Elizabeth Letoureau and Luke Malone write at Slate:
It’s hard not to get emotional about child sexual
abuse. The thought of anyone hurting a child in this way is so egregious that
it’s no wonder society has thrown its support behind a robust criminal justice
response, including lengthy prison sentences and the registration and public
notification of people convicted of this type of sex crime.
But what happens when the perpetrator of child
sexual abuse is also a child?
This isn’t a thought experiment. In the United
States, up to 70 percent of sexual offenses against children are perpetrated by
other children, typically a slightly older relative or playmate who offends in
the context of ignorance, impulsivity, and convenience, not predation. Many
states subject these kids to the same criminal consequences as adults who have
been convicted of sex crimes; the most impactful of which can be registration
and public notification, which typically lasts for decades or life, depending
upon the conviction or adjudication offense.
The problem is registration and notification don’t
work. All published research evaluating juvenile registration has found that
these policies fail to improve community safety in any way. Studies informed by
tens of thousands of cases examined whether putting kids on the registry
reduces sexual recidivism—it does not; or violent recidivism—it does not; or
nonviolent recidivism—it does not; or deters first-time sex crimes—it does not.
What registration does is place substantial barriers in front of kids and make
it less likely they will succeed. Which is why the American Law Institute is
set to suggest a radical change to the nation’s sex crime laws.
In March, the Council of the American Law Institute
will meet to vote on revisions to the Model Penal Code, which include
recommendations that will make it all but impossible to register children for
sexual offenses. This comes after the ALI postponed a January vote to formally
accept the revisions, following fierce pushback from national law enforcement
advocates, who are largely basing their opposition on the tug of emotion and
not reasoned outcomes. We strongly encourage the Council to move forward with
the sorely needed proposed changes when it meets again in March.
You may not have heard of the Model Penal Code, but
it affects most of our lives. It was first published by the American Law
Institute—an independent organization of thousands of lawyers, judges, and
scholars—in 1962, with the goal of encouraging U.S. states to standardize their
criminal codes. Though not legally binding, the Model Penal Code was hugely
influential, with a majority of states adopting it wholly or in part. The
current revision, almost a decade in the making, will guide states to update
their laws based on knowledge that we’ve acquired over the past 60 years.
The proposed revision recommends limiting the
convictions that trigger registration to the most serious sex crimes (some
states currently place public urinators and streakers at sports events on the
registry); eliminating unrestricted public notification of registrants and
returning to the original intent of the law as a tool for law enforcement; and
capping the maximum registration period to 15 years, in the absence of new sex
crimes. Crucially, the revised code recommends ending the practice of placing
children on registries, except in rare cases of youth convicted in adult court
of violent sex crimes committed at age 16 or older.
The number of people currently on sex offense
registries for crimes they committed as children is murky. Estimates range from
tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands. States don’t publicize full data
sets on registered people and our repeated requests have resulted in
bureaucratic brick walls in almost all instances. We do know that the number is
high and that many individuals are under 18 at the time of registration—we’ve
placed kids as young as nine on registries in this country.
We also know that registration reliably and
predictably harms children. Research by the Moore Center for the Prevention of
Child Sexual Abuse found that, relative to children with sexual offenses who
are not registered, kids on the registry were four times more likely to have
attempted suicide, five times more likely to have been approached by adults for
sex, and twice as likely to have been sexually assaulted. Likewise, a Human
Rights Watch report found that more than half of registered children
experienced violence or the threat of violence, including having guns held to
their heads by strangers, being beaten, shot at, and having Molotov cocktails
thrown into their homes. So, a policy intended to prevent child sexual abuse is
instead associated with increased risk of sexual and violent victimization of
children.
This is not what the principal architect of the sex
offense registry had in mind. Patty Wetterling began advocating for nationwide
sex offense registration after her 11-year-old son Jacob was abducted by a
masked gunman in Minnesota in 1989. Jacob was missing for 27 years, until his
remains were discovered buried in a field 30 miles from the family home. In
1994, thanks to Patty’s tireless efforts, President Bill Clinton signed the
Jacob Wetterling Act—the first federal law requiring states to register people
convicted of serious sex crimes. It was originally designed as a tool to help
law enforcement keep track of dangerous adults, but Wetterling watched as the
goal posts changed and the Wetterling Act was expanded to include community
notification and the registration of children.
“People would call me and they would be very proud
that they had kids as young as 10 on their sex offender registry, and I’m like,
‘No, that’s not what it was for,’” she said, adding that we shouldn’t even be
referring to children as juvenile sex offenders. “They are kids. The
terminology is all wrong because that throws them into the same pot as the man
that kidnapped and murdered Jacob. It’s not fair.”
Wetterling has since gotten to know several families
whose children have been placed on sex offense registries and witnessed
firsthand the unintended consequences. She told us she feels a heavy
responsibility for how things have turned out and would welcome an update to
the law she helped create.
“You can’t just pass something in 1994 and never
revisit it,” she said. “What I’ve watched over the years is that all the
elected leaders want to look tough on crime, so they keep making it more
stringent instead of evaluating what’s working and what needs to be changed.”
This is precisely what the American Law Institute
has done. It reviewed decades of research, interviewed numerous experts, and
arrived at thoughtful and empirically-based policy recommendations. But not
everyone is happy. The ALI had originally planned to give its final approval to
the revisions at a Council meeting in mid-January. However, in the days leading
up to the vote it received letters opposing the empirically-based recommended
changes from important stakeholders: the U.S. Department of Justice (which
oversees states’ and other jurisdictions’ compliance with federal registration
requirements), the National Association of State Attorneys General, and the
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The letters mostly take aim
at the provisions around sex trafficking and the denial of public access to sex
offense registries, with the proposed exclusion of children from registration
mentioned only in passing—though the National Association of Attorneys General
explicitly cite the recommendation to abolish most juvenile registration as a
“grave concern.”
To read more CLICK HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment