Treatment of Sex Offenders

10 Community Control of Sex Offenders
233
social support were found to predict sexual recidivism (Willis & Grace, 2009 ; Willis
& Grace, 2008 ). Some prosecutors and victim advocates have publicly denounced
residence restrictions, cautioning that the transience created by housing restrictions
undermines the validity of sex offender registries and makes it more difficult to
track and supervise sex offenders (Iowa County Attorneys Association, 2006 ;
NAESV, 2006 ).
A final concern about SORR laws is that they may cause offenders to cluster in
the few locations where compliant housing is available. Clustering is defined as a
disproportional number of sex offenders in a small geographical area. For instance,
a task force in Broward County, Florida, found that 8 % of the county’s sex offenders
lived within a one-square mile area (less than 1 % of the county’s land), raising
concerns about the safety of children living in that neighborhood (Broward County
Commission, 2009 ). According to Socia ( 2011 ), when clustering was measured as
the rate of RSOs compared to the population in upstate New York, RSO clustering
was associated with modest increases of recidivistic sex crimes, but only for sex
offenders with adult victims. On the other hand, in Indianapolis, the number of
RSOs in an area was not predictive of a higher number of reported sex crimes
(Stucky & Ottensmann, 2014 ). RSOs tend to cluster in impoverished neighborhoods
with lower degrees of social control and higher levels of social disorganization,
creating concerns that such communities are less able to provide protective
measures for vulnerable children (Socia & Stamatel, 2012 ; Tewksbury & Mustaine,
2008 ; Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2006 ). Whether the result of residence restrictions,
the limited ability for offenders to find affordable and available housing elsewhere,
or because residents are simply unable to keep RSOs out, the dense clustering of
RSOs in limited areas does not appear to be a desirable policy outcome.
Implications for Evidence-Based Sex Offender
Management Policy
It is estimated that there are currently about three quarters of a million registered sex
offenders in the USA (Ackerman et al., 2011 ; Ackerman, Levenson, & Harris, 2012 ;
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, 2012 ). As those numbers continue
to grow and more sex offenders are publicly identified within online registries,
law enforcement resources are spread thin, and the ability of the public to distinguish
truly dangerous offenders is diluted. Enormous resources are needed to
enforce registration compliance and track violators, despite evidence suggesting
that failing to register as a sex offender is not predictive of sexual reoffending (Duwe
& Donnay, 2010 ; Levenson, Ackerman & Harris, 2013 ; Levenson et al., 2010 ).
Public registries, if used, should be reserved for high-risk offenders. In this way,
the public can be better informed specifically about pedophilic, predatory, repetitive,
or violent sex offenders likely to commit new sex crimes. At the same time,
collateral consequences could be minimized for lower-risk offenders reintegrating
into society and attempting to become productive, law-abiding citizens. The use of