Sex Offender Laws: Can Treatment, Punishment, Incapacitation, and Public Safety be Reconciled?

Abstract

Sex offenders are viewed a unique type of criminal offender, particularly as more "objectionable,' less treatable, more dangerous, and more likely to recidivate. In recent years, these offenders have once again become the focus of intense legal scrutiny, primarily through laws specifically targeting them for indefinite confinement, registration and community notification, polygraph testing, and chemical castration. This article examines the underlying assumptions and justifications for these sex offender laws. We ask whether treatment, punishment, and public safety can be reconciled as justifications for the laws. We conclude that, even though treatment is an implicit rationale in the laws' provisions, punishment, incapacitation, and public safety are the ostensive purposes of these special laws and policies directed toward sex offenders. Moreover, this article questions the constitutionality and rationality of sex offender laws and policies and their consequences for sex offenders, treatment professionals, the mental health and criminal justice systems, and society in general.