home

Debunking Juvenile Sex Offender Myths

The New York Times Magazine today focuses on juvenile sex offenders, asking where is the line that divides a kid between being a sex offender and merely having boundary issues -- and questioning the wisdom of lifetime community notification laws for juveniles convicted of sex offenses.

It's a ten page feature article, but here are some highlights:

Community notification makes people feel protected — who wouldn’t want to know if a sex offender lives next door? But studies have yet to prove that the law does, in fact, improve public safety. Meanwhile, when applied to youths, the laws undercut a central tenet of the juvenile justice system. Since juvenile courts were created more than 100 years ago, youths’ records have, with exceptions in some states, been sealed and kept out of the public’s hands. The theory is that children are less responsible for their actions, and thus less blameworthy, than adults and more amenable to rehabilitation. But by publishing their photographs and addresses on the Internet, community notification suggests that juveniles with sex offenses are in a separate, distinct category from other adolescents in the juvenile justice system — more fixed in their traits and more dangerous to the public. It suggests, in other words, that they are more like adult sex offenders than they are like kids.

More...

On the effect of sex offender registries for juveniles:

In dozens of interviews, therapists, lawyers, teenagers and their parents told me similar stories of juveniles who, after being discovered on a sex-offender registry, have been ostracized by their peers and neighbors, kicked out of extracurricular activities or physically threatened by classmates. Experts worry that these experiences stigmatize adolescents and undermine the goals of rehabilitation. “The whole world knows you did this bad thing,” notes Elizabeth Letourneau, an associate psychology professor at the Medical University of South Carolina and an expert on juveniles with sex offenses. “You could go to treatment for five years; you could be as straight as an arrow; but the message continues to be: You are a bad person. How does that affect your self-image? How does that affect your ability to improve your behaviors?”

On the requirements of the Adam Walsh Act, passed during Alberto Gonzales' tenure:

Under the Adam Walsh Act, a 35-year-old who has a history of repeatedly raping young girls will be eligible for the public registry, and so will a 14-year-old boy adjudicated as a sex offender for touching an 11-year-old girl’s vagina. According to the law, the teenager will remain on the national registry for life. He will have to register with authorities every three months. And if he fails to do so — not an unlikely prospect for some teenagers, especially those without involved parents — he may be imprisoned for more than one year.

On the danger of the Adam Walsh Act:

the Adam Walsh Act and similar legislation may risk ensnaring low-risk teenagers who were never headed toward becoming adult sex offenders. Numerous studies show that recidivism for juveniles who commit sex offenses is about 10 percent. That’s lower than most other juvenile offenses, including property and drug crimes. It’s also a significantly lower recidivism rate than that of adult sex offenders, which ranges from about 25 percent to, for the most serious offenders, 50 percent or higher. (Official recidivism rates are lower than actual rates; some sex offenders commit later offenses that go undetected.) And though the Adam Walsh Act requires many first-time teenage offenders to publicly register for life, if an adolescent hasn’t committed another sex crime within five years of his first offense, research suggests that he is unlikely to do so, notes Mark Chaffin of the University of Oklahoma.

On trying to distinguish a juvenile sex offender:

[B]y definition, adolescence is a time of development and flux; a boy who seems at high risk for repeat offenses at 14 may no longer be so at 16. And a low-risk 14-year-old boy could become higher risk by the time he is 16. Indeed, the manual of one juvenile-assessment test highlights the complications: “No aspect of their development, including their cognitive development, is fixed or stable. In addition, their life circumstances often are very unstable. In a very real sense, we are trying to assess the risk of ‘moving targets.’ ”

On consequences of lifetime registration for juveniles:

[O]ne consequence of community notification is that as these adolescents move into adulthood, they may struggle to stay in the mainstream because they have a hard time finding and holding jobs. Becoming a teacher or a doctor or joining the military may be virtually impossible for those labeled as sex offenders on public registries. Even job prospects at Target, McDonald’s or any business that performs background checks aren’t promising. In interviews, people in their 20s told me that they have been either fired or turned down for jobs at retail stores, fast-food restaurants and social-service organizations after employers discovered they were adjudicated as juveniles for sex offenses.

The article concludes:

[law professor Franklin E. Zimring says]keeping juveniles off public Internet registries isn’t just a civil rights issue. “It’s also about bringing some kind of rationality into law enforcement,” he says, given that including low-risk offenders in these laws adds to police workloads with no proof that it’s actually effective.

In the meantime, if thousands of juveniles do accumulate on state and federal Internet registries, Mark Chaffin argues that at the very least we should be studying the impact on these adolescents. “We’d need to follow these kids for 10 years to look at their different experiences and outcomes,” he said. “Frankly, we could easily find these policies do more harm than good.”

As Elizabeth Letourneau told me recently, “If kids can’t get through school because of community notification, or they can’t get jobs, they are going to be marginalized.” And marginalized people, she noted, commit more crimes.

Prior TalkLeft coverage: Why juvenile sex offender registries are a bad idea; on the Adam Walsh Act and on Megans' Laws.

< Parents Convicted of Hosting Underage Drinking Party | Feingold Calls For Censure >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    pedofire (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Sumner on Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 12:48:54 AM EST
    Edward Kennedy was about the last holdout on the Adam Walsh Act and then even he caved in. Bush signed it with relish. It is not hard to imagine Alberto Gonzales spending the bulk of his waking hours poring over sexually related material, much like Edwin Meese III.

    The war-on-sex doesn't stop there. See here and here.

    Government wants everybody dirty. These fanatics behind this despotism are even contaminating countries around the globe with this religion masquerading as law.

    Early on, APA psychologists represented that early sexual experiences for children, even where involved with adults, showed little or no harm to willing participants later in life. Republicans blew a gasket.

    The APA recanted and fell into junk science in order to buttress up party line. But some psychologists occassionally abide by primum non nocere, at least long enough to break ranks.

    More insight is available in the "Rachel Maddow Campaign Asylum - The GOP: Protecting the kids?" YouTube video.

    We fight them on issues like this over everyone's human rights, or we end up with the government eventually maintaining each individual's complete sexual history and probably dress codes requiring Mormon Magic underwear.

    government's sexual rigors and mortifications (none / 0) (#6)
    by Sumner on Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 02:32:15 PM EST
    Government loves to pretend how much better prople will be after government has had its way with them.

    If you appreciated the Rachel Maddow video on Romney, you'll no doubt want to read this.

    Reading the above kind of reminded me of the story a while back where...

    ...guards shackle youth in spread-eagled fashion after cutting their clothes off (a practice known as "four-pointing"), chain youth inside their cells ("bumpering"), and place children in isolation twenty-three hours a day for extended periods of time. Girls held in the State Training School report that they have been strip-searched by male guards, sprayed with pepper spray while naked, and handcuffed spread-eagled to their beds.

    "What is hell? I maintain that it is the suffering of being unable to love."
        -- Feodor Dostoyevsky

    "Just look at the number of wars that have been pursued in the name of God - both historically and in the present - especially by Judeo-Christianity and Islam. It's a consistent fact: The more sexual suppression, the more war."
        -- Sachiko McLean

    Parent

    "for unlawful carnal knowledge" (5.00 / 0) (#4)
    by Sumner on Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 12:36:52 PM EST
    This article shows how kids and sex are naturally like two peas in a pod.

    "See, kids really are the same everywhere." -- No. 1 Comment over at DU to the story on Nigerian kids using laptops to surf porn until they were thwarted.

    Just like churches used sex as a powerful weapon to instill guilt, shame and humiliation, in order to more completely dominate their members, so too government now wants to be a church.

    The progress of science in furnishing the government with means of espionage is not likely to stop with wiretapping. Ways may some day be developed by which the government, without removing papers from secret drawers, can reproduce them in court, and by which it will be enabled to expose to a jury the most intimate occurrences of the home....
    -- Justice Louis D. Brandeis, in strong dissent to the majority opinion, Olmstead v US (1928)

    So it was recognized years ago that Government , left to its own devices, would develop a salacious appetite for voyeurism.

    Just as Olmstead imagined extreme situations such as kidnappings where time was of the essence, our laws are regularly passed on the pretext of the most extreme situations and merely serve as proof-of-concept to be applied generally once they gain a foothold.

    The FBI's new program, (CIPAV), of planting trojans on people's computers probably using Microsoft's e-mail, Instant Messaging, or Windows Update to deliver, is said to collect IP addresses, MAC addresses and certain registry information. But watch it grow!

    The FBI also has a history of lying about the implementation of keyloggers onto target's computers. Some versions are most likely to contain that.

    The implementation in the aforementioned case was a juvenile bomb threat hoax, but count on the trend to continue and burgeon as it has now entered proof-of-concept stage. (And by tracking the regular IP addresses a target visits, the FBI will be even better able to choose a location familiar to the target from which to deliver its nefarious payload.)

    There is ample documentation showing that repressed s