What the Experts Say

James F. Hodgson in his book on sexual violence: "Megan's Law is "feel-good legislation" that has led to harmful conditions rather than the betterment or safety of society."

One-time offender, convicted of statutory rape for having consensual sex with 14 year old girlfriend: "What really bothers me is that years from now, I'll still have to worry about soemthign I did at age 19."

Ernie Allen, president and CEO of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children: "Offenders need to have somewhere to live...we can't zone them out everywhereusing the not-in-my-backyard approach."

Bernard James, law professor a Pepperdine University in Malibu, California about educators and PTA's that give out information on offenders: "People who provide the information are not doing anything illegal, but whether it's wise to do so is another question."

Mark Ondris, a Megan's Law prosecutor: "Megan's Law is essentially a school notification law."

Recently released child molester: "No external factor is going to keep me from reoffending--not the program, not my wife, not God. Only me."

Community Notification laws vary from state to state. In New Jersey, the state that passed the original "Megan's Law" in 1997, a panel of prosecutors decides the level of possible threat offenders pose to society. The first level is low risk, meaning that offenders only have to register themselves with the police. These people were generally involved in crimes that did not hurt another individual but are considered a sex crime, such as mooning or public urination. THe second level includes higher risk offenders, whose information is given to schools, child care agencies, and other community groups who may need to know. The third level consists of those who are most likely to commit further crimes. Their info is given to anyone who is likely to encounter them. Some states, however, do not consider the severity of the crime committed. For example, Louisiana is the only state to require offenders to actually notify the community of their crimes and presence in the neighborhood. Judges have even made some offenders wear special clothing and/or sandwich boards announcing their past crimes.

Another issue to consider is the liberties that community notification laws take from offenders. Is it really fair to punish them for life after they have already served their sentence? THese laws infringe on their privacy, their right to equal protection under the law, and provisions against cruel and unusual punishment. A person comvicted of manslaughter can pose a significant htreat to society, but once their sentence is served, they are free to roam the streets and live where they want. Why, then, must sex offenders have to endure an additional punishment, even if their crime was some thing minor, especially, if it was something that didn't hurt another person, such as mooning?

Sex offender statuses

Though anyone convicted of committing a sex-related crime is considered a "sex offender," there are varying degrees of the damage inflicted by the guilty party. For example, there are men who are convicted of having sex with an underage, but consenting, girlfriend. They are labeled sex offenders, and must carry that title for the rest of hteir lives. However, he performed the act with the girl after she consented; it is considered rape only because of her status as a minor, and the age difference, not because the sex was forced. He is not, therefore, a danger to the community. It was a unique situation. He is not a pedophile, and does not feel compelled to repeat the situation with other minors. A law that would force him to notify the entire community of his "sex offender" status would be unfair, as he does not pose any sort of threat to the community, or to the children living there. Regardless, it is likely that he may be abused, harassed, or told in what areas of the town he may live (so that he does not live too close to any daycare centers or schools).On the other hand, a man who has a fetish for young children, feels the need to satisfy his sexual impulses, or gets a kick out of forcing women to have sex with him, is a huge danger to the community. A criminal who is convicted, often repeatedly, of crimes such as rape and child molestation, can inarguably be labeled a "sex offender" for life. Regardless of the harsh reactions he may receive from neighbors for announcing his status to them, community notification laws are absolutely needed to inform the people living nearby of his presence, as there is a big chance that he may be compelled to repeat the criminal behavior. Therefore, there are varying degrees of sex offender status that should be considered in community notification laws. Some people were inarguably convected of a sex crime, but pose no danger to society in the future. They are not likely to repeat the crime, as it was a unique situation. Others shows signs of criminal sexual compulsions that will not go away, and the only way to protect people from being future victims is by notifying them of the criminal's presence nearby.

Pros and Cons of the Issue

My issue for my research paper is going to be whether community notification laws, specifically Megan's Laws, are fair to the sex offenders being punished by them. It is unfair to those people who were sentenced for a minor crime, especially one that will never be repeated. However, it is necessary to inform the community of a sex offender living nearby if the person has been repeatedly committed of such offenses, which would mean that they have a compulsion towards sexual crimes. One side of the argument is that notification laws are necessary to prevent future sexual crimes, as it informs people living near the offender of his (or her) presence in the area, allowing them to protect their children and family members. The other argument would be that it is unfair to the offender, as he or she may have committed the crime without the intent of hurting another person or breaking the law, such as being involved in a statutory rape case, where the offender had non-forcible sex, but it was with a minor. It seems somewhat unfair that one mistake like that could haunt them for the rest of their lives. Because of the community notification laws, the person will have to announce his presence, if not to the whole community, then at the very least to the police. He or she may be harrassed by people who find out about their history and presence in the area. additionally, they may be told where they can or can't live, as some states have laws defining what areas sex offenders can live in. For example, in some places sex offenders cannot live within 2,000 feet of a school.

I think that I will be taking the side that community notification laws are needed for some cases, but overall should be applied based on the seriousness of the crime committed.

My Research Question

My topic for my research paper is Megan's Law. This law is named after a 7 year old girl, Megan Kanka, who was raped and murdered by a neighbor who was a convicted sex offender. Megan's Laws require that people in the community be notified when a sex offender moves into the area. I haven't decided for sure which issue to discuss; I can debate whether it is fair to the sex offenders to pass such laws or I can discuss the effectiveness of these laws and whether they really work in protecting people from possible sex crimes being committed. I have selected this issue because it is an issue that is very interesting to me, and it is also very two-sided. I feel some sympathy for the offenders, as they could have been convicted of something that was completely unintentional, or something that would never happen again, making it somewhat unfair that for the rest of their lives they have to be labeled as a sex offender. For example, if a man had non-forcible sexual relations at the age of 19 with a girlfriend who was, say, 16, he could be charged with statutory rape, and be labeled a sex offender for life. According to Megan's Law, the entire community may be notified of his presence, and he may be ostracized, harrassed, etc. for being "dangerous." However, if a man has a history of sexual crimes, he may be very likely to repeat them, therefore making him truly dangerous to those around him. In such a case, it seems fair that people are made aware of his presence, in order to protect their children, daughters, girlfriends, and wives. I could look at the laws from another perspective, though. I could research how effective the laws are in minimizing the number of sexual crimes being committed. At the moment, I think I'm leaning towards the research question of whether community notification laws, especially Megan's Laws, are fair to the sex offenders being punished by them.