Hanson discusses how many sex offenders reoffend and he finds that the expected recidivism of sexual offenders is reasonably low, however some will reoffend in a new crime area e.g. burglary assault. When looking into rapists, their recidivism rates are much higher than that of a child molester. Hanson notes that this recidivism number is an underestimate due to many sexual offences going unreported. The underestimate number is still under active debate because otherwise we cannot gain definitive evidence; Hanson says numbers will likely rise 30-40%. Hanson then states that the evidence we do have does not support the popular belief that all sex offenders will re-offend and in fact, the recidivism rate of sexual offenders is, on average, lower than that of non-sexual criminals. …show more content…
Coming to the conclusion finds the highest risk factor being sexual deviancy including: sexual preferences, early onset of sexual offending, history of offending, choice of victim, diverse sexual crimes and finally the single strongest predictor of sexual recidivism is interest in children. Other factors are the same as any other criminal: lack of empathy, antisocial personality disorder, juvenile delinquency, minority race among others. Hanson talks about recidivism scales aimed at calculating if a person is low or high risk of offending only to find that they don’t work accurately in the field of sexual offence recidivism and what needs to be looked at is outside the scales- which has been done by Epperson- creating a scale specifically for sexual offenders- it’s suggested that these scales will provide moderate
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).
Sex offender notification laws have been among the most widely discussed and debated criminal justice policy issues in recent years. Numerous studies have been conducted on various views of sex offender notification laws. A vast majority of these studies have mixed research, some showing that sex offender notification laws are more beneficial than harmful and should continue, and others showing the exact opposite. Reasons such as public safety, the fear factor, and the hope for future recidivism to go down are some examples of why many believe that sex offender notification laws are beneficial to society. Others believe that such laws are a continuation of punishment for those who were convicted of a sex offense.
Park, B. and Lee, J. (2013). The effectiveness of Megan’s Law: Does it reduce the recidivism of a released sex offender? British Journal of Arts & Social Sciences, 12(1), 25-34.
The Recidivism Rate of Juvenile Sex Offenders between Uses of Legal Sentencing as Adults or Utilizing Psychological Treatment
Many resources go into the prevention and management of sex offenders. However, very few effective programs exist that decrease the likelihood of reoffending. Through the use of meta-analyses, Seto and Lalumiere (2010) evaluated multiple studies that examined sex offenders. Emphasis was put on etiological explanations in the hopes of identifying factors associated with sex offending. Seto and Lalumiere’s (2010) findings help in creating effective programs to decrease recidivism rates.
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.
There is much debate as to whether a sex offender should be released into the public, this debate stems from the idea that a sex offender cannot be treated and that they are a danger to the public as they are ‘purely evil’ (Burke, 2005), however there is much evidence that sex offenders can be treated and re-introduced into society as a productive member. Sex offender is a general term used to refer to any person who has been convicted of crimes involving sex, from rape and molestation to exhibitionism and pornography distribution. There are many theories which try to explain why people are sexual offenders, these theories along with treatments for sex offenders will be looked at to help explain why people sexually offend and to help evaluate whether sex offenders should be released.
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.
In the United States as a condition of parole sex offenders are typically required to register with law enforcement officials when released from prison. These officials notify the public of the offender’s release back into society and provide them with information such as the offenders address, and other personal information. Research indicates the notification system can have an adverse effect on the offender’s life, casting doubt on what the laws intended purpose to protect the public. This paper will explore the background of sex offender registries, the relationship between the sex offender notifications and registration laws and higher rates of recidivisms in the United States.
In today’s society, juveniles that commit a sexual assault have become the subject of society. It’s become a problem in the United States due to the rise of sexual offenses committed by juveniles. The general public attitude towards sex offenders appears to be highly negative (Valliant, Furac, & Antonowicz, 1994). The public reactions in the past years have shaped policy on legal approaches to managing sexual offenses. The policies have included severe sentencing laws, sex offender registry, and civil commitment as a sexually violent predator (Quinn, Forsyth, & Mullen-Quinn, 2004). This is despite recidivism data suggesting that a relatively small group of juvenile offenders commit repeat sexual assaults after a response to their sexual offending (Righthand &Welch, 2004).
There are many topics nowadays that are still hard to talk about openly. Though we’ve opened the door on many controversies, some of the simplest parts of life can be the hardest to discuss. For most of us, sex in particular can be a taboo topic, which may be the reason why so many children and teens are misinformed on the inner workings of sexual relationships and how they develop as we grow and mature. For some adolescents, this can lead to an unhealthy fixation on the concept of sex, and in some cases, lead them to take action on a situation they do not fully understand. Sexual offenses are perceived as some of the most heinous crimes, but how could our views be affected if those acts were performed by a teenager? We may sometimes consider that they are the same as adult sex offenders; however our judgment can often be clouded by our lack of understanding. Adolescent sex offenders are different from adult sex offenders, are treated in a different way, and often have very different circumstances of their crime.
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
There are several identifiable psychological factors that increase the likelihood an individual will demonstrate deviant sexual behavior. One of the most important contributing factors is physical or sexual abuse endured as a child. According to Becerra-García, García-León and Egan (2012), sex offenders are twice as likely to report being sexually, emotionally, or physically abused as a child in comparison to other offenders. There are also other factors besides abuse that must be taken into consideration. A recent study on female sex offenders by Roe-Sepowitz and Krysik (2008) states, “the data reveal that many of the 118 female juvenile sex offenders came from chaotic and disorganized families and had poor parental supervision and serious school and mental health problems”. As Becerra-García, García-León and Egan (2012) discuss further, there are also personality traits that sex offenders are likely to possess, which makes it possible for psychologists to distinguish general characteristics of sex offenders. These personality traits can be identified using the Five Factor Model, which scales an individual’s level of neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness.
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
The sex offender registry has been a topic of debates and formal studies since the Minnesota Sex Offender Registration Act was first passed in 1991 (Stevens, n.d.). Sex offenders across the country are being harassed and abused on a daily basis for the crimes they committed, were convicted for, and served their punishment for. Due to the sex offender registry giving out names, pictures, addresses, phone, numbers, vehicle information, as well as other personal information these sex offenders are being targeted in the homes and work places. Their families are also victims of abuse. In addition, the use of the sex offender registry has created blind spots in parents. They may