NCJ Number
164406
Journal
Child Abuse and Neglect Volume: 20 Issue: 2 Dated: (February 1996) Pages: 95-101
Date Published
1996
Length
7 pages
Annotation
This paper develops arguments against mandated public notification for sex offenders.
Abstract
The purpose of establishing laws that require public notification of sex offender release is to alert the public, specifically members of the local community, that they are living in the presence of a dangerous sex offender. By increasing community awareness, it is believed that parents will be able to inform their children about who is dangerous and whom to avoid; further, supporters anticipate that public notification will reduce the likelihood that the sex offender will reoffend because of the increased likelihood of detection. This paper identifies 24 issues that call into question the wisdom of public notification laws. One issue pertains to constitutional rights; five States have declared public notification laws to be unconstitutional as regards their invasion of privacy. Further, public notification laws require that a mental health/medical diagnosis (pedophilia) be made public, although many other harmful conditions and behaviors are protected under confidentiality mandates. Also, public notification will cost an increasing amount of public funds to implement and maintain, since it involves continuous monitoring by public service agencies to ensure offender compliance. Although public notification may soothe local fears, it will not deter determined offenders, who will select victims from communities where they are not known. Some other issues include lack of data to support the cost-effectiveness of public notification, the extension of public notification to other crimes, the impact on victims (notably incest victims), the impact on innocent relatives of the offender, and impact on offender treatment.