POSTSCRIPT
Are the New Sex Offender Laws Rational?
The New Jersey legislatures concocted the multifaceted Megan's Law within 30 days of Megan Kanka's death with no hearings or debates on the empirical, ethical, or legal merits of the laws. They were forged, some insist, for revenge. Yet there are some 234,000 rapists or criminals in or out of prison, convicted of sexual assault under the auspices of the criminal justice system. Since 1980 the rate of prisoners convicted of sexual assault has increased 15 percent per year, higher than any other violent crime category. However, does this reflect real increases in child abuse, incest, and molestation or simply that victims are more likely to report violence and sexual offenses than they used to be?
There is a tremendous uneveness in the new sex laws--their scope, penalties, implementation, and so on. Ck~ly 56 offenders registered in New Jersey have been classified as tier 3, which requires full community notification. The 1994 Kansas Act has resulted thus far in only 14 civil commitments. By contrast, in other states information on registered sex offenders has been made much more readily available. In California, for example, one can simply dial a hot line to obtain such information. Megan's Law in New Jersey largely excludes victims of incest, although in probably 75-85 percent of all child molestation cases, the perpetrator is a member of the family or a family friend. In Louisiana such a distinction is not made. Hence, many worry that victims of incest will be reluctant to press charges because their neighbors could then, through community notification, find out. The victims' rights in these cases are ignored. Is that good policy?
What treatments for sex offenders should accompany being registered, having one's community notified, or being civilly committed? In the past, sex offenders were considered among the worst candidates for cure. The "new view" argues that with relapse treatment (i.e., programs similar to those used to treat alcoholism) sicgnificant modifications in sexually deviant behavior are possible. This treatment assumes that the offender is never really "cured" but must always be on guard against relapses. Certainly, though, to succeed, offenders in these programs must be highly motivated, able to show empathy for their victims, and remorseful. Among drugs that may be helpful in rehabilitating sexual offenders are Depo-Provera, which reduces the sexual drive, and triptorelin, which blocks the male sex hormone, testosterone.
Meanwhile, some states are mandating chemical castration in extreme cases. Yet studies show that offenders surgically or chemically castrated are still quite capable of molestation. If castration always worked, would that justify it?
Megan's murderer had been adjudicated for a second offense and should have been sentenced to 30 years, but he received only 7 years. He was released from an overcrowded New Jersey prison against the advice of all relevant staff members. There was no follow-up, let alone treatment. Either a correct sentence or treatment might have prevented Megan's death. Sex offenders often receive less than two hours of treatment per week. These facts were not considered by the legislatures that passed the new sex offender laws. Most states have either made no effort to evaluate the results of the new laws or show contradictory findings. Implementation remains inconsistent and possibly unfair. Retroactive application of the new laws sometimes harm those long since successfully integrated in their community. Many first-time offenders are teenagers, not "dirty old men." Hence, the treatment and labelling issues are most relevant. Are the new laws rational?
Two relevant U.S. Department of Justice publications that are helpful are Sex Offenses and Offenders aanuary 1997) and Sex Offender Community Notification by P. Finn (February 1997). For a current overview with lists of contact sources, see "Sex Offender Community Notification: Policy Report," National Criminal Justice Association (October 1997). From a law enforcement view, see "Put on Notice: Police Agencies Wrestle With Sex-Offender Notification Issue," Lens Uune 15, 1997). A description of one state's novel approach can be found in "At the Los Angeles County Fair: 'Outing' Sex Offenders," by W. Claiborne, The Washington Post (September 20, 1997).
A pointed attack on Kansas's 1994 Sexually Violent Predator Act is made by psychologist S. Lally in "Steel Beds v. Iron Bars: New Laws Muddle How to Handle Sex Offenders," Washington Post Uuly 27, 1997). For a philosophical overview of some of the new laws, see "MIegan's Law: Constitutionality and Policy," by A. Brooks, Criminal Justice Ethics (winter/spring 1996). For discussions of the more draconian aspects of the present movement, see "Calif ornia Child Molesters Face 'Chemical Castration,'" by B. Ayres, Jr., The Ne.v York Times (August 27,1997) and "The Many Myths About Sex Offenders," by G. Kolata, T1re Ne-.v York Times (September 1,1996). Among the many legal cliscussions are "Megan's Law: Can it Stop Sexual Predators--and at What Cost to Constitutional Rights?" by J. Rudin, Criminanl Justice (Fall 1996) and the special issue of the New York Law School Journal of Huiman Rights entitled "Critical Perspectives on Megan's Law" (1996). For a moving account of pedophilia among priests, see C. Connors, "The Moment After Suffering: Lessons from the Pedophilia Scandal," Commonweal (October 21, 1996). A classic article by E. Sutherland is "Sexual Psychopath Laws," in The Sutherland Papers, edited by A. Cohen et al. (Indiana University Press, 1956).