Message from the Director

Common sense dictates that convicted sex offenders should not reside directly across the street or in close proximity to schools, parks and playgrounds, but it is time to draw the line on Long Island.

Current residency restriction laws in Nassau and Suffolk County were enacted in direct response to multiple incidences where convicted sex offenders took up residence in locations with an unobstructed view of schoolchildren playing at recess and at public playgrounds. Long Island’s first residency restriction law was enacted when a Level 3 sex offender convicted of Rape in the first degree, who completed parole, took up residence directly across the street from North Coleman Elementary School in Centereach.

Sex offender residency restriction laws will not eliminate sexual victimization. They do however reduce the potential for offender escalation and their ability to observe and pattern children. Daily exposure and access to a vulnerable victim pool facilitates the potential for sex offender fantasy to become a heinous reality. According to Jill Levenson, Ph.D. and Leo Cotter, Ph.D. in The Impact of Sex Offender Residency Restrictions, 1,000 feet from danger or one step from the absurd?, "sexual interest in children and access to victims are also factors associated with recidivism." Additionally, "it is well established that most sex offenders have many more victims (and a variety of victims) than those for which they have been arrested (Abel et al., 1987; Abel, Becker, Cunningham-Rathner, Mittleman, & Rouleou, 1988; Ahlmeyer et al., 2000; Heil, Ahlmeyer, & Simons, 2003) and therefore, some may pose risks not readily apparent by relying solely on their documented offense history." (Levenson & Cotter 2005) According to Stephen Brake, Ph.D and Greig Veeder M.S.W., in Re-Offense Rates of Adult Sex Offenders Evidence Pertaining to the Effectiveness and Ineffectiveness of Treatment Programs, "adult sex offenders self-report only a fraction of their crimes at the time of their arrest. They have a long history of committing sex offenses prior to getting caught." Adult sex offenders who were known to have an average of 2 victims at the time of their arrest subsequently report having an average of 184 victims after taking polygraph tests while in treatment (Ahlmeyer, Heil, McKee, and English, 2000).

Individualized sex offender management based on risk assessment is playing Russian roulette with our children’s safety as we will never have all the information required to accurately predict human behavior and make informed decisions. Reasonable residency restriction laws prevent known registrants from residing in close proximity to our vulnerable populations. After performing due diligence to prevent the creation of exclusionary zones, local laws offer the additional benefit of reducing the potential for community unrest and vigilantism by providing statutory guidance clarifying what the rules are for both residents and for registrants.

Attempting to expand existing stringent residency restriction laws is a popular platform during election season and may appear on the surface to be a good idea, but in fact, may be counterproductive to enhancing sexual abuse prevention. Expansion initiatives lull a community into having a false sense of security and can never take the place of parents who take the time to learn how to protect themselves and their children through prevention education. Nine out of ten children who are sexually abused know and have an established relationship with their abuser. We as a society cannot consciously disregard the one in ten who do not. Enacting ill conceived politically correct in the moment laws may lead to a constitutional challenge, bringing invited attention to the lawmaker but seriously compromising existing laws. More importantly, it will lead to a greater number of homeless and non-compliant sex offenders - exacerbating their tracking, monitoring and supervision - ultimately placing our children at greater risk for victimization.

Government can make a real impact by re-directing community focus and providing any number of Parents for Megan’s Law’s (PFML) child or adult sexual abuse prevention education programs to residents on a monthly basis, and initiating community mailings that inform residents how to access the sex offender registry and how to register for sex offender email alert notifications.

Research and experience indicate that victim and community safety is best achieved when those supervising sex offenders work collaboratively with law enforcement, therapeutic providers, community organizations and the public. Proposals and passage of more restrictive laws while ignoring the need to provide resources for collaborative enforcement of existing laws serves only to strain already limited resources and renders those laws ineffective. Further, valuable time spent responding to community members misled by misinformation can instead be used to educate the public about existing resources they can utilize to keep themselves and their children safe from sexual predators.

There are over 700,000 registered sex offenders in our nation and keeping track of them requires strong collaborations between law enforcement, the community and organizations such as Parents for Megan’s Law. Police utilize information technology resources and in-person verifications and sweeps to check addresses and call upon the US Marshals to hunt down non-compliant registrants crossing state lines. Because Megan’s Law is an unfunded mandate, these initiatives require ongoing funding.

Megan’s Law provides the public a unique opportunity to be the eyes and ears for law enforcement by reporting registrants that may be in violation of local, state and federal laws. Through the Parents for Megan’s Law Sex Offender Registration Tips (SORT) Program the public can anonymously report registrants who may be in violation of registration, employment and residency restriction laws or who may be violating conditions of probation or parole. SORT reports are researched and forwarded to the appropriate law enforcement agency for follow-up action. This collaboration has led to multiple arrests for non-compliance and increased accuracy of registry information.

The over arching problem is that sex offender registration is done on an honor system. If we were serious about ensuring sex offender compliance with registration, residency and employment restriction laws then funding should be provided to supervise sex offenders for the same term they are required to register - and that supervision can be tailored to the individual registrant. Nation-wide life-time supervision for sex offender laws would prevent local governments from proposing and passing laws in response to real-life situations we are all confronted with on local levels - twenty-six states across the nation have some form of life-time supervision for registered sex offenders.

Preventing our most vulnerable from sexual victimization requires that we take a comprehensive approach which includes stricter sentencing, civil confinement, strong registration and notification laws, realistic residency and employment restriction laws, individualized life-time supervision plans which include treatment and the use of GPS and computer monitoring software, resources for enforcement of sex offender management laws, resources and support for victims and sexual abuse prevention education for children and adults - laws alone cannot protect them.

Laura A. Ahearn, L.M.S.W.
Executive Director
Parents for Megan’s Law and the Crime Victims Center (PFML/CVC)