Sex offenders are viewed a unique type of criminal offender, particularly as more "objectionable,' less treatable, more dangerous, and more likely to recidivate. In recent years, these offenders have once again become the focus of intense legal scrutiny, primarily through laws specifically targeting them for indefinite confinement, registration and community notification, polygraph testing, and chemical castration. This article examines the underlying assumptions and justifications for these sex offender laws. We ask whether treatment, punishment, and public safety can be reconciled as justifications for the laws. We conclude that, even though treatment is an implicit rationale in the laws' provisions, punishment, incapacitation, and public safety are the ostensive purposes of these special laws and policies directed toward sex offenders. Moreover, this article questions the constitutionality and rationality of sex offender laws and policies and their consequences for sex offenders, treatment professionals, the mental health and criminal justice systems, and society in general.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abrams, S.
(1989). Probation, polygraph surveillance of child abusers. The Prosecutor, 22, 29-38.
2.
Adams, D. B.
(1999). Summary of-state sex offender registry dissemination procedures. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
3.
Ahlmeyer, S.
, Heil, P., McKee, B., & English, K. (2000). The impact of polygraphy on admission of victims and offenses in adult sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 12(2), 123-138.
4.
Alexander, R.
(1991). The United States Supreme Court and an inmate's right to refuse mental health treatment. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 5(3), 225-240.
5.
American Psychiatric Association
. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
6.
Ansley, N.
(1997). The validity and reliability of polygraph testing. Polyraph, 26(4), 215-239.
7.
Arizona v. Christopher, 652 P.2d 1031 (Ariz. 1982).
8.
Baranowski, G.
(1998). Managing sex offenders in the community with the assistance of polygraph testing. Polygraph, 27(2), 75-85.
9.
Barnickol, L.
(2000). Access to justice: The social responsibility of lawyers. Recent development: Missouri's sexually violent predator law. Treatment or punishment?Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, 4, 321-339.
10.
Beck, A. J.
, & Maruschak, L. M. (2000). Mental health treatment in state prisons, 2000 (Bureau of Justice Statistics Publication No. NCJ-188215). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
11.
Bedarf, A.
(1995). Examining sex offender community notification laws. California Law Review, 83, 885-937.
12.
Berliner, L.
(1996). Commentary: Community notification of sex offenders: A new tool or false promise. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11(2), 294-295.
13.
Billings, J.
, & Bulges, C. (2000). Comment: Maine's sex offender registration and notification act. Wise or wicked?Maine Law Review, 52, 175-259.
14.
Blasingame, G. D.
(1998). Suggested clinical uses of polygraphy in community-based sexual offender treatment programs. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 10(1), 37-45.
15.
Bradford, J. M.
(1990). The antiandrogen and hormonal treatment of sex offenders. In W. L. Marshall, D. R. Laws, & H. E. Barbaree (Eds.), Handbook of sexual assault: Issues, theories, and treatment of the offender (pp. 297-310). New York: Plenum Press.
16.
Brito, T.
(2000). Paranoid parents, phantom menaces, and the culture of fear. Wisconsin Law Review, 2000, 519-529.
17.
Brooks, A. D.
(1995). Megan's Law: The legal issues. Criminal Justice Ethics, 14(2), 12-16.
18.
Bureau of Justice Statistics
. (1997). Sex offenses and offenders: An analysis of data on rape and sexual assault. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
19.
Clear, T.
, & Cole, G. (2000). American corrections (5th ed.). Belmont, CA, Wadsworth.
20.
Cornwell, J. K.
(1998). Understanding the role of the police andparent patriae powers in involuntary civil commitment before and after Hendricks. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4(112), 377-413.
21.
Cross, T. P.
, & Saxe, L. (1992). A critique of the validity of polygraph testing in child sexual abuse cases. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 1(4), 19-33.
22.
Cross, T. P.
, & Saxe, L. (2001). Polygraph testing and sexual abuse: The lure of the magic lasso. Child Maltreatment, 6(3), 195-206.
23.
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
24.
Druhm, K. A.
(1997). A welcome reaction to draconia: California's penal law section 645. The castration of sex offenders and the Constitution. Albany Law Review, 61(1), 285-343.
25.
Edwards, W.
, & Hensley, C. (2001). Contexualizing sex offender management legislation and policy: Evaluating the problem of latent consequences in community notification laws. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45(1), 83-101.
26.
English, K.
(1998). The containment approach: An aggressive strategy for the community management of adult sex offenders. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4(1/2), 218-235.
27.
English, K.
, Jones, L., Pasini-Hill, D., Patrick, D., & Cooley-Towell, S. (2000). The value of polygraph testing in sex offender management. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
28.
English, K.
, Pullen, S., & Jones, L. (1997). Managing adult sex offenders in the community-A containment approach. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
29.
Falk, A.
(1999). Sex offenders, mental illness, and criminal responsibility: The constitutional boundaries of civil commitment afterKansas v. Hendricks. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 25(1), 117-147.
30.
Farkas, M. A.
, & Zevitz, R. G. (2000). The law enforcement role in sex offender community notification: A research note. Journal of Crime and Justice, 23(1), 125-139.
31.
Farrenkopf, T.
(1992). What happens to therapists who work with sex offenders?Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 18 (314), 217-223.
32.
Federoff, J. P.
, & Moran, B. (1997). Myths and misconceptions about sex offenders. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 6(4), 263-277.
33.
Fitzgerald, E. A.
(1990). Chemical castration: MPA treatment of the sexual offender. American Journal of Criminal Law, 18(1), 1-60.
34.
Floyd, J.
(1990). The administration of antipsychotic drugs to prisoners: State of the law and beyond. California Law Review, 78, 1243-1285.
35.
Freeman-Longo, R.
(1996). Feel good legislation: Prevention or calamity. Child Abuse and Neglect, 20, 95-101.
36.
Friedland, S.
(1999). On treatment, punishment, and the civil commitment of sex offenders. University of Colorado Law Review, 70(1), 73-154.
37.
Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).
38.
Gillespie, A.
(1998). Note: Constitutional challenges to civil commitment laws: An uphill battle for sexual predators afterKansas v. Hendricks. Catholic University Law Review, 47, 1145.
39.
Glovan, J.
(1999). I don't think we're in Kansas anymore, Leroy:Kansas v. Hendricks and the tragedy of judicial restraint. McGeorge Law Review, 30, 329-366.
40.
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).
41.
Hagler, H. L.
(1995). Polygraph as a measure of progress in the assessment, treatment, and surveillance of sex of fenders. Sexual Addiction and Compulsion, 2(2), 98-111.
42.
Harris, G. T.
, Rice, M. E., & Quinsey, V. L. (1998). Appraisal and management of risk in sexual aggressors: Implications for criminal justice policy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4(1/2), 73-115.
43.
Henseler, T. B.
(1997). Comment: A critical look at the admissibility of polygraph evidence in the wake ofDauber. The lie detector fails the test. Catholic University Law Review, 46, 1247-1297.
44.
Hicks, P. K.
(1993). Castration of sexual offenders: Legal and ethical issues. Journal of Legal Medicine, 14, 641-667.
45.
Himes v. Thompson, 225 F.3d 662 (9th Cir. 2000).
46.
Holden, E. J.
(2000). Pre- and post-conviction polygraphs: Building blocks for the future. Procedures, principles and policies. Polygraph, 29(1), 69-98.
47.
Iacono, W. G.
, & Lykken, D. T. (1997). The validity of the lie-detector: Two surveys of scientific opinion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 426-433.
48.
Jacobson, R.
(1999). "Megan's Laws": Reinforcing old patterns of anti-gay police harassment. Georgetown Law Journal, 87(7), 2431-2473.
49.
Janus, E.
(2000). Sexual predator commitment laws: Lessons for law and the behavioral sciences. Behavioral Science and the Law, 18, 5-21.
50.
Johnson, M.
(1998). Notification dilemmas: Megan's Law spawned flurry of state acts, but implementation proves problematic for all. The Quill, 86(7), 9-12.
51.
Kabat, A. R.
(1998). Scarlet letter sex offender databases and community notification: Sacrificing personal privacy for a symbol's sake. American Criminal Law Review, 35(2), 333-370.
52.
Kaden, J.
(1998). Therapy for convicted sex offenders: Pursuing rehabilitation without incrimination. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 89(1), 347-392.
53.
Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407 (2002).
54.
Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997).
55.
Kansas v. Lumley, 977 P.2d 914 (Kan. 1999).
56.
Keene, B.
(1997). Chemical castration: An analysis of Florida's "cutting edge" policy towards sex criminals. Florida Law Review, 49, 803-820.
57.
La Fond, J.
(1992). Washington's sexually violent predator law: A deliberate misuse of the therapeutic state for social control. University of Puget Sound Law Review, 15, 655-702.
58.
Lea, S.
, Auburn, T., & Kibblewhite, K. (1999). Working with sex offenders: The perceptions and experiences of professionals and paraprofessionals. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43(1), 103-119.
59.
Lieb, R.
(1996). Commentary: Community notification laws. A step toward more effective solutions. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11(2), 298-300.
60.
Loe, M.
, & Porter, M. (2000). Case note: Arkansas sexual offender registration and notification laws. An ex post facto violation?Arkansas Law Review, 53, 175-195.
61.
Logan, W.
(1999). Liberty interests in the preventive state: Procedural due process and sex offender community notification laws. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 89(4), 1167-1231.
62.
Maeve, M. K.
, & Vaughn, M. S. (2001). Nursing with prisoners: The practice of caring, forensic nursing, or penalharm. Advances in Nursing Science, 24(2), 47-64.
63.
Maletsky, B. M.
(1991). Treating the sexual offender. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
64.
Marsh, R. L.
, & Walsh, A. (1995). Physiological and psychosocial assessment and treatment of sex offenders: A comprehensive victim-oriented approach. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 22(1/2), 77-96.
65.
Marshall, S.
(2001, July 9). County uses lie detectors to supervise sex offenders. North County Times, pp. A1, A4.
66.
Matson, S.
, & Lieb, R. (1997a). Megan's Law: A review of state and federal legislation. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
67.
Matson, S.
, & Lieb, R. (1997b). Sexual predator commitment laws. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
68.
Melella, J. T.
, Travin, S., & Cullen, K. (1989). Legal and ethical issues in the use of antiandrogens in treating sex offenders. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 17(3), 223-232.
69.
Meyer, W. J.
, & Cole, C. (1997). Physical and chemical castration of sex offenders: A review. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 25(314), 1-16.
70.
Meyer, W. J.
, Cole, C., & Emory, E. (1992). Depo-Provera treatment for sex offending behavior: An evaluation of outcome. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 20(3), 249-259.
71.
Miller, R. D.
(1998). Forced administration of sex drive reducing medications to sex offenders: Treatment or punishment?Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4(1/2), 175-199.
72.
Money, J.
(1987). Treatment guidelines: Antiandrogen and counseling of paraphiliac sex offenders. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 13(3), 219-223.
73.
Nassi, A. J.
(1980). Therapy of the absurd: A study of punishment and treatment in California prisons and the roles of psychiatrists and psychologists. In H. J. Vetter & R. W. Rieber (Eds.), The psychological foundations of criminal justice: Contemporary perspectives on forensic psychiatry and psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 322-334). New York: John Jay Press.
74.
Palermo, G.
, & Farkas, M. A. (2001). The dilemma of the sexual offender. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas Publisher.
75.
Pallone, N.
(1991). The American Bar Association and legislatively mandated treatment for sex offenders. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 17(1/2), 105-117.
76.
Parks, B.
(2000). Sex offender registration enforcement: A proactive stance to monitoring convicted sex offenders. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 69(10), 6-9.
77.
People v. Gauntlett, 353 N.W. 2d 463 (Mich. 1986).
78.
Peters-Baker, J.
(1998). Comment: Challenging traditional notions of managing sex offenders. Prognosis is lifetime management. University of Missouri Kansas City Law Review, 66, 629.
79.
Pratt, J.
(2000). Sex crimes and the new punitiveness. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 18, 135-151.
80.
Prendergast, W. E.
(1991). Treating sex offenders in correctional institutions and outpatient clinics: A guide to clinical practice. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
81.
Prentky, R.
(1996). Commentary: Community notification laws and constructive risk reduction. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11(2), 295-298.
82.
Raskin, D. C.
, Honts, C. R., & Kircher, J. C. (1997). The scientific status of research on polygraph tests. In D. L. Faigman, D. Kaye, M. J. Saks, & J. Sanders (Eds.), The West companion to scientific evidence (pp. 565-582). St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
83.
Reams, P. N.
, Smith, M. N., Fletcher, J., & Spencer, E. (1998). Making the case for bioethics in corrections. Corrections Today, 60(2), 112-117.
84.
Rennie v. Klein, 462 F. Supp. 1131 (D. N.J. 1978).
85.
Ryan, L.
(1990). Washington State Prison procedure for the forcible administration of antipsychotic medication to prison inmates does not violate due process:Washington v. Harper. University of Cincinnati Law Review, 59, 1373-1415.
86.
Saxe, L.
,& Ben-Shakkar, G. (1999). Admissibility of polygraph tests: The application of scientific standards post-Daubert. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 203-223.
87.
Scholle, A.
(2000). Sex offender registration. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 69(7), 17-24.
88.
Schwartz, B.
(1988). A practitioner's guide to treating the incarcerated male sex offender. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections.
89.
Schwartz, B.
(1995). Decision making with incarcerated sex offenders. In B. K. Schwartz&H. R. Cellini (Eds.), The sex offender: Corrections, treatment, and legal practice (pp. 8-1-8-18). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute.
90.
Scott, L. K.
(1997). Community management of sex offenders. In B. K. Schwartz & H. R. Cellini (Eds.), The sex offender: New insights, treatment innovations, and legal developments (pp. 15-1-15-12). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute.
91.
Simon, J.
(1998). Managing the monsters: Sex offenders in the "new penology."Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4(1/2), 452-467.
92.
Simon, J.
(2000). Megan's Law: Crime and democracy in late modem America. Law and Social Inquiry, 25, 1111-1150.
93.
Simon, L.
(1997). An examination of the assumptions of specialization, mental disorder, and dangerousness in sex offenders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23(2/3), 275-308.
94.
Smith, K. L.
(1999). Making pedophiles take their medicine: California's chemical castration law. Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal, 17, 123.
95.
Spalding, L. H.
(1998). Article: Florida's 1997 chemical castration law. A return to the dark ages. Florida State University Law Review, 25, 117-139.
96.
Spencer, A.
(1999). Working with sex offenders in prisons and through release to the community: A handbook. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
97.
State v. Eaton, 919 P. 2d 116 (Wash. App. 1996).
98.
State v. Flores-Moreno, 879 P. 2d 292 (Wash. 1994).
99.
State v. Riles, 936 P.2d I (Wash. App. 1997).
100.
Tancredi, L.
(1981). Informed consent: The dilemma. In E. B. Roberts, R. J. Levy, & S. W. Finkelstein (Eds.), Biomedical innovation (pp. 301-323). Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
101.
Vatz, R. E.
, & Weinberg, L. S. (2001). Sex offender statutes and psychiatric confusion. USA Today Magazine, 130, 61-62.
102.
Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210 (1990).
103.
Wells, C.
, & Motley, E. (2001). Article: Reinforcing the myth of the crazed rapist: A feminist critique of recent rape legislation. Boston University Law Review, 81, 127-198.
104.
Wettstein, W. M.
(1992). A psychiatric perspective of Washington's sexually violent predator statute. University of Puget Sound Law Review, 15, 597-633.
105.
Wilcox, D. T.
(2000). Application of the clinical polygraph examination to the assessment, treatment, and monitoring of sex offenders. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 5(2), 134-152.
106.
Winslade, W.
, Stone, T. H., Smith-Bell, M., & Webb, D. M. (1998). Castrating pedophiles convicted of sex offenses against children: New treatment or old punishment?Southern Methodist University Law Review, 51, 349-412.
107.
Zevitz, R.
, & Farkas, M. A. (2000a). The impact of sex-offender community notification on probation/parole in Wisconsin. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44(1), 8-21.
108.
Zevitz, R.
, & Farkas, M. A. (2000b). Sex offender community notification: Managing high-risk criminals or exacting further vengeance?Behavioral Science & the Law, 18(213), 375-391.
109.
Zonana, H.
, & Norko, M. (1999). Sexual predators. Forensic Psychiatry, 22(1), 109-127.
