Policy Enhancement



Policy Enhancement

Introduction

After examining the details of sex offense registration (SORN) policy in the revision section, this section focuses on the outcome, effectiveness of the policy and the future recommendations for better implementation.

Outcome of the Policy

It can be said that the increased surveillance by the registration and notification is significant to deter the sexual offenders from committing the offense. The policy has helped to increase the likelihood of capturing the offender who will reoffend. Some of the critiques have argued that the policy of sex offense registration may increase the recidivism rate although not necessarily sexual recidivism. This can happen by creating barriers to the successful societal reintegration. Most studies have failed to find any link between the SORN and increased or decreased recidivism. From the analyses from the previous sections, it can be said that the effects of the sexual offence registration policy are numerous on the reoccurrence of crimes (Matson,Lieb,1996).

The SORN policy was originally developed to address the recidivism risk by the violent adults repeat sexual offenders. This policy has been extended to the lower risk offenders with no or little consideration of individual recidivism or other mitigating circumstances. As a consequence the evidence are emerging that in some situations, this policy extends effects on the judicial decision making. For example, the Florida law allows a judge to impose penalty as early as the first sexual offense is committed (Matson,Lieb,1996). In California judge must impose it necessarily from the second sex offense. In other states, however, the judge has more discretion. In terms of duration SORN also varies by state. In Florida, for example, the judge must determine if the penalty remains for life. In other states (California, Oregon) the duration of the measure is in hands of the appropriate Department of Correction. Only California expressly ...