This report examines the efficacy of sex offender registration and notification (SORN) through its influence on sex offender recidivism and collateral consequences. The first study examines the recidivism rates of two samples of sex offenders, those released prior to SORN and a sample released under SORN in New Jersey. It asks whether or not there are distinct risk profiles among sex offenders with regard to their recidivism trajectories, and if these profiles are similar or different for sex offenders pre- and post- SORN. Additional analyses also include an examination of the influence of demographics, substance abuse, mental health issues, treatment history, sex offense incident characteristics, and criminal history on recidivism trajectories. The second study looks at whether the recidivism trajectories post-prison release for post-SORN sex offenders are similar to or different from the recidivism trajectories post-prison release for post-SORN non-sex offenders who are released from prison via parole. It also specifically focuses on whether or not a series of collateral consequences are experienced similarly or differently among these post-SORN sex and post-SORN non-sex offender parolees.
This is a good read for EVERYONE. I wish policy makers would actually learn from it (but most will not), and that the general public actually makes an informed decision (instead of living off of government induced hysteria). A few points:
ReplyDelete1) sex offenders generally have lower rates of recidivism than non-sex offenders --especially for a sex offense (sex offenders if they do commit a new crime-it is more often not a sex crime) The study did not include technical violations or parole violations--only new arrests for new sex and non-sex offenses
2) a high-risk sex offender (and there aren't many high-risk offenders)
a) had more than one sex offense to begin with
b) generally had at least one non-sex offense with an arrest when younger
b) initial sex offense was when they were relatively young Older people have a lower risk of offending)
c) was probably not married
d) not employed or poor employment history
e) had drug/substance abuse issues
3) Registration (1994 and later) has little effect on predicting or deterring new sex offenses or new non-sex offenses for registrants (i.e. public registration is a huge waste of money)..
4) registration can have additional negative effects on registrants (vs non sex offender felons) such as inability to find work, living in group housing, greater risk of being transient/moving around
5) policy makers should do a better job of determining a high-risk offender and focus $$$ and time on the high-risk offenders instead of treating all registrants the same. (I think the policy makers keep going backward).