interventions. The patient-related reasons for the choice of interventions were patient’s medical status (diagnosis and severity of symptoms) and psychological status (psychological mindedness), while the provider-related factors influencing the choice of intervention were provider’s skills and personal preference. Moreover, resources (human and material) and service provision policies (treatment guidelines and aftercare interventions) were the most common hospital-related factors. Further prospective research to determine the associated patients, providers, and hospital factors in larger geographic and cultural settings will provide evidence for the effectiveness and outcomes of psychosocial interventions.
psychosocial