CFC OKLAHOMA

The Oklahoma Legislature is exploring a tier system to categorize sex offenders. Such categories dictate how long sex offenders must register as sexual offenders. The Legislature should also determine if residency restrictions truly protect children. Legislators currently favor laws prohibiting registered sex offenders from living near schools, parks and other places children congregate.

Florida passed the first state residency restriction laws in 1995. In 2006, 22 states, including Oklahoma, passed residency restrictions that created zones around schools, parks and day-care centers and prohibited sex offenders from living within these areas. Presently, few areas exist in Tulsa where registered offenders can live.

No research has evaluated the impact of residency restrictions on recidivism. An Arizona study found child molesters were more likely than rapists to live near schools. The Arizona study did not explore recidivism, however, or other factors affecting sex offenders' housing choices. No link between residency restrictions and sexual recidivism has been established. Colorado and Minnesota studied this issue prior to enacting residency restriction laws. Researchers found that such laws were not a strategy for preventing sex crimes but found individualized restrictions may be appropriate.

No viable research examines the efficacy of residence restrictions. Research does identify unintended consequences. According to a Florida study involving sex offenders on probation, one quarter reported relocating because of the state's law. Nearly

In an Indiana study, more than 25 percent of sex offenders could not return home after prison. Thirty-eight percent reported affordable housing was less available, forcing them to live away from employment, social services and treatment.

Six months after the initiation of Iowa's laws, thousands of sex offenders became homeless or transient. Registered offenders vanished, rendering the registry inaccurate. Iowa prosecutors and victims' advocates have denounced residency restrictions, believing they create more problems than they solve.

Oklahoma should consider alternatives to residency restrictions like limiting offenders' access to places where they can easily engage children and employing Global Positioning Systems monitoring. By contrast, residency restrictions primarily require sex offenders to sleep in certain residences. Since the most complete meta-analysis reflects only 13 to 19 percent of sex offenders are rearrested for sexual offenses, why not assess risk and apply policies to those most likely to offend?

Actually, residency restrictions are designed to prevent predatory sex offenders from reoffending. These offenders are responsible for 5 to 7 percent of sex offenses against children. Most child victims are abused by relatives or acquaintances. About 40 percent of offenses occur in victims' homes; 20 percent happen in the homes of friends or relatives.

Residency restrictions disrupt offender stability and often isolate sex offenders from their support systems. While isolation from family is often initially appropriate for family safety, this should be based on risk assessments rather than all encompassing laws. Residency restrictions remove offenders from employment and public transportation, creating financial stress, a dynamic risk factor associated with reoffense. Stable employment and housing are essential for offenders to successfully transition into the community.

Risk assessment separating offenders into relative risk tiers and incorporating treatment provides a comprehensive approach to recidivism. Oklahoma uses the Containment Model; here, victims' advocates, probation/parole officers, polygraph examiners and treatment providers develop supervision and treatment strategies.

Understandably, legislators and citizens are unsympathetic to the problems of sex offenders. Some sex offenders pose serious threats and we must protect our children from sexual violence. However, laws should not contribute to the risk of reoffense. I encourage all Oklahomans to protect our children and urge the Legislature to pass laws that will truly enhance their safety.