JCSA 10(3).vp - University at Albany

0 downloads 0 Views 153KB Size Report
Louisiana, do not differentiate between offenders based on the likeli- hood of ..... --violation of rights chemical castration of convicted child molesters .62. Note. ..... Societal self-defense: New laws to protect children from sexual abuse.
Community Notification: Perceptions of Its Effectiveness in Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Allison D. Redlich

ABSTRACT.Megan’s law, a law designed to protect children from sexual abuse, enables law enforcement to notify communities when convicted sex offenders reside in their neighborhoods. Although there is vast support for the law, little is known about the perceived efficacy of the law. Community members’, law enforcement officials’, and law students’ attitudes toward community notification and other child abuse prevention measures were investigated. The groups significantly differed in support of Megan’s Law and surrounding issues, such as whether all criminals should be subject to community notification. Also, perceptions of the efficacy and the degree to which offenders’ rights are violated differed according to whether community notification tactics were typical or extreme. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: Website: © 2001 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

KEYWORDS.Community notification, child sexual abuse prevention, sex offender rights Allison D. Redlich, PhD, is affiliated with the Department of Psychiatry, Stanford University, 401 Quarry Road, Stanford, CA 94305-5719 (E-mail aredlich@ leland.stanford.edu). The author would like especially to thank Dr. Gail S. Goodman for her thoughtful comments and invaluable assistance. The author would also like to thank Sarah Barry, Simona Ghetti, Mary Jane Lowrey, Jodi Quas, and three anonymous reviewers. This project was funded, in part, by an American Psychology-Law Society award. Submitted for publication 4-12-00; revised 9-25-01; accepted 10-29-01. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, Vol. 10(3) 2001  2001 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

91

92

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

Megan Kanka was a 7-year-old girl who lived in a residential suburb of New Jersey. After being enticed to enter a neighbor’s home with the lure of a new puppy, she was raped and murdered. The man convicted of this heinous crime was Megan’s neighbor, a twice-convicted sex offender, who lived with two other convicted sex offenders. The community in which Megan lived was outraged. How could three convicted sex offenders be living in their neighborhood without their knowledge? Hence, the introduction of Megan’s Law, which was signed into law in April of 1996 by President Clinton (see 42 U.S.C. Section 14071 (d)). Megan’s Law enables law enforcement officials to notify communities of convicted sex offenders’ presence, in effect adding to the Jacob Wetterling Act (1994) that established state registries of sex offenders. A main goal of community notification laws is to prevent sexual abuse by (1) serving as a deterrent for sex offenders, and (2) arming parents and others in the community with knowledge of the presence of convicted sex offenders in their community. Those who argue against notification laws contend that the laws violate privacy rights, will have no impact on the actual prevention of child sexual abuse, and may even increase rather than prevent such occurrences (e.g., Prentky, 1996). To date, very little empirical information exists about Megan’s Law, including how individuals regard the law. The present study examined the perceived effectiveness of community notification in protecting children from sexual predators, which was the initial impetus for the enactment of Megan’s Law. In particular, California community members, law enforcement officials, and law students were asked about their perceptions of the effectiveness of community notification laws in preventing child sexual abuse and the degree to which offenders’ Constitutional rights are violated. Megan’s Law is a relatively recent law, and as such, many questions remain unanswered concerning it. For instance, is there widespread support for Megan’s Law? Although the alacrity with which Megan’s Law was enacted suggests considerable backing, to date no empirical data exist to support this suggestion. Also, how does group membership (i.e., law enforcement officials, community members, and law students) influence perceptions of community notification? Finally, how do attitudes about controversial issues surrounding community notification laws, such as the likelihood of vigilantism, the laws’ constitutionality, and the differential treatment of sex offenders, influence respondents’ perceptions of community notification laws? The goal of the present study was to address such questions.

Allison D. Redlich

93

MEGAN’S LAW The main crux of Megan’s Law is community notification. Current laws require convicted sex offenders to register with their local police departments. Washington was the first state to adopt such a law requiring sex offenders to register under the 1990 Community Protection Act (Berliner, 1996). Using these registration lists, local police departments can track sex offenders and notify communities when there is a perceived potential for danger. As of 1997, 47 states had passed some version of Megan’s Law (Matson & Lieb, 1997), whereas three states–Kentucky, Nebraska, and New Mexico–did not allow access to registration lists and did not have community notification legislation. In contrast, some states’ registries are open to the public. For example, California has a 900-number in which suspected child molesters can be “checked out” for prior convictions, and a CD-ROM for public use that lists the nearly 70,000 convicted sex offenders in the state (Vellinga, 1997). In California, there are approximately 147 registerable sex offenses (e.g., CA Penal Code 269: aggravated sexual assault of a child). However, not all sex offenses are subject to public disclosure. Only those convicted offenders deemed “high risk” or “serious” are subject to community notification (California Attorney General’s Office, 2000). There are generally three categories of notification: broad, limited, and access to registration information (Matson & Lieb, 1997). Eighteen states allow for broad notification. Typically, broad community notification laws contain three levels of notification. The first level is notification to police agencies; the second level is notification to community groups and school districts; and the third, most extreme level, is notification to the press (Schopf, 1995). Depending on the potential for danger, law enforcement agents use their discretion in deciding which level of notification is appropriate for a particular offender. California has adopted a similar three-tier approach. However, some states, such as Louisiana, do not differentiate between offenders based on the likelihood of re-offense; rather all convicted sex offenders are subject to community notification (Matson, 1996). Moreover, in Louisiana, sex offenders are responsible for notification themselves (as opposed to law enforcement or probation officers), and may be required to “give any other notice deemed appropriate by the court in which the defendant was convicted of the offense that subjects him to the duty to register, including but not limited to signs, handbills, bumper stickers, or clothing labeled to that effect” (LA Rev Stat Ann. § 15:542 (3)).

94

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

To date, little is known about whether community notification is a successful deterrent of child sexual abuse. Although there have been several commentaries written on community notification and other recent sex offender laws (see Winick & La Fond, 1998), very little empirical research has been conducted. In one of the few studies that has been done (Lieb, 1996; Schram & Milloy, 1995), Washington state law enforcement officials were found to have used Level 3 notification on 176 offenders from a total of 3,000 released sex offenders during the first three years the law was passed. The group of 176 offenders was compared with a matched sample for which notification had not been employed. Interestingly, the two groups did not significantly differ in recidivism rates (19% and 22%, respectively). However, the notification group was rearrested twice as fast in comparison to the control group, which may have reduced actual victimization rates. CONTROVERSIES SURROUNDING MEGAN’S LAW Arguments have been put forth both for and against community notification. The most obvious and convincing argument for community notification is a reduction in the incidence of child sexual abuse. Proponents feel that child molesters will be highlighted and thus less likely to commit further abuse. Another argument is that parents will be in a better position to protect their children with knowledge of the presence of convicted sex offenders. The present study attempts to ascertain what specific actions parents would be likely to take to protect their children if given knowledge of an offender’s presence. Parents’ evaluation of the effectiveness of their probable efforts was also assessed. One main argument against community notification laws concerns the potential violation of offenders’ Constitutional rights, such as offenders’ rights to privacy, not being punished twice for the same crime, and not being subject to cruel and unusual punishment. Prentky (1996) outlines three additional problems associated with community notification. First, what prevents convicted sex offenders from perpetrating sex crimes in nearby neighborhoods where the community is not notified of their presence? He notes, “If we were as concerned about victims in adjacent neighborhoods as we are about victims in the same neighborhood, we would recognize the profound flaw in the logic of community notification” (p. 296). Second, Prentky points out that community notification may increase, rather than decrease, the number of offenses. That is, convicted sex offenders may rebel, either consciously or unconsciously,

Allison D. Redlich

95

against a community in which they are negatively labeled and ostracized. Then, the likelihood of abuse would be enhanced rather than prevented. The third problem highlighted concerns vigilantism. There remains an assumption that communities will act responsibly when notified of convicted sex offenders’ presence. In a few cases, the possibility of vigilantism has already been actualized. In one case, when a community was notified of a sex offender’s release from prison, his house was burned down (Myers, 1996). Although it cannot be determined definitively in the arson case if the burned house was a direct cause of community notification, the community was provided with a mug shot of the soon-to-be-released sex offender, a description of his crime, and the detail that he had not received any treatment in prison. Furthermore, a study in Oregon concerning the procedural implementation of community notification laws also noted two extreme cases of vigilantism (e.g., one offender was threatened with a gun), although reported that less than 10% of sex offenders had experienced some form of harassment (Sex Offender Supervision Network, 1996). The perceived effectiveness of vigilante acts in deterring child sexual abuse was also measured in the present study. A final argument against community notification is that convicted sex offenders are treated differently than other types of criminals. Sex offenders are often singled out and subjected to laws that the majority of other criminals are not. For example, in Kansas v. Hendricks (1996), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the 1994 Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act, which allows for the civil commitment of violent sexual predators, including offenders who have already completed their prison sentence (Simon, 1998). Megan’s Law is, of course, another example of differential laws for sex offenders, and to some, an example of “populist punitiveness” (Simon, 1998). Scholars also question why Megan’s Law singles out sex offenders. Berliner (1996) asks the astute question: “After all, would it not be useful to know that a burglar or drug dealer is living next door?” (p. 294). I was therefore interested to determine how community members would feel and what actions they believe they would take if criminals other than sex offenders were living in their neighborhood or right next door. Also, a comparison of people’s perceptions of anger and safety toward three types of criminals was included in the present study to determine if fear and retribution are potential considerations.

96

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

THE INFLUENCE OF GROUP MEMBERSHIP AND DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS ON SUPPORT FOR MEGAN’S LAW Perceptions from three groups may have relevance for the implementation and utility of Megan’s Law. These include community members, law enforcement officials, and law students. Notification laws necessarily place more responsibility in the hands of citizens than they previously had before the laws were enacted. Lieb (1996) considers community notification as “a form of community policing whereby police form an active partnership with the community to reduce crime” (p. 299). Ultimately, it will be neighborhood citizens who take action with the knowledge of convicted sex offenders’ presence to protect the community’s children. Whether these actions will be nonaggressive, such as warning their children to stay away from the convicted sex offender, or more confrontational, such as vigilante acts, is unknown. It is therefore important to understand how individuals will potentially react when notified of convicted sex offenders’ presence in their neighborhoods and how the effectiveness of these actions is perceived. It is also important to understand law enforcement officials’ perceptions of community notification laws. In most states, it is left up to law enforcement officials’ discretion to decide which convicted sex offenders are potentially dangerous and are thus eligible for community notification (Matson & Lieb, 1997). Law enforcement officials must then decide which level of community notification, if any, is suitable for each convicted sex offender. In other words, law enforcement dictates for each individual sex offender whether only local community groups, such as Boy Scout troops, be notified, or whether the entire community should be notified via the media. Finally, in regard to law students, understanding how tomorrow’s attorneys view community notification laws, the degree to which these laws violate constitutional rights, and the degree to which the laws are effective measures of child sexual abuse prevention may prove important. First, future attorneys may be contesting the legality of the laws. Litigation concerning the constitutionality of registration and community notification laws concerning their constitutionality has already resulted. For example, in State v. Ward (1994), the Washington Supreme Court found that the Washington State community notification statute had a clear regulatory purpose and did not violate ex post facto laws (Bedarf, 1995; Turner, 1996). (Ex post facto laws prohibit punishing people for acts committed before the acts in question became criminal.)

Allison D. Redlich

97

However, in other rulings, both registration (State v. Douglas, 1989) and community notification (State v. Payne, 1993) were viewed as punitive in nature by Ohio and Louisiana appellate courts, respectively. Finally, in Artway v. Attorney General of New Jersey (1995), a decision was issued directly regarding Megan’s Law. Specifically, the U.S. District Court of New Jersey found that the community notification provisions of Megan’s Law were in violation of the ex post facto clause of the Constitution, and concluded that community notification went “beyond . . . traditional justifiable law enforcement objectives” (p. 923, Bedarf, 1995). Second, the implementation of community notification laws has the potential to directly impact the prosecution of sexual assault cases. Specifically, to avoid the stigma of being labeled a convicted sex offender, having to register, and possibly be subject to community notification, it has been suggested that defendants may refuse to accept plea bargains. In turn, this means that many more cases would go to trial, increasing the possibility of acquittals as well as the number of child and adult sexual assault victims who would have to testify in court. Third, it can be argued that law students may be less biased than prosecuting or defense attorneys. That is, because practicing attorneys deal with criminals on a day-to-day basis, their views of sex offenders’ ability to rehabilitate, for example, may be skewed by their own experiences. In contrast, law students are being trained to think analytically, and arguably have less direct contact with criminals that may bias their opinions. It is predicted that law enforcement officials, compared to members in the other two groups (i.e., community members and law students), will demonstrate the most support for community notification laws, including rating the laws as more effective in preventing child sexual abuse and less of a violation of offenders’ Constitutional rights. Law enforcement agents typically have conservative views (Ortet-Fabregat & Perez, 1992), most likely due to their day-to-day experiences with police duties (Fielding & Fielding, 1991). Ortet-Fabregat and Perez (1992) stated, “The role the police play in law enforcement (detention, apprehension, and interrogation) molds police officers’ attitudes towards crime” (p. 204). Moreover, Feild (1978) found that patrol police officers were the most likely to endorse severe punishment for rape, in comparison to groups of citizens, rapists, and rape crisis counselors. If law enforcement officials have the most unfavorable perceptions towards criminals, particularly sexual abusers, then it is likely that law enforcement officials will evidence higher levels of support for child sexual abuse prevention measures, such as Megan’s Law in comparison

98

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

to other groups. This is an interesting empirical question that has not been sufficiently addressed in the prevention literature. On the other hand, because community notification laws are questionable constitutionally, law students, who are most likely more familiar with the United States Constitution, in comparison to community members, are expected to demonstrate the least support for laws that potentially violate individuals’ rights. Finally, because law enforcement officials and law students are expected to hold opposing attitudes in their support for community notification laws (i.e., much versus relatively little support), community members are predicted to have views falling somewhere between those of law enforcement and law students. Gender may be another factor that predicts perceptions of Megan’s Law and its utility. Although very little research has been conducted concerning relations between gender and perceptions of child abuse prevention measures, considerable research has been conducted on the relation between gender and perceptions of sexual abuse offenders and victims. Women consistently tend to be more pro-victim and anti-defendant than men in both child sexual assault cases and adult rape cases (e.g., Borgida & Brekke, 1985; Bottoms, 1993). Women are also more likely to vote guilty than men in mock court cases involving sexual assault (Crowley, O’Callaghan, & Ball, 1994; Gabora, Spanos, & Joab, 1993; Swim, Borgida, & McCoy, 1993), and tend to rate child victims/witnesses as generally more credible (Bottoms, 1993). To the extent that mock jurors’ perceptions of defendants in child sexual abuse cases generalize to actual convicted child sexual offenders, compared to men, women are expected to harbor harsher feelings towards offenders, thus evincing greater support for Megan’s Law and lower ratings of the degree to which offenders’ rights are violated. KNOWLEDGE OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE AND PREVENTION Community notification laws presume that parents, when armed with knowledge of convicted child molesters’ identities and locations, will be better prepared to protect their children. Yet some research suggests that parents, because of lack of knowledge themselves, are generally ineffective in promoting skills in their children necessary to avert abuse (Miltenberger, Thiesse-Duffy, Suda, Kozak et al., 1990). For example, Tutty (1993) surveyed 201 parents and their children immediately following and five months after children participated in a school-based child abuse prevention program. Importantly, she discovered that par-

Allison D. Redlich

99

ents overestimated the knowledge levels of their younger children, although parents with high levels of knowledge were more accurate in assessing their children’s knowledge. Furthermore, Elrod and Rubin (1993) found that, although parents wished to be the primary educators of their children for prevention concepts, they demonstrated a lack of knowledge themselves and planned to discuss only the least threatening topics with their children. Reppucci, Jones, and Cook (1994) discovered that parents were generally knowledgeable about child sexual abuse, but they were also unlikely to go the next step and convey their knowledge to their children. The aforementioned findings demonstrate that parents either lack sufficient knowledge or training to teach their children effective prevention skills, or do not discuss these topics with their children. An important implication of community notification laws involves what parents will do when notified of a convicted child molester’s presence. It is likely that parents will (1) tell their children never to go near or talk to the “notified” man, and/or (2) educate their children with prevention concepts, such as to tell an adult if touched inappropriately or the difference between “good” and “bad” touches. However, if parents are typically ineffectual at teaching these concepts to their children because of parents’ lack of knowledge, then it remains unclear how child abuse can be successfully averted. In the present study, the relation between knowledge of prevention concepts and the perceived effectiveness of community notification laws and current abuse prevention programs was examined. METHOD Participants Two hundred and sixty-nine participants were included in the present study: 109 community members, 78 law enforcement officials, and 82 law students. The three target groups varied on several different demographic characteristics. For example, on average, the community members were age 46 years compared to the average ages of 40 years and 28 years for law enforcement officials and law students, respectively. Also, the law students were the least likely to be married (37%) in comparison to community members (66%) and police officers (70%). In general, however, the demographic characteristics of the three target groups are representative of the populations from which the samples

100

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

were drawn. Finally, twenty-four counties spread throughout California were represented. Questionnaires The survey included three questionnaires: (I) Demographic Questionnaire; (II) Child Abuse Prevention Questionnaire; and (III) Child Abuse Knowledge Questionnaire. Demographic Questionnaire. This questionnaire included questions about general demographic information, such as age, gender, occupation, and education level. Also, participants were asked if they had children, and if so, the children’s ages and genders. Child Abuse Prevention Questionnaire (CAPQ). This questionnaire, devised by the author and several experts in survey development, tapped respondents’ perceptions of community notification laws and current child sexual abuse prevention measures. The questionnaire was intended to be broad in nature, and not focus on one state’s version of Megan’s Law. Questions asked how likely respondents would be to do certain actions if provided with the knowledge of convicted sex offenders’ identities. For example, one question asked how likely respondents would be to confront known child molesters (0 = not at all likely, 3 = very likely). Also, respondents rated the efficacy of community notification measures, and the efficacy of measures used in current child sexual abuse prevention programs (0 = not at all effective, 3 = very effective). Both Likert-scaled questions and open-ended questions were included. Additionally, in the middle of the survey, a brief paragraph was included explaining Megan’s Law and very general pros and cons of Megan’s Law. The paragraph read: Recently, President Clinton signed a Bill enabling law enforcement to notify communities when a dangerous sexual offender is in the area. This is known as “Megan’s Law,” named after a seven-year-old girl who was killed by a convicted sex offender living in her neighborhood. The law may also require convicted sex offenders to register with their local police departments, supplying such information as current address, distinguishing physical marks, and depending upon the State, DNA samples. Those in support of the law feel it will empower parents in protecting their children from abuse and also deter child molesters from abusing. Those who do not support the law feel it violates offenders’ right

Allison D. Redlich

101

to privacy, punishes people unfairly, and will not be effective in preventing sexual abuse. Immediately following the paragraph, respondents were asked if they support Megan’s Law (0 = no, 1 = not sure, 2 = yes) and their reasons for either supporting it, not supporting it, or for being unsure. Other questions included Likert-scaled questions concerning the degree to which sex offenders’ rights are violated with the enactment of community notification laws and the likelihood of rehabilitation for child molesters and sex offenders who abuse adults (0 = does not directly violate rights/not at all likely, 3 = does directly violate rights/very likely). Child Abuse Knowledge Questionnaire (CAKQ). This questionnaire, devised for the present study and with the help of a child abuse expert, was intentionally brief (one page) to facilitate completion of the entire survey. A few of the questions were adapted from a survey assessing sexual abuse knowledge from relevant professionals (Hibbard & Zollinger, 1990). Questions accessed knowledge of general sexual abuse facts (e.g., that females are abused more often than males) and concepts that are commonly taught in sexual abuse prevention programs (e.g., a child molester is less likely to be a stranger than someone the child knows). A true/false/I don’t know trichotomy was employed. Procedure Surveys were distributed to members of the three groups of interest in the manner described below. Except for a subset of the community members, distribution of surveys was anonymous and thus follow-up was not possible. A cover letter explained the general purpose of the study and rules of confidentiality. Order of the Child Abuse Prevention and Child Abuse Knowledge Questionnaires was counterbalanced in the survey packet. Community Members. Community members were recruited in two ways. First, 57 community member respondents were recruited via random mailings. Ten phonebooks representing 14 California counties were selected for use. Page numbers of the phonebooks and names and addresses were selected using a random number table. Participants were sent a questionnaire with a cover letter explaining the study and a postage-paid envelope in which to return the questionnaire. A second reminder mailing was then conducted as needed. Second, a total of 52 participants were collected at a local market on two separate occasions. Participants were not approached, but rather, if interested in participat-

102

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

ing in research, came over to a table to learn more about the study. Respondents had the option of completing the questionnaire there or taking the questionnaire home and returning it in a postage-paid envelope. The overall response rate for the community member sample was 33%, which is typical for the types of procedures used in the present study to recruit participants (Sommer & Sommer, 1991). Law Enforcement Officials. Perceptions of law enforcement officials were obtained from three field sites. First, the lieutenant of deputies working in a neighboring county courthouse distributed surveys to his deputies. Second, the author attended a daily patrol briefing of the local county sheriff’s department, described the study and handed out surveys. Third, surveys were distributed to local police officers by the captain of the police department. The overall response rate for the law enforcement officials was 43%. Law Students. Approximately 300 surveys were given to three professors from two local law schools to distribute to law students. Eighty-two surveys were returned. Unfortunately, it was not determined if all 300 surveys were distributed, thus making it impossible to obtain a precise response rate. However, if all 300 questionnaires were distributed, the response rate was 27%, which was similar to the response rate of the community members and for surveys of this type. RESULTS The present study conformed to a 3 (group membership: law enforcement officials vs. community members vs. law students) 3 2 (gender) design. In general, alpha levels were preset at p < .05. When post-hoc comparisons were made, Fisher’s least significant differences (LSD) test was used. Reduction of the Number of Variables A principal components analysis using varimax rotation was performed with responses to CAPQ questions concerning the effectiveness of current prevention programs, tenets of community notification, and the degree to which community notification laws directly violate offenders’ Constitutional rights. The principal components analysis yielded six reliable factors with eigenvalues all greater than 1.0. Next, these six factors were used to form mean composite scores (see Table 1). Coefficient alphas ranged from .79 to .97, indicating sufficient

Allison D. Redlich

103

TABLE 1. Composite Scores Effective--Current Prevention Programs Cronbach alpha = .81 --teaching children to say “NO” when in potential abuse situations --teaching children the difference between “good touches” and “bad touches” --teaching children to trust their intuitions about what is right --teaching children to always tell an adult when they have been touched inappropriately --teaching children that familiar adults, as well as strangers, can be molesters --teaching children never to get into a stranger’s car --teaching children to run away or scream if approached by a stranger Effective--Regular Measures Cronbach alpha = .79 --notifying the police of suspected child molesters --notifying community groups (e.g., Boy Scouts) and schools of convicted child molesters’ presence --notifying the press of convicted child molesters’ presence in the community --requiring convicted child molesters to register with local police departments Effective--Drastic Measures Cronbach alpha = .90 --requiring convicted child molesters to mail postcards to neighbors stating their status as child molesters --requiring convicted child molesters to take out ads in local newspapers stating their status as child molesters --requiring convicted child molesters to post signs on their lawns stating their status as child molesters --requiring convicted child molesters to place bumper stickers on their cars of their status as child molesters --requiring convicted child molesters to wear T-shirts stating “I am a convicted child molester” --community members confronting known child molesters and warning them to stay away from local children --community members harming known child molesters Violate Rights--Regular Measures Cronbach alpha = .84 --notifying community groups (e.g., Boy Scouts) and schools of convicted child molesters’ presence --notifying the press of convicted child molesters’ presence in the community --requiring convicted child molesters to register with local police departments Violate Rights--Drastic Measures Cronbach alpha = .97 --requiring convicted child molesters to mail postcards to neighbors stating their status as child molesters --requiring convicted child molesters to take out ads in local newspapers stating their status as child molesters --requiring convicted child molesters to post signs on their lawns stating their status as child molesters --requiring convicted child molesters to place bumper stickers on their cars of their status as child molesters --requiring convicted child molesters to wear T-shirts stating “I am a convicted child molester” Chemical Castration Cronbach alpha = .95 --effectiveness of voluntary chemical castration of convicted child molesters --violation of rights chemical castration of convicted child molesters

Factor Loadings .75 .81 .53 .71 .62 .66 .53

.63 .72 .60 .62

.63 .71 .87 .86 .88 .54 .65

.80 .70 .74

.79 .88 .91 .91 .88

.76 .62

Note.Effectiveness was worded “Please indicate how effective you believe the following measures would be in PREVENTING CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE”: (0 = not at all effective, 3 = very effective). Violate Rights was worded “Under the assumption that all individuals have rights, including convicted child molesters, please rate to what degree the following measures VIOLATE CHILD MOLESTERS’ RIGHTS”: (0 = does not directly violate rights; 3 = directly violates rights).

104

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

reliability. These included: three effectiveness scores (current prevention program concepts, regular measures, and drastic measures of community notification laws), two violate right scores (regular and drastic measures), and one score concerning the effectiveness of voluntary chemical castration and the degree to which it violates rights. Regular measures consisted of what is normally thought of in terms of community notification laws (i.e., notifying community groups and the press about convicted offenders’ presence, and requiring convicted offenders to register with the police). In contrast, drastic measures included requiring convicted sex offenders to post signs on their lawns, mail postcards to their neighbors, and wear t-shirts denoting their status of convicted sex offender, that is, aspects of community notification advanced by Louisiana. Also included in the effectiveness-drastic measures composite score were mean responses from two questions concerning community members (1) confronting and (2) harming known child molesters. Support for Megan’s Law and Related Issues Group membership and gender were predicted to influence support for Megan’s Law and support for related measures, such as whether all criminals should be subject to formal registration with the police. To examine these predictions, a series of separate 3 (group membership) 3 2 (gender) between-subject ANOVAs was performed. Main effects of group membership will be addressed first, followed by a discussion of the main effects of gender. No significant interactions among group membership and gender emerged. Group Membership. As shown in Table 2, several significant main effects of group membership emerged. Consistent with the prediction, law enforcement officials held the most support for community notification laws, differing significantly from both community members and law students. Moreover, compared to law enforcement officials and community members, law students demonstrated the least support for community notification and were the least likely to advocate requiring all criminals to register with the police and be subject to notification laws. Law enforcement officials and community members did not significantly differ from one another. Law students were also the most likely to think community members would harm known child molesters, whereas law enforcement officials and community members did not differ in their views. Finally, law students and community members rated the possibility of rehabilitation for child molesters and those who

Allison D. Redlich

105

TABLE 2. Mean Responses to Individual Questions and Composite Scores with Significant Main Effects of 3 (Group Membership) 3 2 (Gender) ANOVAs Indicated

Law Enforcement

Group Membership Community Members Law Students

Support for Megan’s Law 1.94

Gender Partial η2 Males

F

Females

Partial η2

F

a

a

1.70

b

1.56

b

11.51***

.07

1.68

1.78

7.49**

.03

1.07

a

0.51

b

10.65***

.08

0.86

0.85

0.18

.001

a

0.22

b

9.76***

.07

0.56

0.50

0.00

.000

1.50

a

1.85

b

7.93***

.04

1.58

1.56

1.06

.002

0.82

b

0.84

b

13.42***

.09

0.78

0.63

9.65**

.04

1.01

b

10.35***

.08

0.81

0.87

0.28

.002

ab

2.28

b

7.15**

.04

2.33

2.48

11.63**

.04

2.03

b

1.87

b

9.83***

.06

1.98

2.12

7.84**

.03

1.18

b

1.17

b

3.07*

.01

1.40

1.17

1.31

.06

b

1.48

c

31.74***

.20

0.88

1.01

0.68

.004

b

2.59

c

17.79***

.13

2.06

2.19

0.30

.003

0.86

.005

1.32

1.30

0.26

.001

All criminals registera 0.94

a

All criminals subject to notification 0.66

a

a

0.69

Likelihood of community members harming child molestersb 1.36

a

Likelihood of child molesters being rehabilitatedb 0.43

a

Likelihood of people who sexually assault adults being rehabilitatedb 0.55

a

0.93

b

Effective--Current prevention programsc 2.51

a

Effective--Regular Measures 2.26

2.41 c

a

Effective--Drastic Measuresc 1.55

a

Violate Rights--Regular Measuresd 0.43

a

0.90

Violate Rights--Drastic Measures 1.64

a

d

2.10

Voluntary Castration--Effective and Violate Rightscd 1.26

1.29

1.40

Note. Means with different supersripts corespond to significant mean differences at p < .05 according to Fisher’s LSD test. * p < .05 ** p < .01 *** p < .0001 a These questions were scored as 0 = no, 1 = not sure, 2 = yes. b These questions were scored as 0 = not at all likely, 3 = very likely. c Scored as 0 = not at all effective, 3 = very effective. d

Scored as 0 = does not directly violate rights, 3 = directly violates rights.

106

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

sexually assault adults as significantly more likely than law enforcement officials. When each respondent’s mean composite scores of effectiveness and the degree to which community notification laws violate rights were entered into two separate 3 (group) 3 2 (gender) ANOVAs, support for predicted differences emerged (Table 2). Specifically, law enforcement officials, when compared to members of the other two groups, rated current prevention program tactics, regular measures, and drastic measures of community notification as significantly more effective in terms of preventing child sexual abuse. Also, law enforcement officials were the most likely to believe that regular and drastic community notification measures were the least likely to violate offenders’ rights. Gender. In accordance with the prediction, women were significantly more likely to support Megan’s Law than men (Table 2). Additionally, women were less likely to think that child molesters could be rehabilitated than men, which is consistent with past research findings concerning gender and views of defendants in child sexual abuse cases (e.g., Bottoms, 1993). Surprisingly, men and women did not differ on whether all criminals should register and be subject to notification laws, or in their perceptions of the likelihood that community members will harm known child molesters, and the likelihood of rehabilitation for sex offenders who abuse adults. Child Molesters, Drug Felons, and Murderers An argument against community notification laws is that sex offenders are singled out and treated differentially than other criminals. Related to this argument is the consideration that community members may be just as concerned if other types of criminals, such as drug felons and murderers, were living in their neighborhoods or right next door. To examine this issue, a series of 3 (group membership) 3 2 (gender) 3 3 (type of criminal: drug felon vs. child molester vs. murderer) mixed-model ANOVAs was performed on ratings of how safe and how angry respondents would feel if the convicted criminal moved nearby. Additionally, to reduce the number of variables, questions concerning how safe respondents would feel, for example, if a child molester was living in their neighborhood and how safe they would feel if a child molester was living right next door, were combined and the mean was taken. Thus there were six new variables: For each type of criminal there was a safe and an angry composite score. Cronbach alphas ranged from .92 to .97.

Allison D. Redlich

107

Safety Ratings. When ratings of how safe respondents would feel with criminals living in their neighborhoods or right next door were examined, several significant findings emerged (see Table 3). First, there was a main effect for type of criminal, F (2, 506) = 32.13, p = .001. Planned comparisons revealed that respondents were less likely to feel safe around murderers than child molesters and drug felons, and to feel less safe around child molesters than drug felons. All Fs (1, 263) > 7.85, p < .006. Second, group membership, F (4, 506) = 3.93, p = .004, and respondent gender, F (2, 506) = 6.75, p = .001, significantly influenced ratings of safety for the three types of criminals. No significant interactions emerged. Planned comparisons were performed for each type of criminal TABLE 3. Mean Responses to Safe/Angry with Significant Results of 3 (Group Membership) 3 2 (Gender) 3 3 (Type of Criminal) ANOVAs Indicated Type of Criminal Drug Felon

Child Molester

Murderer

Mean

How SAFE would you feel if (type of criminal) was living in your neighborhood/right next door Group Law enforcement

4.70

Community Members

4.12

a

4.57 4.50

b

4.89 4.95

c

4.71 4.51

Law Students

4.10

a

4.54

b

5.30

c

4.66

4.26

a

4.18

a

4.76

b

4.40

Females

4.32

a

4.95

b

5.37

c

4.87

Overall Mean

4.28

a

4.53

b

5.04

c

Gender Males

How ANGRY would you feel if (type of criminal) was living in your neighborhood/right next door Group Law enforcement

1.76

a

2.33

b

2.15

c

2.07

Community Members

1.38

a

2.12

b

2.05

b

1.84

Law Students

1.14

a

2.23

b

2.18

b

1.86

Gender Males

1.44

2.10

2.03

1.86

Females

1.41

2.33

2.23

1.99

Overall Mean

1.42

a

2.21

b

2.12

c

Note. Safety scored as 0 = very safe, 6 = very unsafe. Anger scored as 0 = not at all angry, 3 = very angry. Partial η2 for SAFE ANOVA = .32, and partial η2 for ANGRY ANOVA = .42. a Scored as 0 = no, 1 = not sure, 2 = yes b Scored as 0 = not at all likely, 3 = very likely c Scored as 0 = not at all effective, 3 = very effective d

Scored as 0 = does not directly violate rights, 3 = directly violates rights

Means with different superscripts correspond to significant mean differences at p < .05 according to Fisher’s LSD test, all Fs > 5.28, ps < .02.

108

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

by group membership and by gender. In regard to group membership, the only significant planned comparison was for feelings of safety towards drug felons, F (2, 256) = 5.66, p = .004. Law enforcement officials felt significantly less safe if drug felons were nearby in comparison to community members, F (1, 256) = 7.97, p < .01, and law students, F (1, 256) = 7.59, p < .01. Community members and law students did not significantly differ. In regard to gender, planned comparisons revealed that men felt significantly more safe around child molesters than did women, F (1, 256) = 13.75, p = .001, and murderers, F (1, 256) = 12.85, p = .001. Gender did not influence feelings of safety for drug felons. Anger Ratings. Ratings of anger were examined in a manner similar to that of safety ratings. Within-subjects ANOVAs performed with how angry respondents would feel if a criminal lived in their neighborhood or right next door revealed a significant main effect for type of criminal, F (2, 506) = 123.63, p < .001. In contrast to safety ratings, where respondents felt the least safe around murderers, respondents were most angry if child molesters lived nearby. When planned comparisons were performed, in comparison to child molesters, respondents significantly differed in their anger towards murderers, F (1, 263) = 5.95, p = .02, and drug felons, F (1, 263) = 200.96, p = .0001. Respondents also significantly differed in anger ratings of drug felons and murderers, F (1, 263) = 175.43, p = .0001. There was also a significant effect of group membership on anger ratings for type of criminal, F (4, 506) = 7.48, p = .0001, though there was not a significant main effect of gender. Simple effect analyses revealed a significant difference for ratings of anger towards drug felons, F (2, 253) = 8.58, p =.0001. Results of planned comparisons between the three groups are presented in Table 3. In summary, members of different groups and genders rated themselves as feeling differently in terms of safety and anger for each type of criminal. Respondents in the different target groups felt the least safe if murderers were nearby, and were most angry if child molesters were nearby. This pattern was also found for men and women. Knowledge and Support for Megan’s Law Finally, the relation between knowledge of child sexual abuse concepts and support for Megan’s Law was investigated. Respondents received a total knowledge score by proportioning the number of correct responses from the total number of answered questions. Questions not answered or answered as “don’t know” were excluded.

Allison D. Redlich

109

Correlations were conducted to examine the relation between CSA knowledge and support for Megan’s Law. A weak, albeit significant, correlation was found between respondents’ total knowledge score and support for Megan’s Law, such that respondents with more knowledge of child sexual abuse facts were less likely to support Megan’s Law (Table 4). Respondents with more knowledge were also less likely to think all criminals should be required to register and be subject to notification, and were less likely to view current prevention programs as effective. Finally, respondents who were more informed of child sexual abuse facts were more likely to think that drastic community notification measures directly violated offenders’ rights. However, because these correlations were small in magnitude, definitive conclusions cannot be made. DISCUSSION The main goal of the present study was to examine different groups’ perceptions of community notification laws and other measures of child TABLE 4. Correlations Between Knowledge, Support for Megan’s Law, and Related Constructs r

n

with knowledge Support for Megan’s Law All criminals register

a

a

All criminals notification

a

Likelihood of community members harming child molesters

b

Likelihood of child molesters being rehabilitated

b

Likelihood of people who sexually assault b adults being rehabilitated Effective--Current prevention programs Effective--Regular Measures Effective--Drastic Measures

c

c

c

Violate Rights--Regular Measures Violate Rights--Drastic Measures

d

d

Voluntary Castration--Effective and cd Violate Rights a Scored as 0 = no, 1 = not sure, 2 = yes b Scored as 0 = not at all likely, 3 = very likely c Scored as 0 = not at all effective, 3 = very effective d

2.14*

259

2.12*

260

2.15*

253

.01

257

.09

256

.08

256

2.13*

210

2.11

210

2.03

210

.11

210

.17** 2.01

Scored as 0 = does not directly violate rights, 3 = directly violates rights

* p < .05, ** p < .01.

210 210

110

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

sexual abuse prevention. Overall, predictions were supported by the data. Findings are addressed in the following discussion. Community Notification and Group Membership Group membership was predicted to influence support for Megan’s Law. Specifically, law students were predicted to be the least likely to support community notification laws in comparison to community members and law enforcement agents. Also, law enforcement agents were predicted to be more pro-community notification laws than community members. Considerable support was found for this prediction. Law enforcement officials were significantly more likely than community members and law students to support Megan’s Law. Additionally, this increased support demonstrated by law enforcement officials also characterized perceptions of related topics. For instance, law enforcement officials were the least likely to think that child molesters and those who sexually assault adults could be rehabilitated. Also, law enforcement officials rated community notification measures, both regular and drastic, as the most effective and the least likely to violate offenders’ rights. In a study that compared law enforcement and mental health professionals’ perceptions of behavioral indicators of child sexual abuse, law enforcement agents were more likely to be convinced that sexual abuse occurred in light of behavioral indicators, such as children’s depression and aggression, than were mental health professionals (Kendall-Tackett & Watson, 1991). This finding is consistent with the present results, such that law enforcement officials were the most likely to support Megan’s Law. Perhaps because law enforcement officials have a lot of exposure to child sexual abuse victims and offenders, their perceptions favor child victims over offenders. It is also not surprising that law students were the least likely to support community notification laws. Just as law enforcement officials may have more experience with child sexual abuse, law students may have more familiarity with the Constitution and how current laws interact with individuals’ rights. Those against community notification laws contend that sex offender’s rights are infringed upon in several ways (e.g., the right to privacy, being punished twice for the same crime). It is possible that law students are more aware of recent legal decisions concerning community notification laws, and of ongoing controversies surrounding the laws. Thus, it makes sense that respondents in the present sample (law students), with presumably the most acquaintance with our

Allison D. Redlich

111

nation’s laws, would be the least likely to support potentially unconstitutional laws. Community Notification Laws and Gender Women were found to be more likely to support Megan’s Law than men, though not as broadly as expected. For example, although women were significantly more likely to support Megan’s Law, men and women did not significantly differ on other related concepts, such as requiring all criminals to register and be subject to notification, and the likelihood of community members harming known child molesters. Moreover, whereas men were less likely than women to consider regular community notification measures as effective in preventing abuse, gender did not influence perceptions of rights’ violation. These findings concerning gender are generally consistent with previous research indicating that women are more pro-victim than men in adult and child sexual abuse cases (e.g., Borgida & Brekke, 1985; Bottoms, 1993). Since community notification laws favor the rights of children and community members over the rights of convicted sex offenders, it is reasonable that women support the laws more so than men. Community Notification and Type of Criminal It has been suggested that community notification laws are biased against sex offenders (Berliner, 1996) because other types of criminals are not subject to the laws or are even required to register with their local police. Although there is barely enough funding and resources to keep registries of sex offenders updated (Bedarf, 1995), 31% of the entire sample felt that all criminals should be required to register. Moreover, 39% of the law enforcement officials, who should be more aware of the problems associated with maintaining criminal registries, believed that all criminals should be required to register. Attitudes towards requiring all criminals to be subject to community notification were less severe, although 17% of the entire sample and 26% of the law enforcement officials felt that all criminals should be subject to community notification. Opponents of community notification laws argue that the laws may produce a “slippery slope” situation. That is, because community notification laws are now enacted, it will be easier for lawmakers to apply these laws to other types of criminals and/or enact similar laws that distinguish certain criminal groups. However, findings

112

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

from the present study concerning all types of convicted offenders being subject to registration and community notification laws suggest that 1/4 to 1/3 of California law enforcement officials may want to keep sliding down the slope. Respondents were expected to feel the most negatively towards child molesters in comparison to drug felons and murderers. This prediction was only partially upheld. Although respondents rated themselves as feeling most angry about child molesters living in their neighborhoods, they rated themselves as feeling the least safe if murderers were living in their neighborhoods. The main intent of Megan’s Law is to increase safety levels (either actual or perceived) in our communities. During the Bill Signing ceremony for the enactment of the federal Megan’s Law, President Clinton stated, “Today, America circles the wagon around our children. Megan’s Law will protect tens of millions of families from the dread of what they do not know. It will give more peace of mind to our parents” [1996 WL 263016 (White House)]. If community members (and law enforcement officials and law students) feel less safe around murderers than child molesters, then why do community notification laws focus on sex offenders? In the recent past, the Courts have varied on their decisions whether registration and/or community notification have a punitive or regulative purpose (see Bedarf, 1995). These findings suggest that Megan’s Law has a retributive and vengeful purpose instead of a purely preventive one. Community Notification and Knowledge of Child Sexual Abuse Facts Though it was predicted that knowledge would influence perceptions of support for Megan’s Law and related constructs, only weak confirmation was found. Specifically, a significant, but small, correlation was found between respondents’ total knowledge score and support for Megan’s Law. Respondents with less knowledge were more likely to support Megan’s Law. Less knowledge was also associated with increased beliefs that all criminals should register and be subject to community notification, more favorable perceptions of current prevention programs effectiveness, and lowered perceptions that drastic community notification measures directly violate offenders’ rights. Past research concerning parents’ efficacy in teaching their children child abuse prevention concepts has indicated that parents are more efficacious when they have more knowledge themselves (e.g., Miltenberger et al., 1990). Because community notification laws ultimately encourage

Allison D. Redlich

113

increased use of prevention concepts with community children, it was worthwhile to examine the relation between knowledge of prevention concepts and support for the laws. On average, respondents obtained a relatively high knowledge score. This high score indicates that community members, law enforcement agents, and law students are relatively well-informed about current child sexual abuse concepts, at least as tapped by the CAKQ. Caveats and Limitations Although the present study provides unique insight into a little-studied topic, there are limitations that should be addressed. First, the response rate was low. However, response rates were in the typical range for random mail surveys and distribution at group meetings and/or to an interested group (Sommer & Sommer, 1991). Because distribution to law enforcement officials and law students was anonymous, following up with individuals who did not comply was impossible. It is conceivable that people who did not return their surveys are qualitatively different than those who did. Moreover, only California citizens were surveyed, and thus findings may not apply to attitudes of individuals in other states. In the future, individuals’ perceptions should be compared and contrasted with the actual effectiveness of the laws in preventing child sexual abuse, and perceptions of members of different states with different versions of community notification should be compared. The second limitation was that only perceptions of the efficacy of Megan’s Law were obtained. That is, the actual effectiveness of the law was not examined, and thus whether respondents’ perceptions relate to the law’s actual efficacy is unknown. However, perceptions can be of note as well, particularly because the laws are relatively new and information concerning how well the laws actually prevent abuse may be inaccessible until the laws have been in effect for several more years. Finally, a possibility exists that certain wording used in the questionnaire may have biased participant’s opinions against community notification laws. Specifically, the paragraph in the CAPQ concerning Megan’s Law included how the law came about (i.e., the murder of Megan Kanka) and the words “dangerous sexual offender.” Although the police are generally only allowed to notify communities when the convicted offender is considered dangerous, the inclusion of this phrase may have negatively influenced participants’ perceptions. Moreover, it is not possible to determine if the wording used in the paragraph affected the target groups differentially. However, because little to no in-

114

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

formation exists concerning attitudes toward community notification laws, perceptions from the present sample are still of value. CONCLUSIONS Despite these limitations, results from the present report spawn many interesting questions and issues for further study. The first question relates to the effectiveness of community notification measures. Respondents, regardless of group membership or gender, on average rated current prevention programs as more effective in preventing abuse than both regular and drastic community notification measures. The presumed rationale for community notification laws is to prevent abuse. Do community notification laws add any extra protection to our children in terms of preventing child abuse than current prevention programs already in place? Second, drastic community notification measures, such as those proposed in Louisiana, should be considered separate from more traditional forms of community notification. Compared to regular community notification measures, respondents in the present study generally felt that drastic community notification measures were less effective in preventing abuse and directly violated offenders’ Constitutional rights. Third, the question of whether community notification laws are punitive or regulative in nature must be confronted. The answer to this question directly addresses the Constitutionality of the laws, and whether, in fact, offenders’ rights are being violated. Relative to convicted murderers, respondents rated themselves as feeling more anger toward child molesters but also more safe, suggesting a more punitive disposition. In conclusion, at least in California, differential support for community notification laws is seen among law enforcement agents, law students, and community members. This differential support could prove to be important in the implementation of the laws, to the debates surrounding the constitutionality of the laws, and to the overall protection of our nation’s children from sexual abuse. REFERENCES 1996 WL 263016 (White House). President remarks at signing of Megan’s Law 05/17/96. Artway v. Attorney General, 876 F. Supp. 666 (D.N.J. 1995). Bedarf, A. R. (1995). Examining sex offender community notification laws. California Law Review, 83, 885-939.

Allison D. Redlich

115

Berliner, L. (1996). Community notification of sex offenders: A new tool or a false promise? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11, 294-295. Borgida, E., & Brekke, N. (1985). Psycholegal research on rape trials. In A. Burgess (Ed.), Rape and sexual assault: A research handbook (pp. 313-342). New York, NY: Garland. Bottoms, B. L. (1993). Individual differences in perceptions of child sexual assault victims. In G. S. Goodman & B. L. Bottoms (Eds.), Child victims, child eyewitnesses: Understanding and improving children’s eyewitness testimony (pp. 229-261). New York, NY: Guilford. Crowley, M. J., O’Callaghan, M. G., & Ball, P. J. (1994). The juridical impact of psychological expert testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 89-105. Elrod, J. M. & Rubin, R. H. (1993). Parental involvement in sexual abuse prevention education. Child Abuse & Neglect, 17, 527-538. Feild, H. S. (1978). Attitudes towards rape: A comparative analysis of police, rapists, crisis counselors, and citizens. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 156-179. Fielding, N. G., & Fielding, J. (1991). Police attitudes to crime and punishment. British Journal of Criminology, 31, 39-53. Gabora, N. J., Spanos, N. P., & Joab, A. (1993). The effects of complainant age and expert psychological testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 103-119. Hibbard, R. A., & Zollinger, T. W. (1990). Patterns of child sexual abuse knowledge among professionals. Child Abuse and Neglect, 14, 347-355. Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act (45 U.S.C.A. 14071). Kansas v. Hendricks. 17 S. Ct. 2072 (1996). Kendall-Tackett, K. A., & Watson, M. W. (1991). Factors that influence professionals’ perceptions of behavioral indicators of child sexual abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6, 385-395. Lieb, R. (1996). Community notification laws: “A step toward more effective solutions.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11, 298-300. Matson, S. (October, 1996). Sex offender community notification update. Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Olympia, WA. Matson, S., & Lieb, R. (1997). Megan’s Law: A review of state and federal legislation. Washington Institute for Public Policy. Olympia, WA. Megan’s Law, Pub. L. No. 104-145, 110 Stat. 1345, amended subsection (d) of section 170101 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-322, 108 Stat. 1796, 2038 (codified at 42 U.S.C. 14071). Miltenberger, R. G., Thiesse-Duffy, E., Suda, K. T., Kozak, C. et al. (1990). Teaching prevention skills to children: The use of multiple measures to evaluate parent versus expert instruction. Child & Family Therapy, 12, 65-87. Myers, J. E. B. (1996). Societal self-defense: New laws to protect children from sexual abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect, 20, 255-258.

116

JOURNAL OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

Ortet-Fabregat, G., & Perez, J. (1992). An assessment of the attitudes towards crime among professionals in the criminal justice system. British Journal of Criminology, 32, 193-207. Prentky, R. A. (1996). Community notification and constructive risk reduction. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11, 295-298. Reppucci, N. D., Jones, L. M., & Cook, S. L. (1994). Involving parents in child sexual abuse prevention programs. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 3, 137-142. Schopf, S. (Fall 1995). “Megan’s Law”: Community notification and the Constitution. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, Inc., 29-60. Schram, D., & Milloy, C. D. (1995). Community notification: A study of offender characteristics and recidivism. Urban Policy Research. Seattle, WA. Sex Offender Supervision Network (1996). Sex offender community notification in Oregon. Eugene, OR (unpublished report to the 1995 Oregon legislature). Sexually Violent Predator Act, Kan. Stat. Ann. Section 59-29a01 et seq. (1994). Simon, J. (1998). Managing the monstrous: Sex offenders and the new penology. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4, 452-467. Sommer, B., & Sommer, R. (1991). A practical guide to behavioral research: Tools and techniques (Third Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. State v. Douglas, 586 N.E. 2d 1097 (Ohio Ct. App. 1989). State v. Payne, 633 So. 2d 702 (La. Ct. App. 1993). State v. Ward, 869 P.2d 1062 (Wash. 1994). Swim, J., Borgida, E., & McCoy, K. (1993). Videotaped versus in-court witness testimony: Does protecting the child witness jeopardize due process? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 603-631. Turner, L. A. S. (1996). Sex offender statutes: Society’s need for protection versus an individual’s Constitutional rights. Law and Psychology Review, 20, 263-274. Tutty, L. M. (1993). Parents’ perceptions of their children’s knowledge of sexual abuse prevention concepts. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 2, 83-103. Vellinga, M. L. (February 2, 1997). Crackdown on sex offenders raises tough questions. The Sacramento Bee. Winick, B. J., & La Fond, J. Q. (1998). Special Theme: Sex offenders: Scientific, legal, and policy perspectives. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4.