A recent op-ed piece in the New York Times had Roger N. Lancaster dissecting the “tough-on-crime” mindset that brought forth some of harshest sanctions a convicted criminal can face. Those charged with a sex offense are not only subjected to incarceration, but they also face a life sentence of notoriety for a crime that may have been committed decades before. A person who is required to register as a sex offender carries with him or her what Lancaster calls a “digital scarlet letter,” often for life.
A person could murder someone, complete his sentence, and move into a neighborhood without anyone knowing his past criminal history. Not so with a convicted sex offender. Sex offenders must register where they live and their photo, address, crime and other information is included on a website for all to view.
Some may say that this information is vital to protect children from monstrous child predators, but Lancaster points out that children are more often sexually abused by a family member, not the bogeyman hiding in an alley waiting to strike.
When the media reports the rape and murder of a child there is a natural outpouring of grief and rage. Such cases stir up feelings that have fed the frenzy that created harsh laws regarding sex crimes. But most sex crimes aren’t against children. And there are different reasons a person can be convicted of a sex crime, and be labeled for life.
Along with serial rapists and child predators is the 18 year -old who had sex with his 16 year-old girlfriend. There is the drunken neighbor who touched the breast of a women at a party, or the female who joking grabbed the buttocks of a co-worker. In some states urinating in public is considered a sex crime. A teen who is found to be “sexting,” sending nude photos of herself via her phone to a boyfriend, can be charged with child pornography. If the boyfriend send the photo to a friend, he is guilty of disseminating child pornography. The sanctions concerning child pornography seem to be the same. A person can be arrested and sent to prison for looking at a nude photo of an underage child, just as the person actually having sex with a child in a photo can be.
The natural desire to protect children has led to some strict laws that have dire consequences. Being branded a sex offender for life, or even a period of several years, is tantamount to being labeled a “pariah” and is sure to cause the “social death” of the former offender, according to Lancaster.
Finding employment is hard for those without a criminal history, harder for those with one, and hardest for those convicted of a sex crime. An under class of homeless former sex offenders is rapidly growing throughout the country. Some states have laws that do not let convicted sex offenders live near schools, or within a selected amount of feet of a park, playground, beach or any other area children might congregate. In large cities this rule effectively bans ex-sex offenders from living in most neighborhoods.
The legal sanctions made with regard to sexual offenses seem to be one-size-fits-all, although the crimes are not. According to the Vera Institute, of Justice, the sentences of those convicted of a sex offense are twice as long as sentences for other crimes. In America, one in 500 prisoners are incarcerated for a sex crime. (The Vera Institute study Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders can be found in the Library of www.reentrycentral.org.)
Rape is a horrific violation of a person’s body, as is mugging and murder. Supporters calling for a re-examination of sex crime laws are not asking that crimes go unpunished, but rather that they are more consistent with similar crimes and sanctions. The recidivism rate for sex offenders who received treatment in prison is 12.3%, lower than the average recidivism rate of other crimes.
While not seeking to diminish the seriousness of a sexual crime, or to ignore the impact of such crimes on the victims, some feel that for some of the crimes a lifetime registry as a sex offender is too harsh. A person who committed a sex crime 20 years ago, and has since become a model citizen should have the option of having his or her name removed from the sex offender registry list, reform minded individuals believe. And, of course, input from victims of sexual crimes is vital to the discussion about changing laws. As more information is released concerning the collateral costs of harsh sentences, the time for that discussion seems to be now.
To view Roger N. Lancaster's full article click here to go to website
|
|
|
|
