Sex offender Registration and Recidivism

...

The results show that 23.4% of those who went through the treatment program recidivated within 24 months and the type of offence was the variable effect. Sexual offenders were less likely to recidivate than juveniles who committed general offences. However it shows that involvement in the welfare system slightly decrease the chance of recidivism. As does the length of the stay in the residential treatment program. The group that has the lowest chance are those who go AWOL or get transferred to another program (Calley 265 -266).

The methodology used in the studies that try to predict recidivism for sexual offences is often underestimated. This is due to the fact that not all sexual offences are reported. The probability that an adult offenders first offence happened during adolescence and the risk that they may offend again over their life proves for a strong need for follow up with past offenders and those at risk to offend (Riser 23).

Data of forcible rapes for all 50 states ranging from 1960 to 2008 were analyzed using a time-series design. Forcible rapes before the passage of sex offender legislation were compared to rates after the passage of legislation. The results were mixed with only 17 states having a significant drop in rate and 39 states had no discernable changes. Explanations for these results were explored and included the effect of differences in notification practices, registration practices, and the availability of sex offender treatment (Maurelli 128).

The first research evaluating the effectiveness of sex offender notification laws in 1995 written by Schram and Milloy compared recidivism rates of sex offenders subjected to notification to those who were not. The research compared the two groups over a 54 month period and showed the recidivism rate was not much different between the two groups (19% notification group and 22% non-notification group). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the general deterrent effect of notification laws on forcible rape.

The data was measured on a yearly basis and the comparison of these rates over time (before and after implementation of sex offender laws). Data was obtained for each state and a time-series model was created for each one. The year legislation was passed was excluded from the time-series model to allow a one-year lag in which legislation took effect (Maurelli 133). There is a decreased possibility the results are due to societal change. It is more likely due to the differences in notification practices from state to state. There are three main types of notification; broad notifications, notifications to vulnerable individuals and organizations, and notifications through granting the public access to offender information. Overall, offender might be less inclined to offend or reoffend because of increased police monitoring and subsequent arrest (Maurelli 139).

Citation Page

- Calley, Nancy G. "Juvenile Offender Recidivism: An Examination of Risk Factors." Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 21.3 (2012): 257-272. Print.

- www.FBI.gov

- Kingston, Drew A., and John M. Bradford. "Hypersexuality and Recidivism among Sexual Offenders."Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity 20.1/2 (2013): 91-105. Print.

- Maurelli, Kimberly, and George Ronan. "A Time-series Analysis of the Effectiveness of Sex Offender Notification Laws in the USA." Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology 24.1 (2013): 128-143. Print.

- Riser, Diana K., Sheri E. Pegram, and Julee P. Farley. "Adolescent and Young Adult Male Sex Offenders: Understanding the Role of Recidivism." Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 22.1 (2013): 9-31. Print.