Literature Review on "Megan's Law"

>

Since community support is one way to assist in rehabilitating a criminal, Megan's law may prevent that. An additional article from Zevitz explains the difficulty of policy is to keep things balanced in a way that is fair to the community and to a lesser extent, the criminal. Communities may also become offended by knowing a sex offender is in the neighborhood and as real estate prices could, drop or people move out for fear of risking their children to potential danger. Research from Zevitz suggests government rules intended for societal rehabilitation of released sex offenders must take into consideration the impact that domiciliary placements of these persons possibly have on the quality of life of said communities directly affected.

The consequences for neighborhood cohesion are far-reaching and should be carefully scrutinized. In a democratic society that prides itself on adherence to the rule of law, the implications of policy governing residential placements for convicted sex offenders released from correctional institutions are complex. The challenge for those who formulate such policy is to balance the public's right to know when a convicted sex offender resides nearby with the law's need to successfully reintegrate those who have paid their debt to society (Zevitz, 2004, p. 219).

Recommendations to Enhance Megan's Notification

Although strangers commit sex crimes, most of the sex crimes that take place, take place with a person the victim knows. "Historically, there has been great public emphasis and fear of stranger abductions and rape. These sex offender policies may not deflect from the concerns of intimate partner and nonstranger sexual assault, but they may also dissuade the public from other viable policy options" (WRIGHT, 2003, p. 102). If Megan's law and policies aimed at improving these laws want to provide a positive impact, it must consider this. Communities are often not aware of the people around them and in the case of Megan; the predator involved knew her as a neighbor. Had community awareness been raised concerning sexual offenders, perhaps Megan would have not been in such a situation. There is little impact if Megan's law does not raise awareness of sexual predation.

CCT or Crime Control Theater refers to prevalent laws, which appear to propose simple answers to address severe crimes but are not empirically operative. Sex offender registration/notification laws/Megan's law meet each of the CCT principles: intransigent response to an ethical panic, undisputed acceptance and campaign, appeal to allegorical narratives, and observed letdown. These laws have caused unintended costs including violence aimed at offenders' families, powerlessness and failure for offenders to reintegrate into the community, misappropriation of the laws on unintentional populations, as well as others. A conjectural elucidation for why community sentimentality toward CCT laws remains positive using social cognitive mechanisms of heuristics and schemas in combination with cognitive-experiential self-theory. Such theories point to people utilizing emotive processing and cognitive shortcuts in developing their responses to crime. Understanding how such theories transpire can assist in preventing adoption of CCT laws as well as endorse laws that are more effective.

RCNLs are not without benefits. These and other sex offender laws have increased the awareness about sexual victimization, which is a critical step toward protection from abuse. This awareness can lead to a dialogue about best practices for prevention as more researchers focus on what works. Awareness about the realities of sexual abuse emerged more generally in the mid-1970s through the mid-1980s, which led to changes in child protection laws (e.g., mandatory reporting laws), an increase in publications on the topic (e.g., launch of the journal Child Abuse and Neglect in 1976), research on the prevalence and harm of sexual victimization (Terry, 2011, p. 279).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the government formed Megan's law and laws like it in response to crimes like the rape and murder of Megan Kanka, a seven-year-old killed by a neighbor. Although the laws have helped create some awareness of sexual crimes and unlawful sexual activity, it has not had the kind of impact that communities need to prevent crime and rehabilitate sex offenders. Several studies concluded that Megan's law and laws like it could have a negative impact not just on criminal rehabilitation, but also on community awareness. Communities should know who the kind of people that live there. However, it may promote negative consequences that could create additional criminal activity.

For laws as these to turn not into CCT laws, legislation must raise awareness without compromising criminal rehabilitation. Since many sex crimes come because of relative or friend/acquaintance interaction, awareness in nonstranger sex crimes should be at the forefront. That is not to say Megan's law has not had any positive side effects in the community and with criminals. Sex offender re-offense remains low and communities are growing more awareness in potential sex crime behavior.

Children like Megan have better outcomes thanks to preventative measures taken by parents like Megan's parents and Amber's that made the American government pass policies and legislation tackling sex crimes, especially sex crimes on minors. Rape, molestation, sexual assault, these are crimes that should be punished. However because these kinds of crimes are not weighed as heavily as murder or drug possession, most of these criminals come out into society with some serving only one or two years in prison. That is why it is essential that criminal rehabilitation be an aim for such policies, laws, and programs.

References

Burchfield, K., & Mingus, W. (2012). Sex Offender Reintegration: Consequences of the Local Neighborhood Context. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(1), 109-124. Doi: 10.1007/s12103-012-9195-x

Levenson, J. (2011). Sex offender policies in an era of zero tolerance. Criminology & Public Policy, 10(2), 229-233. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2011.00704.x

Levenson, J., & Cotter, L. (2005). The Effect of Megan's Law on Sex Offender Reintegration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(1), 13. Doi: 10.1177/1043986204271676

Levenson, J., D'Amora, D., & Hern, A. (2007). Megan's law and its impact on community re-entry for sex offenders. Behav. Sci. Law, 25(4), 587-602. doi:10.1002/bsl.770

Shelby, R., & Hatch, A. (2014). Obscuring sexual crime: examining media representations of sexual violence in Megan's law. Criminal Justice Studies: A Critical Journal of Crime, Law and Society, 27(4), 402. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1478601X.2014.928459#.VTQfQyFViko

Terry, K. (2011). What is smart sex offender policy?. Criminology & Public Policy, 10(2), 275-282. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2011.00707.x

Tewksbury, R., & Lees, M. (2006). PERCEPTIONS OF SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION: COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES AND COMMUNITY EXPERIENCES. Sociological Spectrum, 26(3), 309-334. Doi: 10.1080/02732170500524246

WRIGHT, R. (2003). SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION AND NOTIFICATION: PUBLIC ATTENTION, POLITICAL EMPHASIS, AND FEAR. Criminology & Public Policy,… READ MORE