Collateral Consequences and Effectiveness of Sex Offender Registration and Notification: Law Enforcement Perspectives

• Author: Michelle A. Cubellis,Andrew J. Harris,Scott M. Walfield
• Published date: 01 March 2018
• Date: 01 March 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16667574
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16667574

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2018, Vol. 62(4) 1080 –1106

© The Author(s) 2016

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X16667574

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

Collateral Consequences and

Effectiveness of Sex Offender

Registration and Notification:

Law Enforcement

Perspectives

Michelle A. Cubellis1, Scott M. Walfield2,

and Andrew J. Harris3

Abstract

A growing body of research has examined the collateral effects of sex offender

registration and notification (SORN), particularly those related to offenders’ social

and economic reintegration into society. Although studies have examined public,

offender, treatment provider, and other criminal justice perspectives on SORN’s

collateral impacts, few have elicited the views of law enforcement (LE) professionals

who have contact with registered offenders. This study presents results from a

mixed method study examining LE perspectives on collateral consequences and

effectiveness of SORN. Results indicate that, although overall LE concern regarding

collateral impacts is limited, those who are most engaged in SORN-related duties

are significantly more likely to indicate such concern, and also more likely to believe

that SORN was an effective public safety tool. Importantly, respondents in states

with larger registries expressed greater concern over collateral consequences, and

less belief in SORN’s public safety efficacy. Implications for policy and practice are

discussed.

Keywords

SORNA, law enforcement, sex offenders, collateral consequences, effectiveness

1Central Connecticut State University, New Britain, USA

2East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA

3University of Massachusetts Lowell, USA

Corresponding Author:

Michelle A. Cubellis, Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Central Connecticut State

University, 1615 Stanley Street, New Britain, CT 06050, USA.

Email: macubellis@ccsu.edu

667574IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X16667574International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyCubellis et al.

research-article2016

Cubellis et al. 1081

Introduction

Over the past two decades, policies directed toward the community management of

sex offenders have proliferated across the United States (Cohen & Jeglic, 2007).

Central to these policy developments has been the expansion and enhancement of the

nation’s systems of sex offender registration and notification (SORN), which are

intended to inform the public about, and improve the ability of law enforcement, to

monitor (e.g., unannounced house visits, electronic/computer monitoring) registered

sex offenders (RSOs) living in the community, ensuring that RSOs comply with regis-

tration requirements (Harris, Lobanov-Rostovsky, & Levenson, 2010).

Research examining the impact of SORN on sex crimes and re-offense rates has

been inconclusive. Whereas some studies have found little to no effect of SORN on

sex crimes or sexual recidivism (Adkins, Huff, & Stageberg, 2000; Letourneau,

Levenson, Bandyopadhyay, Sinha, & Armstrong, 2010; Tewksbury & Jennings, 2010;

Zgoba, Witt, Dalessandro, & Veysey, 2008), others have found some reductions in

sexual offenses or recidivism following SORN implementation (Barnoski, 2005;

Duwe & Donnay, 2008; Prescott & Rockoff, 2011).

Beyond examining SORN’s effects on sexual offending, many studies have also

examined possible collateral impacts of SORN policies on those required to regis-

ter. Such studies have found that RSOs may face difficulty obtaining employment,

difficulty maintaining stable housing, emotional distress, and lack of positive social

support by virtue of their placement on the registry (e.g., Evans & Porter, 2015;

Tewksbury, 2005; Tewksbury & Levenson, 2009; Tewksbury & Zgoba, 2010;

Zevitz & Farkas, 2000). Studies have also suggested that RSO status can leave

offenders open to victimization and vigilantism (Tewksbury & Levenson, 2009;

Tewksbury & Zgoba, 2010), contribute to social isolation of the offender (Linden

& Rockoff, 2008), and lead to threats/harassment and employment/financial hard-

ships for family members (Comartin, Kernsmith, & Miles, 2010; Levenson &

Tewksbury, 2009).

To date, most studies examining SORN’s collateral consequences have been based

on surveys of RSOs (Tewksbury, 2005; Tewksbury & Lees, 2007; Mercado, Alvarez,

& Levenson, 2008), their family members (Comartin, Kernsmith, & Miles, 2010;

Levenson & Tewksbury, 2009), mental health/treatment providers (Harris, Walfield,

Shields, & Letourneau, 2015; Levenson, Fortney, & Baker, 2010; Malesky & Keim,

2001), the public (Redlich, 2001), and students (Redlich, 2001). Although a limited

number of studies have elicited the views of criminal justice professionals on these

and related matters (Bailey & Sample, 2015; Mustaine, Tewksbury, Connor, & Payne,

2015; Zevitz & Farkas, 2000), very little is known about the perspectives of law

enforcement officials. To our knowledge, only one study conducted in England and

Wales has addressed the views of law enforcement in terms of sex offender manage-

ment (Nash, 2016). This gap is particularly notable given the central role that police

and sheriff agencies play in managing SORN systems, interacting with RSOs, and

enforcing SORN compliance. The current study attempts to fill this gap in the litera-

ture, presenting an exploratory examination of law enforcement officials’ concern