Megan's Law and Durkheim’s Perspective of Punishment: Retribution, Rehabilitation or Both?

<p>The victimization of Adam Walsh, Jacob Wetterling and Megan Kanka has been instrumental in designing sex offender laws. Registration and Community Notification Laws (RCNLs) are informally known as Megan’s Law (Terry 2011.) This paper explores sex offender legislation from the Durkheimian framework of retribution versus rehabilitation. In this paper I attempt to answer the research question: Does sex offender legislation respond to the diluted stance of punishment, which Durkheim envisioned is characteristic of modern societal sentiments (rehabilitation replacing retribution)? Why or why not? I first outline a brief history of sex offender legislation, followed by a discussion of select characteristics of societies that exhibit retributive and rehabilitative justice. Based on scholastic evidence presented in this paper, I conclude the punitive tendencies of current sex offender legislations are more retributive than rehabilitative. Current policies do not conform to the progress of punishment which Durkheim envisioned is concomitant to social evolution, and in many ways, demonstrates taking a step backwards.</p>

Sentencing high-risk sex offenders

This essay considers sex offender legislation in a number of countries, including England and Wales, Germany, and the United States, and details sex offender sentencing provisions in various systems. It evaluates the policies behind these laws. The essay deals with some key contemporary questions in relation to high-risk sex offending. Are policies being driven by populist punitiveness and an agenda based on public protection and preventive detention? Or are more welfare-driven goals taken into account? Particular sentences such as mandatory life and other forms of indeterminate sentencing, such as civil commitment, are evaluated and their use and efficacy considered. Whether such policies are lawful and also ethically acceptable is also evaluated.