Application of Megan's law to juveniles.

Abstract

This article examines (a) the history of registration and notification statutes for sex offenders and the concerns and legal challenges they have faced, (b) psychology's limited knowledge about normal versus abnormal sexual development, and (c) research that suggests rates of recidivism for sexual offenses may be lower for juveniles than for adults who have been discovered and received punishment and/or treatment. Although the behaviors of juvenile and adult sex offenders may appear similar, the underlying mechanisms triggering the behaviors may be different or juveniles' patterns of behaviors may be less established, accounting for some of the observed differences in recidivism rates. Although the authors recognize the critical objective of protecting victims and potential victims, this article focuses on intervention efforts with juvenile sex offenders.

Treatment Outcome and Criminal Offending by Youth With Sexual Behavior Problems

“…The sexual behavior of minors-even between consenting peers and sometimes between young children-has been criminalized in many states (Caldwell, 2002;Carpentier et al, 2006;Trivits & Reppucci, 2002) and the recent spate of laws specifically targeting sexual offenders often include (or fail to exclude) minors. For example, the newly enacted federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 requires the public registration of children as young as 14 years if convicted of certain sexual crimes.…”

Sex offender registration and recidivism risk in juvenile sexual offenders

“…Although registration laws have been ruled to be civil, rather than punitive, in nature (Smith v. Doe, 2003), the ultimate goal is to assist in deterring future offenses (Gonzales, 2007). Although the potential effectiveness of these statutes in achieving these goals when applied to juveniles has been questioned (Chaffin, 2008;Garfinkle, 2003;Letourneau & Miner, 2005;Trivits & Reppucci, 2002;Zimring, 2004), the issue has been subject to very little empirical research. A limited number of published studies have examined the specific deterrent effect of sex offender registration.…”

Assessing risk of reoffending in adolescents who have committed a sexual offense: the accuracy of clinical judgments after completion of risk assessment instruments

“…When examining the potential of future offending, risk estimates often inform the courts regarding prosecution, detention placement decisions, level of security necessary, and when, if ever, a youth can be released back into the community (Hoge, 2002;Prentky & Righthand, 2003). Youth's risk for future violence is routinely considered in decisions regarding transfer of youth to adult court (Kent v. United States, 1966), and in a number of states adolescent sex offenders believed to be at high risk for future violence are placed on sex offender registries (Caldwell, 2002;Trivits & Reppucci, 2002). For example, North Carolina currently requires registration of youth age 11 and older, but only for those who were found by the court to be a danger to the community (N.C. Gen.…”