NSPCC inform - Megan's Law: Does it protect children? (2). An updated review of evidence on the impact of community notification as legislated for by Megan's Law in the United States

Navigation menu list for sections above the current page: NSPCC Home; NSPCC inform

Research: NSPCC Research findings; NSPCC Research Department; Child protection research briefings; Child sexual abuse research at Fresh Start; Network for Research on Children, Young People and Families

Megan's Law: does it protect children?

An updated review of evidence on the impact of community notification as legislated for by Megan's Law in the United States

By Kate Fitch (November 2006)

Megan's Law: does it protect children? (2) - an updated review of evidence on the impact of community notification as legislated for by Megan's Law in the United States (PDF, 645KB) evaluates the effectiveness of Megan's Law in the United States. It updates a previous study published by the NSPCC in 2001.

This paper is intended to help policy-makers in the UK develop an informed policy position on the subject of public access to information about convicted sex offenders.

Executive summary

The NSPCC's purpose is to end cruelty to children. It therefore wishes to help ensure the creation of the best possible child protection system. This paper examines evidence about the outcomes and impact of Megan's Law, to discover if there are any lessons which can be applied to the UK.

The history and details of Megan's Law in the US

Megan's Law is an amendment to a series of laws passed in the United States that aimed to protect children from sex offenders. The law introduced compulsory 'community notification' by providing public access to information about convicted sex offenders. Its main aim is to promote public and community safety by increasing awareness of sex offenders thought to be at high risk of reoffending.

Megan's Law was not evidence-based legislation, but was adopted in response to a series of high profile crimes against children (Farkas and Stichman, 2002 ¹ ). After the abduction of eleven-year-old Jacob Wetterling from his home in Minnesota, in 1994 the Jacob Wetterling Crimes against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act mandated the compulsory registration of convicted sex offenders. In 1996 following the abduction and murder of seven-year-old Megan Kanka in New Jersey, this act was amended, and all states were ordered to publicise information about offenders listed on the registry.

All 50 states and the District of Colombia have enacted legislation to authorise the release of sex offender information to members of the public. As individual state legislatures have adapted the federal mandate to suit local systems, differences in implementation mean there is still no consistent version of Megan's Law across the United States. Despite the fact that all states now use sex offender registry websites to notify the public, there remain variations in:

the use of risk assessment procedures
the methods of disclosure used
which offenders are subject to online disclosure
time periods of offender registration and between re-registrations
type of information published
time and money allocated across individual states to enforce laws
penalties and law enforcement responses in cases of non-compliance.

The report includes case studies of California, Washington State, Minnesota, Louisiana and Vermont. These states were selected to demonstrate a variety of implementation methods and to represent the country geographically.

Evidence about the impact of Megan's Law in the US

Most states have very little evidence on the actual impact of community notification on their jurisdiction. Most of the understood benefits of the laws are based on assumptions about the nature of sexual offending and the behaviour of parents and community members. Such assumptions are rarely supported through research, but continue to legitimise the law for law enforcement workers and members of the public.

Areas where additional research is needed

There is currently no empirical evidence that community notification has had a positive impact on offender recidivism rates.
There are methodological barriers to proving or disproving any correlation between community notification and offending.
There is no evidence that community notification has resulted in fewer assaults by strangers on children.
There is no evidence that sex offenders use public information sources to form networks.
There is currently very little monitoring of vigilantism against offenders. Although there are few known incidents of harassment, it is likely that these crimes are under-reported and under-recorded.

Findings based on the research

Fears remain about the potential for offenders to 'go underground'. Offender compliance levels vary across states, but are usually higher in dense urban areas.
Methods used to locate offenders who have gone underground are often inadequate. In many cases where a warrant has been issued, states rely on offender traffic violations or 'sweeps' where they attempt to locate missing offenders. Both methods have limited results.
By focusing on a small number of known offenders, the system may detract attention from more common crimes such as intra-familial abuse, leaving parents and children vulnerable to abuse from people known to them.
There are conflicting reports about the extent to which members of the community will take measures to protect family members, and increase the surveillance of known sex offenders.
There is some evidence that victims of intra-familial abuse may be deterred from reporting crimes because of fears related to community notification.
Surveys suggest that, at a general level, community notification is popular with respondents. However, there is academic evidence to suggest that some parents may develop a false sense of fear of offenders in the community, as the laws exaggerate the true level of offender recidivism.
Practitioners speak of the success of Megan's Law in terms of increased use of risk assessments, better information-sharing and additional funding for treatment and surveillance. However, these practices are distinct from the community notification element for which there are no evidenced benefits.
Rules around offender residency, registration and notification are being tightened across all the states in response to perceived loopholes and high-profile sex attacks on children.
The financial cost of implementing community notification is high.

Report recommendations

Application to the UK
At present, when the police are aware that an offender poses a risk to the public, they or the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPAs) are responsible for informing individuals and the community on a case by case basis ² . The report finds that there is no evidence to justify a wholesale change to the UK's current systems of disclosure, although the following measures are required:

Public awareness of existing arrangements
At present many people are unaware that a system of discretionary disclosure exists in the UK. In order for the current system of notification to continue, information about child protection procedures need to be improved, and there should be greater public understanding of the current methods of disclosure used.

Public education
The report shows that there is a danger of the debate around sex offenders becoming too narrow if policy-makers mainly focus on a small group of high-risk offenders. There therefore needs to be more public education to raise awareness that most sexual abuse is perpetrated by someone known to the child. Children also need to be educated about abuse and offered ways to share their concerns with somebody who is able to help.

Treatment for children who display sexually harmful behaviour
A large percentage of sexual assaults are perpetrated by young people and individual states in the US respond to this in different ways. In the UK young people should not be made subject to public notification, but should instead be given access to additional treatment programmes. We believe that every local authority should have in place a multi-agency assessment framework and access to any treatment services that are needed. There should be a full, welfare-based assessment of every child who displays sexually harmful behaviour. This should identify appropriate next steps to address their needs, and safeguard others from the risks they may pose.

Treatment for those outside the criminal justice system
Most perpetrators, or individuals with a sexual interest in children, are not in contact with the criminal justice system. Treatment is also needed for these people to help them desist from harmful sexual behaviours.

Implications for policy
There is currently insufficient proof that the community notification practices of Megan's Law makes children safer. Registration and notification alone cannot solve the problem of child sexual abuse. Policy-makers should ensure that sex offender management policies are based on objective evidence of what makes children safer and not on popular responses to high-profile sex crimes such as Megan's Law, however tempting it is.

Other NSPCC recommendations

Review of existing arrangements
The NSPCC would like the UK Government to examine a range of measures which protect children, rather than focusing primarily on the issue of disclosure.

Adult offender treatment programmes
The Home Office must ensure that treatment is available for offenders both in prison and in the community. In addition, there is a role for residential treatment for very high-risk offenders. The only residential treatment centre for adult sex offenders, the Wolvercote Clinic, was closed in July 2002. The NSPCC recommends that the Home Office establish a network of residential treatment centres for high-risk offenders.

Resourcing of existing sex offender management arrangements
MAPPAs are an important framework for the management of offenders in the community. However, recent reports from the MAPPAs reveal problems with an inconsistent use of risk assessment and heavy caseloads (HMIP, 2006 ³ ). The NSPCC believes it is essential that MAPPAs are adequately resourced and supported so that they can reduce the risk to children from offenders in the community. Risk assessments must be consistent and caseloads must be a manageable size.

Inter-agency working
Agencies must work together in order to properly manage the risk that sex offenders pose. Evidence suggests that this is currently inconsistent between areas. It is important that agencies work closely with the MAPPAs, and that child protection experts on Local Safeguarding Children Boards are also represented on MAPPAs, and are able to develop a joined-up response.

Sex offender accommodation
The NSPCC believes that high-risk offenders should be housed in a way that minimises the risks they pose to children. The Home Office must ensure that all high-risk sex offenders are accommodated in suitable hostels which offer an appropriate level of supervision and contact with staff.

Therapeutic services for children
There should be greater support for children who have been the victims of sexual abuse. The NSPCC recommends that the UK Government ensure that every child who experiences abuse is expertly assessed and is given the therapeutic services they need. A fully funded delivery plan must be developed at national and local levels to achieve this.

References

1. Farkas, M. and Stichman, A. (2002) Sex offender laws: can treatment, punishment, incapacitation, and public safety be reconciled? Criminal Justice Review, 27(2): 256-283.

2. MAPPAS are in place in Wales and were introduced in Scotland from April 2006. In Northern Ireland, MASRAM (Multi Agency Sex Offender Risk Assessment and Management meetings) involve the Police, the Probation Service, Prisons and Social Services in the management of sex offenders.

3. HM Inspectorate of Probation (2006) Joint thematic inspection report: Putting risk of harm in context.