Sex Offender Residence Restrictions in Chicago: an Environmental Injustice?

Hughes, Lorine A.; Burchfield, Keri B.

doi:10.1080/07418820802119976

Cited by 58 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This differential enforcement has been posited to be both intentional by enforcement decision makers (Bullard and Johnson, 2000), and passive based on political resources in disadvantaged communities (Rosenstone and Hansen, 1993). Hughes and Burchfield (2008) find neighborhood disadvantage is negatively associated with sex offender distance from parks, schools, and day cares in Chicago, suggesting a stronger concentration of potential SORR violations in these 8 areas. We anticipate that violation rates would be higher in more disorganized counties, as supervision agencies may be less concerned with enforcing the policy in these areas, allowing sex offenders to live within close proximity to restricted objects.…”

Section: Non-compliance With Sex Offender Residence Restrictionsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Increasing values on the index indicate increasing levels of racial and ethnic differentiation. The other environmental justice variables are measured as oblique rotated principal components factor scores designed to represent classic social disorganization constructs (Shaw and McKay, 1942;Wilson, 1987) which have also been utilized in previous sex offender research Hughes and Burchfield, 2008;Socia, 2011). All factor scores are standardized, with higher scores indicating a higher degree of the measured construct.…”

Section: Independent Variables 13mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To understand how these factors interact to produce variation in violation rates, predicted response surfaces were estimated. These response surfaces apply the fractional logit model estimated in Model 2 ( (Hughes and Burchfield, 2008;Socia, 2011), violation rates in both states are predicted to be highest when restriction density is high and disadvantage low, and when disadvantage is high and restriction density low. However, in Michigan, violation rates were highest among counties with either high concentrated disadvantage or high SORR density, but not both.…”

Section: [Table 4 About Here]mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hughes and Burchfield (2008) found that that registered sex offenders were more likely to reside in socially disorganized areas (see also Clark and Duwe, 2015;Mustaine, Tewksbury, and Stengel, 2006). There is further evidence that as sex offenders moved after prison, they were increasingly more likely to reside in more disadvantaged communities (Hipp, Turner, and Janetta, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Housing availability and housing affordability are included to measure characteristics of each county's housing market and are consistent with salient housing measures utilized in previous examinations of residence restrictions (Socia, 2011;Socia, et al, 2014). Shaw and McKay, 1942; Wilson, 1987) which have also been utilized in previous sex offender research Hughes and Burchfield, 2008;Socia, 2011). All factor scores are standardized, with higher scores indicating 14 a higher degree of the measured construct.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Examining the Correlates of Sex Offender Residence Restriction Violation Rates

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This research examines the contribution of social ecological factors to the variation in sex offender residence restriction (SORR) violation rates, operationalized as a sex offender residing within a buffer zone around a school or a day care.Methods: Drawing on data from two Midwestern states, we utilize a quasi-experimental cohortcontrol group design to examine the correlates of county-level SORR violation rates among a cohort of post-SORR sex offender parolees, and three counterfactual cohorts (pre-SORR sex offenders, pre-and post-SORR non-sex offender parolees). We model the violation rate using a series of fractional logit regressions, examining the contribution of housing market, environmental justice, and system resource variables.Results: We observe that county-level variation in post-SORR sex offender violation rates is directly associated with concentrated disadvantage and the density of residence restrictions. The direct effect of concentrated disadvantage was unique to the post-SORR sex offender cohort. Model predictions suggest that the relationship between SORR density and concentrated disadvantage varies across the study states. Conclusions:The results suggest that factors found to be associated with sex offender clustering (i.e., housing market characteristics) are not associated with SORR violation rates. Instead, this research suggests a model which allows for the simultaneous influence of environmental justice and system resource effects. Future research on the mechanisms underlying these effects is warranted. Keywords: Sex Offenders; Residence Restrictions; Social Ecology; Proportional Response Models 2 EXAMINING THE CORRELATES OF SEX OFFENDER RESIDENCE RESTRICTION VIOLATION RATESIn the past 20 years, sex offender residence restrictions (SORR) have been widely deployed as a means to manage the recidivism risk of sex offenders in the community (Levenson and Cotter, 2005;Meloy, Miller, and Curtis, 2008). Residence restrictions aim to impede opportunities for reoffending among known, registered sex offenders by regulating their residential proximity to areas where potential child victims congregate. This is accomplished by enacting buffer zones of varying sizes (e.g., 500 to 2,500 feet) around varying protected locations (e.g., schools, day care centers, parks, and bus stops), within which registered sex offenders are barred from holding an official residence (Meloy et al., 2008;Pacheco and Barnes, 2013;Socia, 2011). Implicitly drawing on the distance decay hypothesis (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1984), SORR are built on the assumption that sex offenders choose to locate their residences close to potential victim pools for offending purposes (Walker, Golden, and Van Houten, 2001).However, despite wide political and popular support (Levenson, Brannon, Fortney, and Baker, 2007;Pickett, Mancini and Mears, 2013) recent research suggests that SORR are largely unsuccessful in reducing recidivism. Studies indicate that residential proximity to areas where children congregate explain...

show abstract

Section: Non-compliance With Sex Offender Residence Restrictionsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Independent Variables 13mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: [Table 4 About Here]mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Examining the Correlates of Sex Offender Residence Restriction Violation Rates

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Sex Offender Residence Restrictions

Pacheco

Barnes

2013

The Wiley‐Blackwell Handbook of Legal and Ethical Aspects of Sex Offender Treatment and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A longitudinal examination of sex offender recidivism prior to and following the implementation of SORN

Tewksbury

Jennings

Zgoba

2011

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goals of the present study were to examine the recidivism rates of two matched samples of sexual offenders, those released prior to and after sex offender registration and notification (SORN) in New Jersey. The pre-SORN group (1990-1994) included 247 offenders, while the post-SORN group (1996-2000) included 248 offenders. The longitudinal analysis demonstrated that for sex offenders released from prison both prior to and after implementation of SORN, there are clearly two distinguishable groups of sex offenders in relation to patterns of recidivism. More than three-quarters of sex offenders were identified as at low risk of recidivism, with low rates of repeat criminal offenses. By contrast, the high-risk group of offenders was not only more likely to commit future criminal offenses, including sex offenses, but they were also more likely to commit significantly more offenses and to do so fairly quickly following release. Analyses also include an examination of the influence of demographics, substance abuse and mental health issues, treatment history, sex offense incident characteristics, and criminal history on recidivism. Finally, SORN status was not a significant predictor of sex or general recidivism. The study limitations and policy implications are discussed.

show abstract

Sex Offender Residence Restrictions in Chicago: an Environmental Injustice?

Cited by 58 publications

References 53 publications

Examining the Correlates of Sex Offender Residence Restriction Violation Rates

Examining the Correlates of Sex Offender Residence Restriction Violation Rates

Sex Offender Residence Restrictions

A longitudinal examination of sex offender recidivism prior to and following the implementation of SORN

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About