Awareness of Sex Offender Registration Policies and Self-Reported Sexual Offending in a Community Sample of Adolescents
- 32 Downloads
Sex offender registration laws are widely implemented, increasingly restrictive, and intended to serve both specific and general deterrent functions. Most states have some form of policy mechanism to place adolescents on sex offender registries, yet it remains unclear whether adolescents possess the requisite policy awareness to be deterred from sexual offending. This study examined awareness of sex offender registration as a potential sanction and its cross-sectional association with engagement in several registrable sexual behaviors (sexting, indecent exposure, sexual solicitation, and forcible touching) in a community sample of 144 adolescents. Results revealed that many adolescents were unaware that these behaviors could result in sex offender registration. Moreover, over one-third of adolescents who incorrectly believed that youth cannot be registered were highly confident in their answers. Notably, nearly half the sample had engaged in at least one of the four registrable behaviors we assessed, and policy-aware youth were just as likely as others to have engaged in those registrable sexual behaviors. Our findings cast doubt on arguments that juvenile sex offender registration serves as a general deterrent, adding to a growing body of literature suggesting that the policy is ineffective and in need of reform.
KeywordsJuveniles Sex offender registration Adolescent sexual offending General deterrence Public policy
The authors gratefully acknowledge Katherine Poindexter for legal assistance, Steven Keener for research assistance, and Research Unlimited for recruitment assistance.
This project was supported by funding from Virginia Commonwealth University’s Presidential Research Quest Fund for the first author and funding from the University at Albany’s Michael J. Hindelang Criminal Justice Research Center for the second author.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All study materials and procedures were approved by the first author’s university institutional review board.
These funding organizations had no role in study design, collection, analysis, interpretation, or publication of findings.
- AdamWalsh Child Protection and Safety Act, 42 U.S.C. § 16901 (2006).Google Scholar
- Boyle, D. J., Ragusa-Salerno, L. M., Marcus, A. F., Passannante, M. R., & Furrer, S. (2014). Public knowledge and use of sexual offender internet registries: Results from a random digit dialing telephone survey. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29, 1914–1932. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513511698.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Caldwell, M. F., Ziemke, M. H., & Vitacco, M. J. (2008). An examination of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act as applied to juveniles: Evaluating the ability to predict sexual recidivism. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 14, 89–114. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Census Bureau (n.d.) American Community Survey, 2011-2017 5-year estimates.Google Scholar
- Center, P. R. (2018). Teens, Social Media & Technology, 2018 Retrieved from https://www.pewinternet.org/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology-2018/.
- Ennett, S. T., Tobler, N. S., Ringwalt, C. L., & Flewelling, R. L. (1994). How effective is drug abuse resistance education? A meta-analysis of Project DARE outcome evaluations. American Journal of Public Health, 84, 1394–1401. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.84.9.1394.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Graham v. Florida, 130 S.Ct. 2011 (2010).Google Scholar
- Harris, A. J., Walfield, S. M., Shields, R. T., & Letourneau, E. J. (2016). Collateral consequences of juvenile sex offender registration and notification: Results from a survey of treatment providers. Sexual Abuse, 28(8), 770–790. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063215574004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Human Rights Watch (2013) Raised on the registry: The irreparable harm of placing children on sex offender registries in the US. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/us0513_ForUpload_1.pdf.Google Scholar
- Jackson v. Hobbs, 132 S. Ct. 1733 (2012).Google Scholar
- Letourneau, E. J., Levenson, J. S., Bandyopadhyay, D., Armstrong, K. S., & Sinha, D. (2010b). Effects of South Carolina’s sex offender registration and notification policy on deterrence of adult sex crimes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 537–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810363569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Letourneau, E. J., Harris, A. J., Shields, R. T., Walfield, S. M., Ruzicka, A. E., et al. (2018a). Effects of juvenile sex offender registration on adolescent well-being: An empirical examination. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 24, 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Letourneau, E. J., Shields, R. T., Nair, R., Kahn, G., Sandler, J. C., & Vandiver, D. M. (2018b). Juvenile registration and notification policies fail to prevent first-time sexual offenses: An extension of findings to two new states. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 30, 1109–1123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403418786783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Liu, G., Hariri, S., Bradley, H., Gottlieb, S. L., Leichliter, J. S., & Markowitz, L. E. (2015). Trends and patterns of sexual behaviors among adolescents and adults aged 14 to 59 years, United States. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 42, 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000231.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Lobanov-Rostovsky, C. (2015, July). Registration and notification for juveniles who commit sexual offenses. U.S. Department of Justice: Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking.Google Scholar
- Martinez, G. M., & Abma, J. C. (2015). Sexual activity, contraceptive use, and childbearing of teenagers aged 15–19 in the United States: NCHS data brief no. 209. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db209.pdf.Google Scholar
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U. S. ____ (2012).Google Scholar
- Najdowski, C. J., Cleary, H. M. D., & Stevenson, M. C. (2016). Adolescent sex offender registration policy: Perspectives on general deterrence potential from criminology and developmental psychology. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22, 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pittman, N., & Nguyen, Q. (2011). A snapshot of juvenile sex offender registration and notification laws: A survey of the United States. Philadelphia, PA: Defender Association of Philadelphia Retrieved from http://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-library/SNAPSHOT_web10-28.pdf.Google Scholar
- Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005).Google Scholar
- Sandler, J. C., Letourneau, E. J., Vandiver, D. M., Shields, R. T., & Chaffin, M. (2017). Juvenile sexual crime reporting rates are not influenced by juvenile sex offender registration policies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23, 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Trenholm, C., Devaney, B., Fortson, K., Clark, M., Quay, L., & Wheeler, J. (2008). Impacts of abstinence education on teen sexual activity, risk of pregnancy, and risk of sexually transmitted diseases. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 27, 255–276. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20324.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., & Helfand, M. (2008). Ten years of longitudinal research on U.S. adolescent sexual behavior: Developmental correlates of sexual intercourse, and the importance of age, gender and ethnic background. Developmental Review, 28, 153–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2007.06.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar