Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Reoffending rates of sexual offenders against children
Essays on registered sex offenders
Essays on registered sex offenders
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Sex offender legislation has been encouraged and written to protect the community and the people at large against recidivism and or to help with the reintegration of those released from prison. Nevertheless, a big question has occurred as to if the tough laws created help the community especially to prevent recidivism or make the situation even worse than it already is. Sex offenders are categorized into three levels for example in the case of the state of Massachusetts; in level one the person is not considered dangerous, and chances of him repeating a sexual offense are low thus his details are not made available to the public (Robbers, 2009). In level two chances of reoccurrence are average thus public have access to this level offenders through local police departments in level three risk of reoffense is high, and a substantial public safety interest is served to protect the public from such individuals. …show more content…
It may also bring issues of anger as the sex offenders laws state that some of the rights of the person being denied in some states sex offenders cannot attend Halloween and even lose their parental rights this may do more harm or good to the person and give him an I don’t care attitude. However flipping the coin to the other side legislation has helped with the integration of the sex offenders as in most cases those who have registered rarely repeat their crime. For example in New York between 1985-2001 out of the registered 11898 only 251 were returned to jail for recidivism which is about 2.1% this shows that it works as the cases have
This essay begins with the introduction of the Risk-Needs-Responsivitiy Model which was developed to assess offending and offer effective rehabilitation and treatment (Andrews & Bonta, 2007). The R-N-R model “remains the only empirically validated guide for criminal justice interventions that aim to help offenders” (Polashek, 2012, p.1) consisting of three principles which are associated with reductions in recidivism of up to 35% (Andrew & Bonta, 2010); risk, need and responsivity. Firstly, the risk principle predicts the offenders risk level of reoffending based on static and dynamic factors, and then matched to the degree of intervention needed. Secondly, the R-N-R targets individual’s criminogenic needs, in relation to dynamic factors. Lastly, the responsivity principle responds to specific responsivity e.g. individual needs and general responsivity; rehabilitation provided on evidence-based programming (Vitopoulous et al, 2012).
The following research will display an overview of the process in Texas on how sex offenders are registered along with the notifications that are followed after registration. Texas, as many other states, has a procedure which requires sex offenders to register with the local law enforcement agencies at the time of their discharge. In addition to registration, they must also comply with further probation regulations. Research has concluded that there are four basic phases of registration and notification. Beginning with offender notified, following the offender registration and community notified and ending with public notification
Megan's Law operates under the logic that responsible parents, once notified that a designated "high risk" sex offender lives nearby, will be able to prevent their children from becoming the victims of another attack. One of its primary motivations is the high recidivism rate associated with crimes of sexual molestation. Without even considering the large number of sex offenses that go unreported each year, the California Sex Offender Registry reports that approximately 40% of convicted sex offenders are arrested again for a repeat offense.... ... middle of paper ...
In the event that a prisoner (particularly a sex offender) does complete rehabilitation, he carries with him a stigma upon reentering society. People often fear living near a prior drug addict or convicted murderer and the sensational media hype surrounding released felons can ruin a newly released convict’s life before it beings. What with resident notifications, media scare tactics and general concern for safety, a sex offender’s ability to readapt into society is severely hindered (554). This warrants life-skills rehabilitation applied to him useless, as he will be unable to even attempt to make the right decision regarding further crime opportunities.
...aker, J. (2007). Public perceptions about sex offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 7(1), 1-25.
The Recidivism Rate of Juvenile Sex Offenders between Uses of Legal Sentencing as Adults or Utilizing Psychological Treatment
The federal and state governments have laws which permit for the legal confinement of sex offenders deemed to pose a risk to themselves or others. In Kansas v. Hendricks (1997), the U.S. Supreme Court set forth the following criteria potential offenders must satisfy in order to be civilly committed: 1) a past of committing sexual offenses; 2) a mental disorder or impairment; 3) some form of volitional impairment; and 4) a significant risk of committing a sexual offense in the future. In order to satisfy the fourth criteria, governments have implemented the use of Actuarial Risk Assessment Instruments (ARAIs) such as the Static-99 and the Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool-Revised (MnSOST-R) (Miller, Amenta, & Conroy, 2005).
According to the National Institute of Justice, recidivism is one of the most fundamental concepts in criminal justice. The NIJ defines recidivism as a person’s relapse into criminal behavior, often after receiving sanctions or undergoing intervention for a previous crime. Recidivism is often utilized in evaluating prisons effectiveness in crime control. Reducing recidivism is crucial for probation, parole and to the correctional system overall.
The acceptance that the court system often treats female offenders differently than male offenders is an accurate statement; however, it comes with many caveats. Generally, the public views women as nurturers, motherly and incapable of harming a child. Research indicates that female sex offenders capable of committing such acts have serious psychiatric and psychological problems. In comparison, research indicates male sex offenders are more callous, more antisocial, and promiscuous, involved in the criminal justice system, and have more victims (Miccio-Fenseca, 2012, slide 7). The consensus is that men commit their acts for sexual pleasure while women commit their acts due to psychiatric and psychological problems. Law enforcement, juries, and judges tend to empathize more when there are additional mitigating factors such as emotional or psychological problems. Due to these mitigating factors, it appears treatment of female sex offenders is more lenient than male if their crimes are similar in nature. Research by Miccio-Fenseca (2012) indicates that in comparison to their male counterparts, “female sex offenders rarely use force or violence far less than often…rarely use threats of violence to silence victims…rarely use threats o...
Ever since the bill for having a Canadian Sex Offender Registry was passed, in December of 2004, it has been a heated debate in many boardrooms across the country. On the one hand, there are the defence attorneys deeming it slightly mentally damaging and unnecessary for their client(s). On the other side of the coin, there are the individuals claiming it to be a great idea if used in the correct manner. A sex offender registry is only useful when used correctly, with updated and accurate profiles, while remaining conscious of charter rights.
Sex offender legislation has become a controversial topic in the recent years. There have been numerous laws enacted in response to sex offender crime. Do these laws really work to help minimize re-offending, or do they give the public a false sense of security and cause recidivism? In a several studies researchers found no evidence of sex offender registries being effective in increasing public safety. Some studies have found that requiring sex offenders to register with law enforcement may significantly may reduce chances of recidivism. However, the research also found that making registry information available to the public may back fire and lead to higher levels of overall sex crimes
3. Report of the Interagency Council on Sex Offender Treatment to the Senate Interim Committee on Health and Human Services and the Senate Committee on Criminal Justice, 1993
However, there is not enough research to prove that community notification prevents reoffending. Registers can only deter and trace already convicted sex offenders. However, research on reoffending patterns of sex offenders suggest that most sex offenders have not previously been convicted and released, so registration cannot protect the community from the majority of sex offenders. A Department of Justice study in the United States suggested that sex-offenders have a recidivism rate of 3-5% within the first three years after release. A New Zealand Department of Corrections study in 2008 revealed that over a 15-year period, 73% of sex offenders had not been charged or convicted for further sexual offending. International studies suggest that sex offender recidivate less than drug, property and burglary offenders. Ideas perpetuated in the media argue that sex offenders are different, they cannot be cured and they have high recidivism rates, however these conclusions are based on sensationalised media reporting on high profile attacks. One of the main purposes of a sex offender register is to reduce recidivism, however these studies and more show that sex offender recidivism is not as high a rate as it is perceived to
Introduction: Recidivism or, habitual relapses into crime, has time and time again proven to be an issue among delinquents, which thereby increases the overall juvenile prison population. This issue has become more prevalent than what we realize. Unless a unit for measuring a juvenile’s risk of recidivism is enacted and used to determine a system to promote effective prevention, than the juvenile prison population will continue to increase. Our court system should not only focus on punishing the said juvenile but also enforce a program or policy that will allow for prevention of recidivism. So the question remains, how can recidivism in the juvenile prison population be prevented so that it is no longer the central cause for increased juvenile delinquency? Simply put, we must create a means of measuring juvenile’s level of risk and in turn, form an effective rehabilitation program that will decrease their risk level for future recidivism.
Sex offenders have been a serious problem for our legal system at all levels, not to mention those who have been their victims. There are 43,000 inmates in prison for sexual offenses while each year in this country over 510,000 children are sexually assaulted(Oakes 99). The latter statistic, in its context, does not convey the severity of the situation. Each year 510,000 children have their childhood's destroyed, possibly on more than one occasion, and are faced with dealing with the assault for the rest of their lives. Sadly, many of those assaults are perpetrated by people who have already been through the correctional system only to victimize again. Sex offenders, as a class of criminals, are nine times more likely to repeat their crimes(Oakes 99). This presents a