Second, findings indicate that those following the childhood-limited conduct trajectory do not experience complete recovery; instead, on average, they account for more criminal convictions, emergency department visits, injury claims, and benefit-months as compared to their peers on the low-conduct problem pathway. Although their service usage was elevated in comparison to the cohort norm, children who followed a childhood-limited trajectory did not accumulate similar levels of criminal convictions and social welfare service usage as their peers on the LCP pathway. A similar pattern of findings emerged for individuals following the adolescent-onset pathway; their levels of offending were much lower than those exhibited by individuals on the LCP pathway (0.9 versus 5.1 convictions, p<.001 respectively) suggesting continued divergence on criminal offending as the cohort is followed further into adulthood. However, those following the adolescent-onset pathway did not exhibit signs of complete recovery when compared to their peers on the low-conduct pathway as they remained slightly elevated in terms of the average number of criminal convictions, health care, and social service usage (see footnote below Table 1 for a comparison of those on the adolescent-onset versus low pathway).
