Purpose 

In lesson 6, we discussed the importance of basing reform efforts on research within the scholarly literature. This week, you will have the opportunity to explore additional research studies evaluating contemporary reform related to the crime you have selected to focus on in this course. You will complete an annotated outline that will assist you in preparing for your signature assignment.

Research and Contemporary Reform

At this point in the course, it is likely clear that contemporary reforms are developed to solve problems within our system. These problems are often identified by research that demonstrates limitations in effectively addressing public safety, seeking just punishment, curbing crime, rehabilitating offenders, and supporting victims. High rates of recidivism suggest that more must be done to enhance public safety, curb crime, and rehabilitate offenders. Victim experiences within the system indicate that reform is needed to better support victims. And, issues related to inadequate treatment of those with mental illness and substance abuse disorders as well as the disproportionate rates of negative outcomes among minoritized communities, such as those who are Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC), call for reforms that address just punishment.

Megan’s Law

It is important that legal, policy, and practice reforms are based on research so that we develop reforms that are effective and avoid additional and unanticipated problems; yet there are instances in which reforms are based on factors other than research. Sex offender registry laws, for example, represent a legal reform based primarily on one high-profile case in New Jersey, in which 7-year-old, Megan Kanka, was kidnapped, raped, and murdered by an individual previously convicted of a sex offense (Waxman, 2017). Megan’s parents stated that they would have been able to protect their daughter had they known that a person convicted of a sex offense was living in their neighborhood. This led to New Jersey adopting Megan’s Law, in 1994, which is named after the victim in the case and requires all individuals convicted of sex offenses to register so that communities may be informed when such an individual resides within their neighborhood. In 1996, the federal government adopted Megan’s Law and created an online sex offender registry (SMART, n.d.). In 2006, further guidance around federal sex offender registry legislation was provided within the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA; SMART, n.d.).

While sex offender registry laws are meant to provide additional protection to public safety, they generally fail to consider the research related to sex offenses. Such research suggests that those who commit sex offenses are among the least likely to recidivate compared to individuals who commit other types of crimes (Przybylsk, 2017). They also fail to address the heterogeneous nature of sex offenses, which include offenses from indecent exposure to the rape of a child. Indeed, research suggests that the highest risk for recidivism exists among those who have been diagnosed with pedophilia, yet our laws treat all sex offenses as if they represent equal risk (Przybylsk, 2017). Sex offender registry laws have created unanticipated negative consequences, such as unemployment, homelessness, social isolation, and victimization among this population of offenders (Craun & Bierie, 2014). While some may argue that these consequences are aligned with just punishment, each of these negative consequences are risk factors for committing additional crimes and therefore indicate a failure to protect public safety, curb crime, and rehabilitate offenders. From this example, we see that reforms must be guided by research rather than our reactions to crimes we deem “horrific.” 

Not only must we base reform efforts on existing research, but we must also conduct research to evaluate the effectiveness of implemented reforms. In your readings for this lesson, you will explore the scholarly literature examining the effectiveness of a few examples of contemporary reforms. Those examples are based on some of the reforms we discussed in lesson 5 including, the First Step Act of 2018, progressive prosecution, and mental health courts. You will also review additional reform research related to the criminal justice system’s response to sexual assault and felony conferences. As you review these examples, reflect on what research you may need to find related to the contemporary reform you would like to explore for your selected crime. You will be expected to apply this knowledge to your assignment.

---

References

Craun, S. W., & Bierie, D. M. (2014). Are the collateral consequences of being a registered sex offender as bad as we think? A methodological research note. Federal Probation, 78(1), 1–5.

Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART). (n.d.). Legislative history of federal sex offender laws.  Retrieved from https://smart.ojp.gov/sorna/current-law/legislative-history

Przybylski, R. (2017). Adult sex offender recidivism. In the National Criminal Justice Association, Sex Offender Management Assessment and Planning Initiative. Retrieved from https://smart.ojp.gov/somapi/chapter-5-adult-sex-offender-recidivism

Waxman, B. (2017). The history behind the law that created a registry of sex offenders. Time. Retrieved from https://time.com/4793292/history-origins-sex-offender-registry/