Introduction Sexual offenders are subject to a particularly devastating stigma and, consequently, classified as their own particular form of criminal. The nature of the offence tends to elicit extreme emotional responses and stand out as being especially egregious due to the potential for extreme emotional and psychological suffering in victims and the harm being most often directed towards vulnerable members of the population. The portrayal of sex offenders in the media also tends to create distorted perceptions among the public, including beliefs of especially high recidivism and how there is little to no chance for rehabilitation. Considering attitudes toward sexual offenders, it is no surprise that their release back into the community is a controversial subject. The practice of community notification is perceived as a means to combat the potential for recidivism among these criminals by providing citizens with the information necessary to protect themselves and others. However, the success of such measures is subject to copious amounts of criticism that outlines key flaws in the goals and also identifies a myriad of unintended consequences. In this paper, I argue that the ineffectiveness and potential harm caused by community notification serves as a strong incentive for major adjustments to that policy framework. Brief Background The murder of Sarah Kelly in 1994 by convicted pedophile Robert Arthurson, among a multitude of other high profile cases throughout
Barbaree looked at 224 sex offenders. Of those men, 33 committed a new offense of some kind for a general recidivism rate of 14.7 percent. Even more interesting was the study did not support the idea that good treatment behavior, as in positive or appropriate behavior in group sessions, good homework assignments, and positive ratings of motivation, could be associated with a less of a chance for recidivism. They gave two possible reasons for this finding. Sex offenders, by the very nature of their criminal behavior, are masters of manipulation and exploitation. These individuals can exhibit behavior that contributes to favorable assessments. The second possible reason is these skills are learned, or enhanced, in the treatment setting. Data from a program
Sex offenders feel unsafe in prison due to threats and actual victimization by fellow inmates. That leads to sex offenders serving their sentence in protective custody, or solitary confinement, for their own good (Higgins & Ireland, 2009; Hogue, 1993; Ricciardelli & Moir, 2013). However, they should not be isolated “for their own good” because they do not deserve it. The negative treatment by other inmates and negative attitudes of prison staff will lead to additional social isolation often already present in sex offenders due to their limited social
There have been many federal acts passed in correspondence with sex offenses that illicit feat with the public. There are many different types of ways in which Levenson & colleagues’ (2007) describes the perceptions that the public has based on certain factors. For instance, in relation to the perception about the sex offender notification system, a survey produced results of around 80 percent in favor of these registries, because these individuals felt safer in their communities knowing who was in their neighborhood. Further, due to this fear that resonated in the early 1990’s communities do have tools such as residential restrictions, civil commitment, notification procedures, etc. that aid in the protection. However, there are myths associated with sex offenders, for example legislation often states that the reasoning for new laws and regulations is due to the high recidivism rates. However, sex offenders have significantly lower recidivism rates than believed. Also, there are countless people who do not believe that sex offenders can be assisted with techniques from a psychological standpoint. Most people think that these offenders cannot be treated, however, there is research being conducted that is promising. Finally, there is a common misconception that sex offenders kill their victims, especially children more often than other killers, however this is not true.
Stories of sex offenders have been increasingly a focus of attention by the criminal justice system over the past years. By legal definition, a sex offender “is a person who is convicted of a sexual offense (Sex Offender Law & Legal Definition),” an act which is prohibited by the jurisdiction. What constitutes as a sex offense or normal/abnormal sexual behavior varies over time and place, meaning that it also varies by legal jurisdiction and culture. In the United States of America, for example, a person can be convicted of wide range of sexual behavior that includes prostitution, incest, sex with a minor, rape, and other sex offenses (Sex Offender Law & Legal Definition). As the nature of sex crimes have long held the
Public Eye on Sexual Offenders In preparing for this essay it has been identified that sexual offenders are not a homogenous group of individuals and that this is an umbrella term used to describe a range of behaviours ranging from acts of voyeurism and exhibitionism, to more serious acts of pedophilia and rape. For the purpose of this essay I have chosen to focus on the more serious forms of sex offending which in my opinion, are the cause of much of the current attention. In order to understand why sexual offenders attract so much attention I will begin by considering today’s society and the emergence of post-modernist values and the preoccupation with risk.
Sex offender registry laws were intended to increase public safety and to reduce the reoffending rates of sexual offenders. However, this paper will argue that registration has no effect on recidivism rates and that the law actually negatively impacts rehabilitative goals because of the unforeseen issues stemming from registration. An analysis of the existing body of literature concerning registration from the United States will address the
Summary of Article or Findings: The key problem the authors raise is if there is a stigma directed at registered sex offenders. The research focuses on certain consequences that register sex offenders deal with because of their status. The data gather in the research shows key problems in being a registered sex offender. The evidence that shows the key problem of being a registered sex offender is actual insight from actual registered sex offenders. The key finding of the research is there are main consequences that registered sex offender’s deal with because of being a registered sex offender. The sex offender’s deal with family and intimate relationship issues, loss of employment, denied promotions at work, lack of housing, different types of harassment. The key concept which leads to the conclusion is that there is a stigma directed at registered sex offenders. Since the registered sex offenders have consequences because of their status as a registered sex offender it gives the look that no matter what, they will never fulfill their debt to society. The conclusion the author’s made is that there are problems with registered sex offenders in locations that have need been studied and those that have been studied. The consequences the registered sex offenders receive could cause further problems such as reoffending and that the stigma regarding sex offenders is still active.
The number of registered sex offenders have increasingly grew over the years. Every day you see a man or women added to the registry for crimes against women and mostly children. The sex offender registries biggest and main focus is to keep the people in the community in each city and state informed and protected. ”Sex offenders and sex crimes provoke a great deal of anxiety in our society.” Baker, J, Brannon, Y, N., Fortney. , Levenson, J.S. (“Public Perceptions about Sex Offenders and Community Protection”). The sex offender registry is based solely on protecting the public from being a victim
Perception is not reality. The common assumption that the court system often treats female sex offenders differently than male sex offenders, the punishments of female sex offenders are more lenient than men who commit the same types of crimes, and the differences between male and female victims are all perception and not reality. Objective considerations to additional factors make the perceptions baseless. These additional factors solidify the factual differences between male and female sex offenders.
When we hear the phrase, sex offender, we normally feel repulsed. We think of dirty old creepy men. I for one used to do this, I won’t lie. This is because people like to rush to judgment. But my opinions changed when I came to the realization that it’s not just creepy old men who are sex offenders. I want to talk about them, but not those who are serial rapists or child molesters; they don’t deserve to be talked about. I’m talking about people who are convicted, whether it’s falsely, or unjustly, and have to wear a stamp on their forehead for the rest of their lives saying they are a sex offender.
South-Carolina implemented its public online sex offender registry in 1999 including notifications, and there was no significant decline in adult sex crimes. In conclusion, registering as a sex offender and public notifications do not work as a deterrence of adult sex crimes. However, the research did not cover sex offenses against children. A study in Wisconsin by Zevitz and Farkas, showed the community notifications caused “increased community anxiety, impeded offender reintegration, and drained agency resources.”
Over the years, there has been controversy on the topic of whether the names of sex offenders should or shouldn’t be made public. Sex offender laws may vary from state to state depending on the specific type of violation. When the sex offenders are released from prison, they are enlisted on an online database where their names, photographs, and addresses are displayed to the public. As a result of this national publication database, “sex-offender laws have grown self-defeatingly harsh” (Economist 655). When sex offenders are added to the registries, it is often felt unfair that the registries enforce harsh punishments for small offenses, sex- offender laws punishes the offender and his or her family, and does little to protect the innocent.
A Hanson and Morton-Bourgon study found that over a 15 year time period, the rate for recidivism was a terrifying 35% for child molesters of boy victims and 24% for rapists. It is vital to consider that there is an abundance of victims whose trauma prohibits them from coming forward therefore a thoroughly accurate representation of repeat offences is severely limited. Brent Peter Cowan is a prime example of a sex offender, whose minimal
Sex offenses receive an inordinate amount of special attention from the public as well as the criminal justice system. Is this because our system is a static reflection of the society/community they answer to? Sexual offense stories infiltrate every membrane of our society, from legal mores to norms, from social media to religion. Our system of justice can’t help but deliver attention to this area. Justice demands it and society needs it for interpersonal validation. The Criminal Justice system has given humans a scale to rate what is normal and what is deviant. Our text (Okada. p.182) shares that
In this paper I will discuss the typical profiling of sex offenders and how one cannot simply point them out in a crowd. I will discuss why sex offenders do not stand out from “normal” people. I will discuss a little bit of why these people do the things they do and what kind of cure there is for these crimes, if any. It is important to know why we cannot assume one is bad news, such as a sex offender and to find out for sure. The true meaning of “you cannot judge a book by its cover” will be revealed in this paper with many examples.