Sex Offender Management Policies and Evidence-Based Recommendations for Registry Reform
- 68 Downloads
Purpose of Review
The goal of this paper is to improve evidence-based sex offender management systems through an understanding of the research findings related to the stated goals and unintended consequences of such laws.
Assessment tools using factors derived from research studies can improve the identification of higher-risk sex offenders, so that more intensive or restrictive interventions can be tailored to those who pose the highest threat to community safety. After substantial time offense-free in the community, even higher-risk offenders become less likely to reoffend, suggesting that registration durations can be modified to utilize resources more efficiently.
Several strategies for applying the evidence base to inform the utility, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of sex offender policies include (1) use of empirically derived risk assessment tools to classify offenders and modify registration requirements accordingly, (2) removal of juveniles from registries; and (3) elimination of residence restrictions.
KeywordsSex offender Registration Notification SORN Residence restrictions Recidivism
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Jill S. Levenson declares no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance
- 2.National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Registered Sex Offenders in the United States. 2015 7/30/15]; Available from: http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/documents/sex-offender-map.pdf.
- 5.Levenson JS, Grady MD, Leibowitz G. Grand challenges: social justice and the need for evidence-based sex offender registry reform. J Sociol Soc Welf, 2016. 43(2).Google Scholar
- 7.Levenson JS, Brannon Y, Fortney T, Baker J. Public perceptions about sex offenders and community protection policies. Anal Soc Issues Public Policy. 2007;7(1):137–61.Google Scholar
- 9.Harris AJ, Socia KM. What’s in a name? Evaluating the effects of the “sex offender” label on public opinions and beliefs. Sex Abus: J Res Treat, 2014: p. 1079063214564391.Google Scholar
- 10.Manchak SM, Fisher LR. An examination of multiple factors influencing support for sex offender policy. Crim Justice Policy Rev, 2017: p. 0887403417715684, https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403417715684.
- 11.Bureau of Justice Statistics. National Crime Victimization Survey 2010, U.S. Department of Justice: Washington, DC: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf.
- 17.Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Sex offender sentencing in Washington State: did community notification influence recidivism? 2005, Author: Olympia.Google Scholar
- 21.Levenson JS, Zgoba K. Community protection policies and repeat sexual offenses in Florida. Int J Offender Ther Comp Crim, 2015. doi: 0306624X15573946.Google Scholar
- 30.Sample LL, Streveler AJ. Latent consequences of community notification laws. In: Decker SH, Alaird LF, Katz CM, editors. Controversies in criminal justice. Los Angeles: Roxbury; 2003. p. 353–62.Google Scholar
- 31.Tewksbury R. Experiences and attitudes of registered female sex offenders. Fed Probat. 2004;68(3):30–4.Google Scholar
- 34.Zevitz RG, Farkas MA. Sex offender community notification: managing high risk criminals or exacting further vengeance? Behav Sci Law. 2000;18(2-3):375–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0798(200003/06)18:2/3<375::AID-BSL380>3.0.CO;2-N.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 35.Levenson JS. Hidden challenges: sex offenders legislated into homelessness. J Soc Work. 2016:146801731665481. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017316654811.
- 38.Colorado Department of Public Safety. Report on safety issues raised by living arrangements for and location of sex offenders in the community. Denver: Sex Offender Management Board; 2004.Google Scholar
- 41.SMART Office Sex offender management, assessment, and planning initiative. 2015: Office of Justice Programs.Google Scholar
- 42.Mogavero MC, Kennedy LW. The social and geographic patterns of sexual offending: is sex offender residence restriction legislation practical? Victims & Offenders, 2015: p. 1–33.Google Scholar
- 45.Walfield SM, Levenson JS, Cubellis MA, Harris AJ, Lobanov-Rostovsky C. Law enforcement views on sex offender compliance with registration mandates. Am J Crim Justice. 2017:1–26.Google Scholar
- 50.Hanson RK, Thornton D, Helmus L-M, Babchishin KM. What sexual recidivism rates are associated with Static-99R and Static-2002R scores? Sex Abus: J Res Treat, 2015: p. 1079063215574710.Google Scholar
- 51.Hanson RK, Thornton D. Static 99: improving actuarial risk assessments for sex offenders. Ottawa: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada; 1999.Google Scholar
- 56.• Zgoba K, Miner M, Levenson JS, Knight R, Letourneau E, Thornton D. The Adam Walsh Act An Examination of Sex Offender Risk Classification Systems. Sex Abus: J Res treat. 2015; https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063215569543. A longitudinal, four-state study funded by the National Institutes of justice. Compared the validity and utility of the Adam Walsh Act Tier classification system with actuarial risk assessment protocols, and found that the AWA Tiers were not valid predictors of risk or recidivism.
- 57.Harris AJ. SORNA in the post-deadline era: what’s the next move? Sex Offender Law Rep. 2011;12(6):81–6.Google Scholar
- 58.Ellman IM, Ellman T. “Frightening and high”: the Supreme Court’s crucial mistake about sex crime statistics. Const Comment. 2015;30:495–667.Google Scholar
- 59.• Hanson RK, Harris AJ, Helmus L, Thornton D. High-risk sex offenders may not be high risk forever. J Interpers Violence. 2014;29(15):2792–813. Provides longitudinal data over 20 years documenting the recidivism trends of low, moderate, and high-risk sexual offenders, which provides compelling evidence for guidance in the construction of registry durations and sex offender management policies. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 60.Harris, A.J.R. and R.K. Hanson. When is a sex offender no longer a sex offender? In 31st Annual Research and Treatment Conference of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. 2012. Denver, CO.Google Scholar
- 61.Harris AJR, Hanson RK. Sex offender recidivism: a simple question. Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada; 2004.Google Scholar
- 63.Schmucker M, Lösel F. The effects of sexual offender treatment on recidivism: an international meta-analysis of sound quality evaluations. J Exp Criminol. 2015:1–34.Google Scholar
- 65.Andrews DA, Bonta J. The psychology of criminal conduct. 4th ed. Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing; 2017.Google Scholar
- 67.Yates PM, Prescott D, Ward T. Applying the good lives and self-regulation models to sex offender treatment: a practical guide for clinicians. Brandon: Safer Society Press; 2010.Google Scholar
- 70.Levenson JS, Willis G, Prescott D. Trauma-informed care: transforming treatment for people who sexually abuse. Brandon: Safer Society Press; 2017.Google Scholar
- 73.Bureau of Justice Statistics. Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice; 2002.Google Scholar
- 77.Bonta J, Andrews DA. The psychology of criminal conduct. 6th ed. New York: Routledge; 2017.Google Scholar
- 79.Jones M. The case of the juvenile sex offender: is he a criminal marked forever or a kid whose behavior can be changed?, in New York Times Magazine. 2007.Google Scholar
- 81.Parker SC. Branded for life: the unconstitutionality of mandatory and lifetime juvenile sex offender registration and notification. Va J Soc Policy Law. 2014;21:167.Google Scholar
- 82.• Harris AJ, Walfield SM, Shields RT, Letourneau EJ. Collateral Consequences of Juvenile Sex Offender Registration and Notification Results From a Survey of Treatment Providers. Sex Abus: J Res Treat 2015: p. 1079063215574004. Summarizes observations from treatment providers about the deleterious impact of sex offender registration on youth, highlighting its contribution to mental health disorders, academic disruption, suicidality, and lost human potential. Google Scholar
- 83.Pittman N, Parker A. Raised on the registry: the irreparable harm of placing children on sex offender registries in the US. 2013, Human Rights Watch.Google Scholar
- 90.Lobanov-Rostovsky C. Adult Sex Offender Management, N.C.J.A.a.U.S.D.o. Justice, Editor. 2015, National Criminal Justice Association and U.S. Department of Justice: http://www.smart.gov/pdfs/AdultSexOffenderManagement.pdf.
- 94.Broward County Commission. Final report: sexual offender & sexual predator residence Task Force. 2009, http://www.floridaatsa.com/Final_Report_-_Sexual_Offender_Sexual_Residence_Task_Force.pdf: Fort Lauderdale, FL.