The Effect and Implications of Sex Offender Residence Restrictions

Abstract

M i c h i g a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y Eric Grommon I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y -P u r d u e U n i v e r s i t y I n d i a n a p o l i s Breanne Pleggenkuhle S o u t h e r n I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y -C a r b o n d a l e Research SummaryWe evaluated the efficacy of sex offender residence restrictions in Michigan and Missouri using a quasi-experimental design with propensity score matching. First, we examined the implementation of the laws and found that sex offenders in both states were less likely to live in restricted areas after the implementation of the laws than the prerestriction sample, but the differences were not statistically significant. In our outcome analysis, we find little evidence that residence restrictions changed the prevalence of recidivism substantially for sex offenders in the postrelease period. In Michigan, trends indicate that the implementation of the laws led to a slight increase in recidivism among the sex offender groups, whereas in Missouri, this effect resulted in a slight decrease in recidivism. Technical violations also declined for both groups in Missouri. The small effect sizes, inconsistent results across states, and the null results between sex offender and non-sex offender models cast doubt on the potential usefulness of the laws to influence individual patterns of recidivism broadly. Policy ImplicationsThe results caution against the widespread, homogenous implementation of residence restrictions. Instead, we advocate individualization in sex offender programming and call for the development of risk-centered models of residence restrictions that draw on the established literature. In addition, the research highlights the practical challenges in defining restricted areas, enforcing restrictions, and promoting successful returns to the community. Furthermore, a call for reframing the focus of sex offender reentry to include collaborative treatment groups and enhanced communication and services between key stakeholders is made. Finally, we close with a discussion of several best practice models that provide alternative housing sources for individuals sentenced under residence restrictions without a suitable home plan.Keywords residence restrictions, recidivism, parole, sex offenders, geographic information systems, collateral consequences of incarceration. taken place in the absence of the legislation. We use a quasi-experimental design with propensity score matching to estimate the efficacy of residence restriction legislation. This research design allows for a multistate evaluation of policy further increasing the internal and external validity of the research observations (Shadish, Cook, and Campbell, 2002). Data, Sample Selection, and MeasuresData for the current study were obtained from two sources. Recidivism and parolee movement information were culled from official records maintained by the Michigan and Missouri Department of Corrections. Address data for schools and childcare facilities were obtained from the Missouri State Police, the Missouri S...

The impact of science-based knowledge on attitudes towards sex offenders

“…In the United States of America residence restrictions for known sex offenders were implemented in several states and municipals in order to reduce reoffending. Residence restriction means that a child sex offender is not allowed to seek residence within 1.000 to 2.500 feet of schools, playgrounds and other facilities often visited by children (Huebner et al, 2014). This generally received great support from within society.…”

Another collateral consequence? : examining homeless shelters policies on sex offenders across four states.

“…Previous research shows that registered sex offenders do have difficulties in finding and establishing housing due to the sex offender registration and notification, as well as the residency restriction laws (Huebner et al, 2014;Levenson & Cotter, 2005a;Levenson, D'Amora & Hern, 2007;Mustaine, 2014;Tewksbury, 2005). This study found that nearly half (44.1%) of the homeless shelters were within 1000' of a school, therefore making them off limits to sex offenders because it would violate the residency restriction laws of each state in this study.…”

“…Moreover, SORN has made the reintegration process for sex offenders extremely difficult, because it limits their options in housing, employment, social support, and education (Barnes, Dukes, Tewksbury & De Troye, 2009;Chajewski & Mercado, 2009;Duwe, Donnay & Tewksbury, 2008;Dyck & Hagley, 2012;Farkas & Miller, 2007;Huebner, Kras, Rydberg, Bynum, Grommon & Pleggenkuhle, 2014;Levenson, 2008;Levenson, D'Amora & Hern, 2007;Logan, 2009;Mercado, Alvarez & Levenson, 2008;Mustaine & Tewksbury, 2011;Tewksbury, 2005;Zandbergen & Hart, 2006).…”

“…Previous research has found SORN to be a detriment to sex offenders because it has caused RSOs to lose employment, positive living conditions, and social support systems (Burchfield & Mingus, 2008;Huebner et al, 2014;Mustaine, 2014;Tewksbury, 2005). All of these factors are necessary to the successful reintegration processes, but more importantly, to reduce the RSOs' potential to recidivate .…”

“…Previous literature has stated that regardless of the buffer zone created by various government agencies to protect children and the public, residency restriction laws are a significant detriment to RSOs' successful reintegration because it severely limits where they can live and work (Barnes, et al, 2009;Burchfield & Mingus, 2008;Huebner et al, 2014;Levenson, 2008;Mercado, et al, 2008;Mustaine, 2014;Mustaine & Tewksbury, 2011;Ragusa-Salerno & Zgoba, 2012;Tewksbury, 2005;Tewksbury & Jennings, 2010;Zandbergen, Levenson & Hart, 2010). Although residency restriction laws create the most difficulties for sex offenders to reintegrate, the false sense of security that it provides to the public may be the most dangerous consequence of them all (Mercado, et al, 2008;Ragusa-Salerno & Zgoba, 2012).…”