What are your thoughts on this story?
We came across this story on an Ohio news station.
WFMJ.com News weather sports for Youngstown-Warren Ohio
What are your thoughts?
On one hand they point out that the sexual reoffense rates are actually low (in comparison to other types of crimes). But on the other hand, they suggest the “Reoffense rate” is high. They question the value of treatment (though it’s generally court ordered). They don’t make mention of other factors that could increase criminal recidivism, like the onerous conditions that are imposed on persons required to register, social ostracism, or people who falsely accuse a registrant of a crime because they don’t want them in their neighborhood. The news station interviewed prosecutors for the piece, but didn’t speak to any social scientists, treatment providers, or actual registrants.
If you were to write a letter to the news station, what points would you make?
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well, I would say the following:
We simply must begin to understand that these laws were written as an angry/emotional reaction to crimes which are incredibly rare. They have been written and named in order to get justice for children like Meghan Khanka and Jacob Wetterling. But those aren’t the crimes being committed nor are the perpetrators the same. When we here “sex offender” we have been conditioned to immediately assume that the person is an “out of control monster,” or a person who just can’t help himself, a pedophile with no self control, waiting behind the bushes to sexually assault a child at any moment. By believing in these myths, our communities are in fact less safe. People convicted of sex crimes can learn their lesson and not commit such a crime again just like any other person convicted of a crime. There is simply no research which suggest otherwise.
We absolutely need every person who re-enters society to have a job, a safe place to live, a support system and be near social and medical services – especially sex offenders. We know this already in our decades of recidivism research. Instead we have come up with this special set of laws and regulations denying those things to sex offenders and in doing we set them up to fail – all in the name of protecting children? It does make any sense.
The Sex Offender Registry itself perpetuates homelessness and unemployment for almost a million people. It shames people which is probably the most damaging aspect of the registry. Sex Offenders wake up everyday in a cloud of shame and social scorn. Why? For what other crime do we do this? Can you imagine getting a DUI in your early 30s, going to jail and when released into society you are publicly labeled a “drunk” for the rest of your life – by the government? It is so harsh that anything good a person does is meaningless; overshadowed by this scarlet letter we have attached to them. When has that ever worked?
How we are treating sex offenders is cruel and we will not save any child by being cruel to sex offenders. In the words of Patty Wetterling, “we want people who abuse children to see the great harm they have done, serve their punishment and then never do it again!” THIS is what we can do to create safer communities. Abuse in response to abuse creates more abuse.
Then you’d better be looking at those whom you know or have trusted because that’s well over 90% of people who commit sex offenses…and they are not on the registry.
Well said.
@Aes
You should always be on the lookout for sex offender myths, such as the ‘frightening and high’ recidivism rate myth, when it is actually less than 5%.
You should always be on the lookout for half-truths, because you are probably going to believe the wrong half.
You should always be on the lookout for well-edited media stories that are meant to engage your emotions, and do not contain all the facts.
I’d point out that if the goal was to do a hit piece, job well done. If the job is to do journalism and be investigative about topics such as this, then you need to be more in-depth with the research, present more views across more segments or online, and ensure outside sources are sought to review and ensure the messaging is correct across the board so the real conclusions are presented, not just the click bait version which benefit the bottom line.
Ohio media is notorious for poor reporting on this topic, so it should be no surprise they presented this as they did.
*Cough Pre-Crime *Cough Cough*
The introduction provides the number of 40 – 60 % recidivism which in the US includes registry (11% – 3 years in FL) and probation (14.4% – 3 years in Fl) paperwork offenses. More importantly this 40 – 60% number was derived during the 1930 – 1970 time period where sex offenses were intended, excitement-stimulated rape and physical violence. It is not applicable today where sex offenses, particularly in Florida, include many new offenses that are not intended and/or sex driven. Reference: Lussier et al, “Against All Odds: The Unexplained Sexual Recidivism Drop in the United States and Canada”, Crime and Justice, 52(2023)
The news story should be corrected.