This trend has been fueled by the following beliefs among the public and policymakers: there is an epidemic of juvenile offending, including juvenile sex offending; juvenile sex offenders have more in common with adult sex offenders than with other juvenile delinquents; and in the absence of sex offender-specific treatment, juvenile sex offenders are at exceptionally high risk of reoffending. Regarding the first assumption, in his recent review of the data, Zimring (2004) argued that between 1974-2000 rates of juvenile sexual offending tended to be stable. In many cases, harsh sanctions against juvenile sex offending have remained in place and even intensified during the period that juvenile sex offending was declining. Regarding the assumption that juvenile sex offenders are different from other juvenile offenders, the available research suggests that juvenile sex offenders have much in common with other delinquents (Milloy, 1994). Hanson (2002) has suggested that the initial peak in ages of sex offenders, which occurs at age 13, may be due to "generally antisocial, aggressive youth becoming sexually active." Regarding the assumption that juvenile sex offenders are at high risk of reoffending, the evidence suggests that sexual recidivism rates for juvenile sex offenders are low, both statistically and compared with recidivism rates for nonsexual offenses. These three flawed assumptions about juvenile sex offenders have undermined the traditional legal and clinical bases for managing juveniles according to the distinctive developmental factors that characterize adolescence. Fortunately, a paradigm shift that acknowledges these developmental factors is apparently emerging in clinical interventions, although it is not so evident in the trend of legal sanctions. 115 references