"Rejection by the community may lead people to despair of ever living a normal life, and such hopelessness can undermine attempts to conform to community standards, driving people inwards, where they may dwell on increasingly inappropriate fantasies" (Lotke, 1997). This clearly has the opposite effect of Megan's Laws intended goals. Instead of protecting citizens, the laws may cause a higher recidivism rate.
Because of the fear of being ostracized, or even harmed, by a community, sexual offenders may purposely move to communities that are less organized. Their initial hope may be to simply avoid the ostracization from Megan's Laws. However, once they've gone unnoticed in a community, these offenders may be more tempted to commit another offense, because they feel like they've gone unnoticed (Lotke, 1997). This too negates some of the effectiveness of Megan's Laws.
Lotke (1997) also notes that the effectiveness of Megan's Laws can be decreased due to the false sense of security the sexual offender registries may give community members. Notification processes may alleviate fears in community members, making them feel that the state is rooting out the offenders in their area. When a person searches an offender database and finds that their neighborhood doesn't have any registered offenders, it may further this false sense of security. These community members may fail to appreciate the potential threat from sexual offenders from other geographic areas that may come to their neighborhood in search of victims. Again, this negatively affects the protection for which Megan's Laws were created.
Conclusion:
The threat of sexual offenders is a significant concern. In 1994, a seven-year-old girl, Megan Kanka was lured to her death with the promise of playing with a puppy. A two-time sexual offender had moved right across the street from her family, unbeknownst to her parents. The death of their daughter caused the Kanka's to form an organization to promote laws that would become today's numerous sexual offender registries. The federal version of Megan's Law requires states...
As each state is different, the type of information released to the general public differs greatly. Most states release name, residential address, a photograph, and information on their conviction(s). Some states release even more detailed information, including workplace location and vehicle information. Like the type of information, how the information is disseminated to the public differs as well. Many states have put their information on publicly accessible websites. Others, like California, offer CDs to concerned citizens. Still others require citizens to come to a public place and research the information themselves. Although the thought behind Megan's Laws are to protect citizens, there are concerns for not only the offenders' privacy, but also their safety as well. In addition, the recidivism rates of sexual offenders is not nearly as high as many people believe, which when coupled with the reality that Megan's Laws has resulted in less offenders complying with registration laws, puts the effectiveness of Megan's Laws in question. Other effectiveness issues include the fact that most victims know their attacker and the ostracism listed offenders may experience may cause them to be more likely to recommit an offense.
References
Larson, a. (Aug 2003). Megan's Law. Retrieved December 12, 2010, from http://www.expertlaw.com/library/criminal/megans_law.html.
Lotke, E. (Sept/Oct 1997). "Politics and irrelevance: Community notification statutes." Federal Sentencing Reporter, 10(2). Retrieved December 12, 2010, from http://www.helping-people.info/articles/lotke_frame.htm.
Megan's Law. (Jul 2001). Retrieved December 12, 2010, from http://ag.ca.gov/megan/pdf/july2001.pdf.
O'Malley, M. (9 Jul 2009). A brief history of Megan's Law. Retrieved December 12, 2010, from http://www.examiner.com/legal-news-in-philadelphia/a-brief-history-of-megan-s-law.
PA Megan's Law Website. (2010). Retrieved December 12, 2010, from http://www.pameganslaw.state.pa.us/.
