Residency Restrictions for Sex Offenders: A Failure of Public Policy

2008 ◽  
Vol 60 (10) ◽  
pp. 3-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dwight H. Merriam
Author(s):  
Corey Rayburn Yung

The American criminal justice system regarding sex is not just logically incoherent, it is also often morally bankrupt because it remains unexamined and poorly understood. This Article contends that there are actually common roots underlying the seemingly oppositional forces of social panic and denial, which explain why the United States has an endemic sexual violence problem. Both panic and denial reinforce the implicit, and sometimes explicit, desire to avoid substantive engagement with socially contentious issues related to sex. The use of residency restrictions and civil commitment fit the modern social goal of putting sex offenders out-of-sight and out-of-mind. Yet, those same desires also explain America’s unwillingness to believe victims of sexual violence and police failure to properly investigate criminal complaints. In this way, sex panic dovetails with sex denial—in both instances, American culture only permits a limited discussion and understanding of sex and sexual violence. The result is that our nation fails to take sex crime complaints seriously while overreacting to the few convictions that emerge from the hostile criminal justice system.


2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-322
Author(s):  
Rebecca ONG ◽  
Sandy SABAPATHY ◽  
Wing Hong CHUI

AbstractIt is likely that no criminal behaviour breeds as much condemnation and fear as sex offences. Tragic examples of young victims of sex offenders from around the world have raised societal concerns and prompted calls for increased surveillance and control. It is responsible public policy to address these concerns in ways that will increase public protection and allay unnecessary fears. The purpose of this paper is three-fold. First, the paper examines Hong Kong’s recently implemented Sexual Conviction Record Check Scheme against the Territory’s low crime victimization rate. Second, it compares the Scheme with pre-employment screening checks in Australia and the UK. The paper finally concludes with proposals for changes to the Scheme.


2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 262-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy L. Anderson ◽  
Lisa L. Sample ◽  
Calli M. Cain

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document