A Systematic Review of Professionals’ Views About Community Management Policies for Individuals Convicted of Sexual Offenses

Abstract

A contentious criminal justice policy issue in recent times has been community management policies for individuals convicted of sexual offenses. This systematic review attained professionals’ views, areas of concern, and recommendations for community management policies. It went beyond the extant literature by exploring perceptions of heterogenous professional groups involved in the criminal justice system. Of the 25 studies, 12 were quantitative, nine qualitative, and four mixed methods, and included custodial and community correctional officers, probation officers, psychologists, police officers, prosecutors, lawmakers, and academics. Overall, professionals mostly supported the policies, but had less support for public registries and community notification. Four key issues associated with the policies were apparent: problems with actuarial risk assessment tools, difficulties accessing information with partner agencies, limited resources, and lack of education among the public. Within this, four recommendations were identified. These findings offer a valuable resource for researchers, along with government and policy professionals tasked with overseeing community management policies.

Keywords

systematic review criminal justice system public registry sex offenses child sexual abuse

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ames

H. M. R.

Glenton

Lewin

(2017). Parents’ and informal caregivers’ views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2, 1–121. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011787.pub2

Babchishin

K. M.

Hanson

R. K.

Blais

(2016). Less is more: Using Static-2002R subscales to predict violent and general recidivism among sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse, 28, 187–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063215569544

Babchishin

K. M.

Hanson

R. K.

VanZuylen

(2014). Online child pornography offenders are different: A meta-analysis of the characteristics of online and offline sex offenders against children. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(1), 45–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0270-x

Banks

(2009). Challenges of evidence-based policy-making. Australian Public Service Commission. https://www.apsc.gov.au/challenges-evidence-based-policy-making

*Call

(2018a). The collateral consequences of sex offender management policies: Views from professionals. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(3), 676–696. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16653978

*Call

(2018b). The community corrections perspective toward sex offender management policies and collateral consequences: Does contact with sex offenders matter? Criminal Justice Studies, 31(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2017.1393418

*Call

Gordon

J. A.

(2016). Support for current sex offender management policies: A national survey of the perceptions of professionals. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 834–851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-016-9337-7

Campbell

Pound

Morgan

Daker-White

Britten

Pill

Yardley

Pope

Donovan

(2012). Evaluating meta ethnography: Systematic analysis and synthesis of qualitative research. Health Technology Assessment, 15(43), 1–164. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta15430

Christensen

L. S.

(2018). Professionals’ perceptions of female child sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518785377

10.

Christensen

L. S.

Sharman

Powell

(2015). Professionals’ views on child sexual abuse attrition rates. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(4), 542–558. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2014.960036

11.

*Connor

D. P.

(2012). Prison wardens’ perceptions of sex offenders, sex offender registration, community notification, and residency restrictions [Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY].

12.

*Cubellis

M. A.

Walfield

S. M.

Harris

A. J.

(2018). Collateral consequences and effectiveness of sex offender registration and notification: Law enforcement perspectives. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(4), 1080–1106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16667574

13.

Cunneen

(2014). Colonial processes, Indigenous peoples, and criminal justice systems. In Bucerius

S. M.

Tonry

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of ethnicity, crime, and immigration (pp. 386–407). Oxford University Press.

14.

*Datz

D. L.

(2009). Sex offender residency restrictions and other sex offenders management strategies: The probation officer perspective in Florida. Bureau of Probation and Parole Field Services.

15.

*Day

Carson

Newton

Hobbs

(2014). Professional views on the management of sex offenders in the community. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 53(3), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2014.887605

16.

Finkelhor

Ormrod

Turner

Hamby

(2005). The victimization of children and youth: A comprehensive, national survey. Child Maltreatment, 10(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559504271287

17.

Fleming

Prenzler

Ransley

(2013). The status of Indigenous women in policing: A Queensland case study. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 24(3), 357–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/10345329.2013.12035966

18.

*Gaines

J. S.

(2006). Law enforcement reactions to sex offender registration and community notification. Police Practice and Research, 7(3), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614260600825448

19.

Government of Western Australia. (2020). Access registered sex offender information. https://www.wa.gov.au/service/security/law-enforcement/access-registered-sex-offender-information

20.

Hanson

R. K.

Morton-Bourgon

K. E.

(2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Studies, 73(6), 1154–1163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1154

21.

Harper

C. A.

Hogue

T. E.

Bartels

R. M.

(2017). Attitudes towards sexual offenders: What do we know, and why are they important? Aggression & Violent Behavior, 34, 201–2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2017.01.011

22.

*Harris

A. J.

Levenson

J. S.

Lobanov-Rostovsky

Walfield

S. M.

(2018). Law enforcement perspectives on sex offender registration and notification: Effectiveness, challenges, and policy priorities. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 29(4), 391–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403416651671

23.

Home Office. (2011). Keeping children safe: Your right to ask. The Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/97899/A5-leaflet.pdf

24.

Jennings

W. G.

Zgoba

K. M.

Tewksbury

(2012). A comparative longitudinal analysis of recidivism trajectories and collateral consequences for sex and non-sex offenders released since the implementation of sex offender registration and community notification. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35(3), 356–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2012.662062

25.

Kernsmith

P. D.

Craun

S. W.

Foster

(2009). Public attitudes toward sexual offenders and sex offender registration. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 18(3), 290–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538710902901663

26.

Kim

Benekos

P. J.

Merlo

A. V.

(2016). Sex offender recidivism revisited: Review of recent meta-analyses on the effects of sex offender treatment. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 17(1), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838014566719

27.

Levenson

J. S.

Brannon

Fortney

Baker

(2007). Public perceptions about sex offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 7(1), 137–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2007.00119.x

28.

*Levenson

J. S.

Fortney

Baker

J. N.

(2010). Views of sexual abuse professionals about sex offender notification policies. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 54(2), 150–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X08327785

29.

Long

H. A.

French

D. P.

Brooks

J. M.

(2020). Optimising the value of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis. Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences, 1(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/2632084320947559

30.

*Malesky

Keim

(2001). Mental health professionals’ perspectives on sex offender registry web sites. Sexual Abuse, 13(1), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/107906320101300106

31.

*Masters

K. B.

Kebbell

M. R.

(2019). Police officers’ perceptions of a sex offender registration scheme: Identifying and responding to risk. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 26(3), 396–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2018.1506717

32.

*McCartan

(2012). Professionals’ understanding of government strategies for the management of child sexual abusers. Probation Journal, 59(2), 124–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/0264550512438603

33.

*McCartan

K. F.

Hoggett

O’Sullivan

(2018). Police officer attitudes to the practicalities of the sex offenders’ register, ViSOR and Child Sexual Abuse Disclosure Scheme in England and Wales. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 24(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2017.1411641

34.

*Meloy

Curtis

Boatwright

(2013a). Policy-makers’ perceptions on their sex offender laws: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Criminal Justice Studies, 26(3), 273–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2012.744307

35.

*Meloy

Curtis

Boatwright

(2013b). The sponsors of sex offender bills speak up: Policy makers’ perceptions of sex offenders, sex crimes, and sex offender legislation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40(4), 438–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854812455740

36.

*Meloy

Boatwright

Curtis

(2013c). Views from the top and bottom: Lawmakers and practitioners discuss sex offender laws. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(4), 616–638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-012-9189-8

37.

Moher

Liberati

Tetzlaff

Altman

D. G

., & the PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLOS Medicine, 6(7), Article e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

38.

*Mustaine

E. E.

Tewksbury

Connor

D. P.

Payne

B. K.

(2015). Criminal justice officials’ views of sex offenders, sex offender registration, community notification, and residency restrictions. Justice System Journal, 36(1), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2014.965859

39.

Napier

Dowling

Morgan

Talbot

(2018). What impact do public sex offender registries have on community safety? (Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, No. 550). Australia Institute of Criminology.

40.

Noblit

Hare

(1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. SAGE.

41.

Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking. (2019). Legislative history of federal sex offender registration and notification. https://www.smart.gov/legislation.htm

42.

Ohly

Gentry

Wigglesworth

Bethel

Lovell

Garside

(2016). A systematic review of the health and well-being impacts of school gardening: Synthesis of quantitative and qualitative evidence. BMC Public Health, 16(1), 286–322. https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-016-2941-0?optIn=false

43.

Owusu-Bempah

Wortley

(2014). Race, crime, and criminal justice in Canada. In Bucerius

S. M.

Tonry

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of ethnicity, crime, and immigration (pp. 281–320). Oxford University Press.

44.

*Payne

B. K.

Tewksbury

Mustaine

E. E.

(2016). Identifying the sources of community corrections professionals’ attitudes about sex offender residence restrictions: The impact of demographics and perceptions. Crime & Delinquency, 62(2), 143–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128712470993

45.

*Powell

Day

Benson

Vess

Graffam

(2014). Australian police officers’ perceptions of sex offender registries. Policing and Society, 24(1), 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2013.784299

46.

Pratt

(2000). Sex crimes and the new punitiveness. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 18, 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0798(200003/06)18:2/3<135::AID-BSL392>3.0.CO;2-Q

47.

Prescott

J. J.

Rockoff

J. E.

(2008). Do sex offender registration and notification laws affect criminal behavior? (Report No. w13803). National Bureau of Economic Research.

48.

Protogerou

Hagger

M. S.

(2020). A checklist to assess the quality of survey studies in psychology. Methods in Psychology, 3, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2020.100031

49.

Sandler

J. C.

Freeman

N. J.

Socia

K. M.

(2008). Does a watched pot boil? A time-series analysis of New York State’s sex offender registration and notification law. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 14(4), 284–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013881

50.

Schumucker

Lösel

(2015). The effects of sexual offender treatment on recidivism: An international meta-analysis of sound quality evaluations. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11(4), 597–630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-015-9241-z

51.

Shackley

Weiner

Day

Willis

G. W.

(2014). Assessment of public attitudes towards sex offenders in an Australian population. Psychology, Crime & Law, 20(6), 553–572. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2013.793772

52.

*Tewksbury

Mustaine

E. E.

(2012). Parole board members’ views of sex offender registration and community notification. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(3), 413–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-011-9119-1

53.

*Tewksbury

Mustaine

Payne

B. K.

(2011). Community corrections professionals’ views of sex offenders, sex offender registration and community notification and residency restrictions. Federal Probation, 75(3), 45–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2012.699733

54.

*Tewksbury

Mustaine

E. E.

Payne

B. K.

(2012). Community corrections professionals’ attitudes about sex offenders: Is the CATSO applicable? Criminal Justice Studies, 25(2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2012.699733

55.

Tong

Sainsbury

Craig

(2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042

56.

Unnever

J. D.

Cochran

J. K.

Cullen

F. T.

Applegate

B. K.

(2010). The pragmatic American: Attributions of crime and the hydraulic relation hypothesis. Justice Quarterly, 27(3), 431–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820902855362

57.

Vásquez

B. E.

Maddan

Walker

J. T.

(2008). The influence of sex offender registration and notification laws in the United States: A time-series analysis. Crime & Delinquency, 54(2), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128707311641

58.

Vess

Day

Powell

Graffam

(2013). International sex offender registration laws: Research and evaluation issues based on a review of current scientific literature. Police Practice and Research, 14(3), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2012.680719

59.

Ward

Fortune

C. A.

(2016). The role of dynamic risk factors in the explanation of offending. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 29, 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2016.06.007

60.

*Whitting

Day

Powell

(2016). Police officer perspectives on the implementation of a sex offender community notification scheme. Police Science & Management, 18(4), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461355716668539

61.

*Whitting

Day

Powell

(2017). An evaluation of the impact of Australia’s first community notification scheme. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 24(3), 339–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2016.1247606

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB