Attitudes About Community Notification: A Comparison of Sexual Offenders and the Non-offending Public
Tóm tắt
Public notification laws have been enacted by legislatures to address the risk posed by sex offenders to the public. Little research has been done regarding either the public’s or sex offenders’ knowledge and attitudes about community notification and its impact. This study compared the experiences and perceptions of 125 sex offenders in outpatient treatment to 193 members of the public in Brevard County, Florida. Sex offenders were significantly more likely to believe that community notification laws and society are unfair, to feel that such laws should be applied to fewer sex offenders based on their level of risk or threat, and to view notification as being ineffective at reducing sex crimes. Nearly half of the offenders reported experiencing threats, property damage, or physical assault as a result of public disclosure. In comparison, only 10% of the public was aware of vigilantism against sex offenders. Implications for public policy and future research are discussed.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Berliner, L. (2003). Victim and citizen perspectives on sexual offender policy. In R. A. Prentky, E. S. Janus, & M. C. Seto (Eds.), Sexually coercive behavior: Understanding and management (Vol. 989, pp. 464–473). New York, New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brannon, Y. N. (2005). Sexual offenders’ and the public’s attitudes towards community notification in Florida. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL.
Bureau of Justice Statistics (1997). Sex offenses and offenders: An analysis of data on rape and sexual assault. (No. NCJ-163392). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
Colorado Department of Public Safety (2004). Report on safety issues raised by living arrangements for and location of sex offenders in the community. Denver, CO: Sex Offender Management Board.
Fortney, T. (2006). Perceptions of sex offenders: Implications for treatment and public policy. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL.
Fortney, T., Levenson, J. S., Brannon, Y., & Baker, J. (2007). Myths and facts about sex offenders: Implications for practice and public policy. Sexual Offender Treatment, 2(1), 1–17.
Freeman-Longo, R. E. (1996). Prevention or problem? Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 8(2), 91–100.
Hanson, R. K., & Bussiere, M. T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348–362.
Hanson, R. K., & Harris, A. J. R. (1998). Dynamic predictors of sexual recidivism. Ottawa, Canada: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
Hanson, R. K., & Harris, A. J. R. (2001). A structured approach to evaluating change among sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 13(2), 105–122.
Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. (2004). Predictors of sexual recidivism: An updated meta-analysis. Ottawa, CA: Public Works and Government Services.
Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(6), 1154–1163.
Kruttschnitt, C., Uggen, C., & Shelton, K. (2000). Predictors of desistance among sex offenders: The interaction of formal and informal social controls. Justice Quarterly, 17(1), 61–88.
Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2001). Understanding desistance from crime. Crime and Justice, 28, 1–69.
Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Levenson, J. S., & Cotter, L. P. (2005). The effect of Megan’s law on sex offender reintegration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(1), 49–66.
Levenson, J. S., & D’Amora, D. A. (2007). Social policies designed to prevent sexual violence: The emperor’s new clothes? Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18(2), 168–199.
Levenson, J. S., Brannon, Y., Fortney, T., & Baker, J. (2007a). Public perceptions about sex offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 7(1), 1–25.
Levenson, J. S., D’Amora, D. A., & Hern, A. (2007b). Megan’s law and its impact on community re-entry for sex offenders. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 25, 587–602.
Lotke, E. (1997). Politics and irrelevance: Community notification statutes. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 10(2), 64–68.
Maruna, S. (2001). Making good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Maruna, S., LeBel, T. P., Mitchell, N., & Naples, M. (2004). Pygmalion in the reintegration process: Desistance from crime through the looking glass. Psychology, Crime & Law, 10(3), 271–281.
McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6–23.
News of the world (2005). Young persons poll. Retrieved August 10, 2006, from http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2005/NOTW%20-%20June%202005/notw-poll-Jun05.asp.
Petersilia, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Phillips, D. M. (1998). Community notification as viewed by Washington’s citizens. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
Sample, L. L., & Streveler, A. J. (2003). Latent consequences of community notification laws. In S. H. Decker, L. F. Alaird, & C. M. Katz (Eds.), Controversies in criminal justice (pp. 353–362). Los Angeles: Roxbury.
Sherman, L. (1993). Defiance, deterrence, and irrelevance: A theory of the criminal sanction. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(4), 445–473.
Tewksbury, R. (2004). Experiences and attitudes of registered female sex offenders. Federal Probation, 68(3), 30–34.
Tewksbury, R. (2005). Collateral consequences of sex offender registration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(1), 67–82.
Tewksbury, R., & Lees, M. (2006). Consequences of sex offender registration: Collateral consequences and community experiences. Sociological Spectrum, 26(3), 309–334.
The Florida Sexual Predators Act, Florida Statute 775.21 (1997).
U.S. Census Bureau (2000). Population Estimates. Retrieved June 17, 2004, from http://eire.census.gov/popest/data/national/tables.
Uggen, C., Manza, J., & Behrens, A. (2004). Less than the average citizen: Stigma, role transition, and the civic reintegration of convicted felons. In S. Maruna, & R. Immarigeon (Eds.), After crime and punishment: Pathways to offender reintegration (pp. 261–293). Devon, UK: Willan Publishing.
Uggen, C., Manza, J., & Thompson, M. (2006). Citizenship, democracy, and the civic reintegration of criminal offenders. Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science, 605(1), 281–310.
Zevitz, R. G. (2006). Sex offender community notification: Its role in recidivism and offender reintegration. Criminal Justice Studies, 19(2), 193–208.
Zevitz, R. G., & Farkas, M. A. (2000). Sex offender community notification: Managing high risk criminals or exacting further vengeance? Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 18, 375–391.