Disadvantages Of Megan's Law

Third, the public’s perceptions on Megan’s Law are affected by the media. Most of the people would highly support Megan’s Law as they think that it can act as a public safety measure that can be used to prevent victimization (Levenson, Brann, Fortney, & Baker, 2007). However, they had omitted the disadvantages of the law regarding the inability to reduce the sex offenses as well as the lack of support in finding other ways for the rehabilitation of sex offenders (Schram & Milloy, 1995 as cited in Levenson, D`Amora, & Hern, 2007). This law had created a fake sense of security to the public, as they would want to know whether there are any sex offenders located in their area in order to protect their children. However, research found that it
increases public anxiety as mention above that they will be alert towards their surrounding and sometimes cannot fall asleep because of it (Levenson, Brann, Fortney, & Baker, 2007). Research shows that the media coverage could only raise the public’s specific knowledge but not improve the general knowledge about the law. The newspaper’s focus is associated with support from the public and the public belief in the effectiveness of Megan’s Law (Levenson, Brann, Fortney, & Baker, 2007; Levenson, D`Amora, & Hern, 2007). Also, the media coverage tends to explain the sex crimes based on the individual’s action. Most of the community do not have a detailed knowledge about Megan’s Law; they usually get that information from the television, newspaper or radio (Proctor, Badzinski & Johnson, 2002). The reinforcement that had been made by media leads to communities fear and anger towards sex offenders, and had affected the sex offenders to lose their job, house, and relationship with partners (Proctor, Badzinski & Johnson, 2002). This will increase the risk of recidivism instead of reducing it. On the other hand, based on Levenson, D`Amora, & Hern (2007) research, in Florida, there are around 193 people who took part in the survey and mentioned that they believe that all sex offenders will reoffend so that is the reason to propose that sex offenders should disclose themselves to the public as they have the rights to know where the sex offenders live near to them. Many residents agreed that the registered sex offender had behaved well compare to those who did not due to Megan’s Law (Philips, 1998). It helps the parents to protect their children from child sexual abuse, allows the public to be more aware of the sex offenders in order to protect their safety, and also reduce the risk of recidivism. Furthermore, it can also provide legal ground for the police to take immediate action to arrest those sex offenders when they reoffend. Thus, Megan’s Law is highly supported by the community; many of them want to be informed about the existence of sex offenders. Nevertheless, a research in Washington had established that between registered sex offender and non-registered sex offenders, there is no significant difference in recidivism rates (Welchans, 2005). (Schram & Milloy, 1995 as cited in Levenson, D`Amora, & Hern, 2007; Cochrane, 2010) On the contrary, the registered sex offenders were found to commit another sex crime faster than the non-registered sex offenders. Plus, notification laws reduce crime by deterring potential criminals but not necessarily recidivists (Prescott & Rockoff, 2011). Serves as a deterrent to unregistered individuals but registered offenders subject to notification may commit more crime (Prescott & Rockoff, 2011). Possibly due to social and financial costs associated with public release of their information. Many researchers indicated that Megan’s Law only gives the community a false sense of safety, but the risk of recidivism does not reduce, and it might even lead to other crimes. According to Levenson & Cotter (2005) research, some of the offenders admitted that Megan’s Law helped them to force themselves to become an honest person.
Some of them even mentioned that their honesty had succeeded in helping them to receive support by others. Many sex offenders normally keep their secret with them and hide themselves from other people, so some of them think that community notification may help them to be brave to develop intimate relationships and receive social support from others (Levenson & Cotter, 2005). Besides, Levenson, D`Amora, & Hern (2007) did found out that Megan’s Law has a positive effect on some of the sex offender, they found out that they are more willing to handle risks, become more honest to other people, and also thinks that Megan’s Law help to improve the safety of public, hence, they are willing to disclose themselves to the public. However, this is only a minority of the sex offenders. Majority of the sex offenders were found to be having social and psychological problem. They reported that after disclosing themselves, many of them lost their jobs, forced to move away from their house because of residency restrictions, and also being harassed by the public for living there (Levenson & Cotter, 2005; Levenson, D`Amora, & Hern, 2007). Community notification also affects the sex offenders’ family and their daily life as they are discriminated, harassed and refused interaction by the community. And because of these problems, most of the
sex offenders feel stress and anxiety; suffer from psychological problem, feeling helpless and hopeless. They feel that it was their fault completely for getting their families involved in this situation and since no one is willing to accept them, why should they even try to make changes, so this may lead them to commit other crime or reoffend. Sex assault cases have been increasing every year, not only children and women but men might also become targets of sex offender.
We hope to find effective ways to reduce sex assault cases and also to reduce the risks of recidivism but the public often ignores the shortcomings of the laws. They assume that those laws are tools for them to treat victimization and for them to feel safe from sex offenders. However, Megan’s Law does more harm than good. It does not help the public to reduce the risk of recidivism, while only giving them a false sense of security. Researches that mention above have already shown that when the community was being notified about the sex offenders, they will be more anxious and afraid that they or their child will become the next target, and even cause some of the people to suffer from insomnia. Because of this, sex offenders are not easily accepted by society, and some people might even have radical behaviour against the sex offenders. A few example of documented radical behaviour would be murdering sex offenders and setting fire to sex offenders’ houses (Bonnar-Kidd, 2010). In conclusion, Megan’s law should be revised as it will lead to more drawbacks compared to its
benefits.