The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School Crime, Law, and Justice Program, Department of Sociology DETERRING SEX OFFENDERS: IDENTIFYING THE FACTORS THAT AFFECT POLICY AND THE POLICIES THAT AFFECT RECIDIVISM A Dissertation in Crime, Law, and Justice by Sarah Koon-Magnin 2011 Sarah Koon-Magnin Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2011 The dissertation of Sarah Koon-Magnin was reviewed and approved* by the following: R. Barry Ruback. Professor of Sociology and Crime, Law, and Justice Dissertation Advisor Chair of Committee Derek A. Kreager Assistant Professor of Sociology and Crime, Law, and Justice Jeremy Staff Associate Professor of Sociology and Crime, Law, and Justice Aaron L. Pincus Professor of Psychology John McCarthy Professor of Sociology Head of the Department of Sociology *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School iii ABSTRACT Sexual offending is considered the most deplorable type of crime, especially when the victims are children. A few particularly sensational cases of sexual assaults against children have led to public outrage and, ultimately, the introduction of new strategies for controlling the sex offender population. Two of the most controversial techniques for controlling sex offender behavior, registration/notification policies and civil commitment statutes, were widely implemented in the 1990‟s. Registration/notification policies (adopted in all 50 states) require that law enforcement officials both maintain a centralized database of all sexual offenders in each jurisdiction and make that list available to the public. Civil commitment statutes (adopted in 20 states) allow the state to keep high-risk offenders under state control (i.e., in state institutions) even after the offenders‟ criminal sentence is complete. This dissertation focused on the adoption of these policies (Study 1) and the impact of these policies (Study 2). Study 1 tested two explanations that have traditionally been offered to explain the risk and timing of policy adoption: internal determinants and diffusion. Internal determinants are factors that are unique to the state, such as the political party of the governor or the unemployment rate. Diffusion is a temporal process in which states respond to the policy choices that other states are making. Studies of state-level adoption of multiple types of policies have found that both internal determinants and diffusion theories can be used to explain the timing of policy adoption (Berry & Berry, 1990). These two theoretical approaches were tested using annual, state-level data from 1986 through 2007. The data used for analysis was drawn from multiple sources, iv including the Statistical Abstracts of the United States, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Uniform Crime Reports. Original variables (e.g., the percentage of neighboring states that have adopted the policy) were also created to capture the diffusion of the two policies and diffusion mechanisms. The results of Study 1 suggest that the factors that led to the adoption of sexual offending legislation differed from those traditionally used to explain policy adoption. Only one of the internal determinant variables was significantly associated with the risk and timing of adopting registration/notification policies. Region of the country was an important predictor of adoption risk, such that states in the Southern region were significantly less likely to adopt the policies, or did so later, than states in other regions of the country. Two additional internal determinants were associated with the timing of adopting a civil commitment statute. First, states with higher populations were more likely to adopt such policies, or to adopt them sooner, than states with smaller populations. Second, states with higher levels of unemployment were less likely to adopt civil commitment statutes, or adopted them later, than states with lower levels of unemployment. There was a significant diffusion effect on both policy outcomes. That is, as more time passed and more states adopted the policy, the remaining states were increasingly likely to adopt the policy, as well. Diffusion mechanisms (specifically, the passage of Federal legislation in the Jacob Wetterling Act and the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kansas v. Hendricks) were negatively associated with the timing of adopting a civil commitment policy. v Study 2 tested the impact of the adoption of these two policies on rates of sexual offending within states over time. The rates of six types of sexual offending were tested: rape (as measured by both the Uniform Crime Reports and the National Incident-Based Reporting System), forcible sodomy, forcible fondling, sexual assault with an object, statutory rape, and incest (all five measured by the National Incident-Based Reporting System). The findings of Study 2 provided no support for deterrence theory. Neither the adoption of a registration/notification policy nor a civil commitment statute led to a significant decrease in the rates of sexual offending. In fact, for four of the outcomes studied here, there were positive relationships between policy adoption and the rate of sexual offending. Failure to find a deterrent effect may mean that no such effect exists. However, it is also possible that the limited scope of NIBRS data (only 15 states were available for analysis because states‟ reporting is voluntary) did not provide adequate power to detect an effect. Four covariates were significantly associated with the rates of sexual offending within states. First, there was a positive association between the murder rate in the state and the rape rate (as measured by the UCR). Second, there was a positive association between the percentage of the population living in poverty and the rape rate (both measured by NIBRS). Third, the divorce rate within a state was positively associated with the rape rate (as measured by the UCR). Fourth, the incarceration rate within a state was positively associated with the rates of rape (as measured by both the UCR), forcible sodomy, forcible fondling, sexual assault with an object, statutory rape, and incest. vi These two studies provide a comprehensive view of registration/notification policies and civil commitment statute. There are three important implications of this research. First, the success or failure of a policy, once implemented, should be tested as a likely predictor of policy diffusion. Second, future policy research should continue to address both adoption and evaluation, as these processes are intertwined. Third, legislators should consider empirical research when implementing sexual offending policy. Although there is symbolic value in implementing policies regardless of their effectiveness, sexual offending is a serious enough problem to demand policies that will also serve to reduce the rate of sexual offending. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................. xi LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... xiii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................................... xx Chapter 1 Introduction to the Research................................................................................... 1 Sexual Offenses in the United States ............................................................................... 3 Memorial Laws ................................................................................................................ 7 Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Predators Act .... 7 Megan‟s Law ............................................................................................................ 8 Adam Walsh Act ...................................................................................................... 9 Punishments Uniquely Applied to Sexual Offenders ....................................................... 10 Registration/Notification .......................................................................................... 11 The Effect of Megan‟s Law on Recidivism ............................................................. 14 The Effect of Megan‟s Law on Re-entry .................................................................. 16 Civil Commitment .................................................................................................... 18 A Comparison of Registration/Notification and Civil Commitment Policies .......... 23 Empirical Knowledge of Sexual Offender Behavior ....................................................... 26 Sex Offender Recidivism ......................................................................................... 27 Sex Offenders as a Homogenous Group .................................................................. 29 Research Questions .......................................................................................................... 31 Chapter 2 Theoretical Framework .......................................................................................... 33 An Introduction to the Theories of Policy Adoption........................................................ 35 Internal Determinants Theory .................................................................................. 36 Demographic Internal Determinants ...............................................................