2016
DOI: 10.1177/1079063215569543
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Adam Walsh Act

Abstract: This study was designed to compare the Adam Walsh Act (AWA) classification tiers with actuarial risk assessment instruments and existing state classification schemes in their respective abilities to identify sex offenders at high risk to re-offend. Data from 1,789 adult sex offenders released from prison in four states were collected (Minnesota, New Jersey, Florida, and South Carolina). On average, the sexual recidivism rate was approximately 5% at 5 years and 10% at 10 years. AWA Tier 2 offenders had higher S… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
22
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
(42 reference statements)
1
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Sex offenders display a wide range of risks for sexual recidivism. Given this, allocating a considerable amount of policing resources to the offenders who are perceived as being at high risk for reoffending better serves the public interest (Zgoba et al, 2016). However, when the risk assessment is inaccurate, enforcing unreasonably high levels of treatment and supervision on sex offenders who have been incorrectly assessed is not cost-effective, and may result in outcomes that undermine the safety of both offenders and the community (Levenson, Fortney, & Baker, 2010;Schiavone & Jeglic, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Sex offenders display a wide range of risks for sexual recidivism. Given this, allocating a considerable amount of policing resources to the offenders who are perceived as being at high risk for reoffending better serves the public interest (Zgoba et al, 2016). However, when the risk assessment is inaccurate, enforcing unreasonably high levels of treatment and supervision on sex offenders who have been incorrectly assessed is not cost-effective, and may result in outcomes that undermine the safety of both offenders and the community (Levenson, Fortney, & Baker, 2010;Schiavone & Jeglic, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, when the risk assessment is inaccurate, enforcing unreasonably high levels of treatment and supervision on sex offenders who have been incorrectly assessed is not cost-effective, and may result in outcomes that undermine the safety of both offenders and the community (Levenson, Fortney, & Baker, 2010;Schiavone & Jeglic, 2009). Thus, it is important to determine the predictive validity of the various risk assessment tools in order to increase community safety and effectively distribute resources (Zgoba et al, 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the United States there has been considerable growth in the recent two decades in laws and policies targeting sex offenders, with the most notable of these policies being the creation and publicizing of sex offender registration and community notification systems via Megan's Law and the Adam Walsh Act (42 U.S.C. § 14,071(d) et seq ;Tewksbury & Jennings, 2010;Zgoba, Witt, Dalessandro, & Veysey, 2008;Zgoba, Miner, Letourneau, Levenson, Knight, & Thornton 2015). Similarly, in 2003 and, the United Kingdom implemented the Violent and Sex Offender Register (ViSOR) and the Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme (CSOD).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many have questioned the utility of applying these laws and policies derived from the Wetterling and Walsh Acts to JSOs (e.g., Batastini, Hunt, Present-Koller, & DeMatteao, 2011; Harris, Lobanov-Rostovsky, & Levenson, 2010; Letourneau & Miner, 2005; Trivits & Reppucci, 2002), and others have demonstrated their ineffectiveness in deterring new sexual offending (e.g., Letourneau, Bandyopadhyay, Armstrong, & Sinha, 2010; Letourneau, Levenson, Bandyopadhyay, Armstrong, & Sinha, 2010) or preventing sexual recidivism (e.g., Tewksbury & Jennings, 2010; Tewksbury, Jennings, & Zgoba, 2012). Indeed, the tiered system used to guide registration and community notification duration and intensity does not seem to align with the empirical literature on known risk factors (Zgoba et al, 2012). Perhaps as a consequence of these observations and because such laws are associated with loss of relationships, threats or harassment, feelings of hopelessness, and loss of jobs and homes, at least for adults who offend sexually (Levenson & Cotter, 2005; Levenson, D’Amora, & Hern, 2007; Tewksbury, 2005), some legal practitioners also question the application of these laws to juveniles.…”
Section: Impact Of Scoring the Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Rismentioning
confidence: 99%