论文辅导 Effects of Offender Registry on Image in the Community

More research should be conducted on the effects that sex offender notifications have on public perception. Does the age and race of a sex offender have an impact on the public? Will the rates of females, parents, and those who have previously been exposed to a sexual traumatic experience be different from those who do not fall into any of these categories? Will those who reside in disadvantaged communities be more receptive to having sex offenders reside in their neighborhood? Does the nature of one’s offense play a role on the public perception or do humans have the tendency to stereotype according to methods of generalization with the belief that all sex offenders are socially deviant? These are all questions that may be beneficial to look at which in turn may reveal several psychological aspects of society.

Furthermore, it is important to understand the concept of how society views sex offenders and why some members of the community are less receptive than others. In a study conducted by Kernsmith, Comartin, Craun, and Kernsmith (2009), Michigan residents were questioned about their use of the sex offender registry publications as well as their belief on whether or not sex offenders lived in their community. Interestingly, most of the respondents stated that their nonuse of the registry publication was due to their lack of interest, believing that they lived in a “safe” area, and not having children. Such information can indicate that one who lives in a “safe” neighborhood with a higher socioeconomic status would be less receptive of having a sex offender live in their community as opposed to one from a more poverty stricken and area with a lower socioeconomic status. Results from this study indicate that those who have been exposed to crime and poverty may tend to utilize such services for the safety of themselves and their loved ones.

In fact, much of the crime that occurs has been reported as being in socially disorganized communities which in turn may affect how people who reside in that community respond to sex offenders. Mustaine & Tewksbury (2008) conducted a study which included data from a census of 2, 290 registered sex offenders in five urban counties and assessed the characteristics where African American and Caucasian offenders resided. It was discovered that majority of the offenders resided in poor neighborhoods. After comparing race, African American sex offenders were discovered as being more likely to reside in more of the socially disorganized communities as opposed to Caucasians. This could potentially lead to future research in examining how receptive members of sex offender communities are according to race and socioeconomic status. Overall, the information revealed how race can play a significant role in the experience of criminal sanctions and collateral consequences.

With this information, it is important to gain insight as to the type of vulnerable population living in such risky communities such as single women, parents, youth, elderly, or sexually abused victims. Placing sex offenders in this type of neighborhood could create public fear which is why the issue should be addressed as to where sex offenders will reside once they are released into the community. Mustaine & Tewksbury (2008) continued their study and also found that registered sex offenders were more likely to reside in socially disorganized and disadvantaged communities, but not in locations where large pools of vulnerable populations reside (i.e. women living alone or with children). However, this information does not protect women and children from moving into the community due to ignorance. After all, sex offenders dwell in various places including our school systems.

Although some people tend to focus more on sex offenders dwelling around school settings, one prospective area that many fail to look at is understanding what occurs when sex offenders are actually enrolled in a school environment. Stover (2005) gave several scenarios that occurred in a school environment including a teenager who molested a 13-year old girl in junior high. Here lies the issue in failing to realize that although it does not occur as frequent, the existence of pedophiles and other sex offenders within school settings cannot be ignored. If an individual looks at a 16-year old boy and a 46-year old man, who would display the greater threat? Would the community feel more comfortable having juvenile sex offenders living in their neighborhood as opposed to older adult sex offenders or even locate into an area where such occurs? Does age really make a difference? Most research fails to compare the perception of threat in the community amongst the various age differences of sex offenders.

Ironically, the characteristics of sex offender crimes and victims tends to vary for both adults and juveniles. In a review of juvenile sex offenders, researchers summarized that juvenile sex offenders were more likely to target victims that are much younger than themselves as opposed to peers, and their victims tend to be females. Craun & Kernsmith (2006) continued to discover in their research that 40 percent of the juvenile perpetrators abused victims under the age of six. In addition, these juveniles were found to be convicted of more aggravated sexual assaults as opposed to adult offenders. Much of this has been due to the use of force that juveniles tend to use against their victim. With this information, it may be interesting to discover how the community would feel about moving into an area where there is a juvenile offender as opposed to an adult offender and whether or not age factors make a difference on public response. However with the exclusion of race factors, it would probably be assumed that adult offenders would be viewed as more of a threat since juvenile sex offenders have the tendency to be overlooked because they are less often seen.

In the prospective study, the description as to the type of sex offense will not be displayed to determine people’s automatic instinct of perceptual threat without being told the type of offense that the sex offender has committed. This is important to look at because it will display one’s stereotypical tendencies to label one’s crime in relation to another based upon their overall appearance. In fact, the issue of labeling occurs in everyday life as most people can picture an attractive individual as opposed to one who appears more disheveled and unkempt. One might assume that the unattractive individual has the greater potential of being associated with committing a crime. The tendency to underestimate one’s potential for crime and sexual offense is often common but not frequently shared. Social psychological theories regarding utilitarian and retributive concerns have been useful for understanding support of registry laws by revealing the human belief that a sex offender poses an immediate significant threat to public safety. This in turn may help to explain one’s retributive motives for sentencing decisions (Salerno, Stevenson, Bottoms, & Pimentel, 2010, p. 80).