policy

The Impact of Sex Offender Registration Policies on Sex Offenders and Community Members

Research Proposal

CJ 421 Policy Analysis in Criminal Justice

Introduction

The development of sex offender registration and notification programs in the United States has proceeded rapidly since the early 1990s, and at the present time such programs exist in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and some of the territories and tribes. In its most basic form, sex offender registrations are systems for monitoring and tracking sex offenders following their release from confinement into the community. The registration provides important information about convicted sex offenders to local and federal authorities and the public, such as offender's name, current location and past offenses (U.S. DOJ, 2015).  Sex offenders are a stigmatized population within our country’s criminal justice system and the major impediments to implementation of sex offender registration policies are non-compliance, loopholes, and the difficult reintegration of an offender who has completed his/her sanctions. On the other end of the spectrum, sex offenders provoke a great deal of anxiety in our society, and community members feel safer knowing who is and where convicted sex offenders live and are being monitored (Levenson et al, 2007). High-profile sex crimes routinely grab headlines, but the question of how well sex offense laws are working in terms of the individual in a community has been examined to a small extent. The aim of this paper is to consider how policies that have been designed to manage the risk of known offenders from reoffending potentially impact the individual as well as the community and its safety.

Background and Significance

The term sex offender refers to an individual who has been convicted of a sex-related crime, or of attempting to commit a sex-related crime. Sex offender registration rulings are promoted as a means of (1) deterring offenders from committing future crimes, (2) providing law enforcement with an additional investigative tool, and (3) increasing public protection (CSOM, 1999). Stricter sentencing, enhanced registration requirements, community notifications, increased residency restrictions, and electronic monitoring are of the few recent trends and policy developments that have contributed to the goals stated above.

According to registration policies, an individual convicted of a sex crime required by law to register must do so prior to leaving state, county or city confinement. They must follow up by registering in person within 24 hours of their release at their county sheriff’s office. It is a federal crime for an individual to knowingly fail to update or register as required. A sex offender who fails to properly register may face fines and up to 10 years in prison. Furthermore, if a sex offender knowingly fails to update or register and commits a violent federal crime, he or she may face up to 30 years in prison under this statute (U.S. DOJ, 2015). These publicly accessible online registries have been the center of most sex offender controversy due to its revealing format. Any public user is capable of searching features including names, zip codes, cities or towns, counties, and addresses, usually through a mapping option. Sites also provide case-specific characteristics including various personal details about offenders such as appearance, specific offense information, victim information, and place of employment. With this information, there have been a growing number of state and municipal laws that expressly forbid sex offenders from living near places where children gather. The inability of convicted sex offenders to find housing when they are released from prison has become more difficult and a significant barrier to their successful reintegration into society. 

Literature Review

The bulk of literature applicable to my research is derived from the articles of Day et al. and Ackerman et al. For this paper, the role sex offender registration policies play in how lifestyles are like for both the offender once released into the community and the members of the community is investigated. Because registration requirements are overbroad in scope and overlong in duration, there are hundreds of thousands of registered sex offenders in the US, including individuals convicted of non-violent crimes such as consensual sex between teenagers, prostitution, and public urination, as well as those who committed their only offenses decades ago (HRW, 2007). It is hypothesized that sex offender policies are effective in terms of deterring offenders from committing future crimes, providing law enforcement with an additional investigative tool, and increasing public protection but also create impediments regarding harassment of the individual, their freedom to privacy, and reintegration into society. The following literature reviews attempt to demonstrate and support the given hypothesis.

Day et al (2014) discussed that the limited evidence available to demonstrate that registration, community notification, and residency restriction policies are effective in reducing reoffending has led some to conclude that the laws upon which they are based are ‘ill-considered, poorly crafted, and may cause more harm than good’. Because of this, risk management policies become important in tailoring the level of intervention to the needs of the individual offender. The current approach to sex offender management is targeted at only those offenders who are considered to be at particularly high risk, which contradicts the idea that collaboration is key to the effective management of all sex offenders.

Ackerman et al (2012) examined the effectiveness of current policies on the incidence of rape. Even with legislation implementing new restrictions on convicted sex offenders, including registration with law enforcement agencies, community notification provisions, and sexually violent predator designations permitting civil commitment following a prison sentence, in the end their research show no evidence that current policies reduce the incidence of rape.

Day, Newton, and Hobbs (2014) aimed to report the perspectives of a group of professional staff who routinely work with sex offenders in the community in a jurisdiction in which offender registration schemes are relatively well-established. The results presented that there was a widely held view that the current laws are both over-inclusive and place unfair restrictions on some offenders. The participants in this study strongly endorse such suggestions which involve creating tiered systems of registration based on levels of risk, with varied application, scope, registration periods, and monitoring requirements.

The literature on these subjects is found very relevant for this research project. For individuals accused and convicted of a sex crime, both social and personal tolls are high. Once registered, the individual's name, picture and personal information will be readily available on these databases and easy for anyone to find and share. Although registration provides important information about convicted sex offenders to local and federal authorities and the public, the question of how effective current sex offense laws are in managing the individual and the protection of the public remain.

Works Cited

U.S. Department of Justice (2015, July). Citizen's guide to U.S. federal law on sex offender registration. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-federal-law-sex-offender-registration

Levenson, J. S., Brannon, Y. N., Fortney, T., & Baker, J. (2007). Public Perceptions About Sex Offenders and Community Protection Policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy Analyses Soc Iss & Publ Pol, 7(1), 1-25.

Center For Sex Offender Management [CSOM]. (1999, October). Sex Offender Registration: Policy Overview and Comprehensive Practices." Retrieved from http://www.csom.org/pubs/sexreg.pdf

Human Rights Watch [HRW]. (2007, September 11). US: Sex Offender Laws May Do More Harm Than Good. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/news/2007/09/11/us-sex-offender-laws-may-do-more-harm-good

Ackerman, A. R., Sacks, M., & Greenberg, D. F. (2012). Legislation Targeting Sex Offenders: Are Recent Policies Effective in Reducing Rape? Justice Quarterly, 29(6), 858-887.

Day, A., Carson, E., Newton, D., & Hobbs, G. (2014). Professional Views on the Management of Sex Offenders in the Community. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 53(3), 171-189.

Day, A., Carson, E., Boni, N., & Hobbs, G. (2014). The management of sex offenders in the community: from policy to practice. Australian Journal Of Social Issues (Australian Social Policy Association), 49(3), 249-264.