Treatment of Sex Offenders

228
J.S. Levenson
of these laws outweigh their benefits (Ackerman, Sacks & Greenberg, 2012 ; Zgoba,
Witt, Dalessandro, & Veysey, 2009 ).
Other recent investigations have raised questions about the utility and validity of
the federally mandated Adam Walsh Act tier system. In Florida, New Jersey,
Minnesota, and South Carolina (Zgoba et al., 2012 ) and in New York (Freeman &
Sandler, 2010 ), the AWA classification categories did a poor job of identifying
potential recidivists, and researchers concluded that empirically derived procedures
(such as Static-99) were better for screening sex offenders into relative risk categories
to establish monitoring requirements. When AWA was implemented in Ohio
and Oklahoma, the retroactive reclassification process redistributed a significant
majority of registrants from lower tier levels to higher ones, contradicting empirical
evidence suggesting that the highest risk of sexual reoffense is concentrated among
a much smaller group of offenders (Harris et al., 2010 ).
Finally, the latest research on long-term sex offense recidivism has indicated that
risk is highest during the first few years after release and declines substantially over
time as individuals live in the community offense-free (Hanson et al., 2014 ). The findings
suggested that after about 16.5 years in the community without a new sex crime
arrest, even high-risk sexual offenders (defined by Static-99R scores) are no more
likely to be arrested for a new sex offense than nonsexual criminals, and sex offenders
scoring below zero on the Static-99R had sexual rearrest rate s that were slightly lower
than those of nonsexual criminals (Harris & Hanson, 2012 ). Thus, policies 25-year or
lifetime registration requirements are not evidence based and may be unnecessary for
many offenders, and resources might be better spent on more intensive supervision
and reintegration assistance in the early years of reentry (Hanson et al., 2014 ).
Residence Restriction Policies and Their Effectiveness
Public access to registries has made citizens more aware of sex offenders living in
communities, inciting a cascade of residential housing restrictions. These laws prevent
sex offenders from living within close proximity to places where children are
likely to be found. There are currently 30 state laws designating where sex offenders
can live (Meloy, Miller, & Curtis, 2008 ). The first state law, passed in 1995 in
Florida and applying only to sex offenders on probation and with minor victims,
created 1000 ft buffer zones around schools, parks, playgrounds, daycare centers,
and other places where children congregate. By 2004, there were 15 state statutes,
but within 2 years of the 2005 murder of 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford by a convicted
sex offender in Florida, the number of states with housing restrictions doubled. The
most common exclusion zones are 1000–2000 ft around venues such as schools,
parks, playgrounds, and daycare centers. Some laws include other facilities such as
arcades, amusement parks, movie theaters, youth sports facilities, school bus stops,
and libraries (Meloy et al., 2008 ).
Too abundant to count are municipal ordinances passed by cities, towns, and
counties which restrict where sex offenders can live. The first local ordinance in the