5. Discussion
5.5 Implications and Recommendations for Future Research
While the current research uncovered some notable findings, limitations did exist by way of sample size, demographics and methodology. It is therefore proposed that a wider study of Irish public attitudes be conducted in this area and perhaps a more qualitatively based study be done. As such, a more in-depth and generalizable analysis of attitudes could be conducted and greater insight might be gained.
Of particular note for future research, both quantitative and qualitative, are the topics of age and sexual offending, how the public construct the concept of consent, and gender dynamics as a means of determining deviance levels. Additionally, further investigation into community education in relation to sex crime is needed to inform best practice in this area and to promote successful social inclusion of sex offenders.
45 5.6 Conclusion
The current study has certainly made a good argument for the hypothesis that sexual offending is perceived to be on a scale of severity. As predicted, crimes against children have been deemed to be the least acceptable, with such offenders being least conducive to gaining public support for reintegration. In saying this, a willingness to rehabilitate and a foundation for the support of the employment of such offenders does exist. Additionally, support for the implementation of COSA has proven to be strong and this is promising, given the positive nature of its evaluations.
Public knowledge in relation to the reality and prevalence of sexual recidivism, sex crime statistics and legislative measures is lacking. Progress in the area of reintegration is dependent on an informed public, willing to engage with what works best. Community education is proposed to be the key to this development.
Finally, it could be said that Ireland is moving away from the neoliberal approaches of the UK and the USA. The commitment to using empirical findings and expert groups to inform policy and the lack of public registries and restrictive housing policies, shows a social-democratic side to Ireland. This approach, in conjunction with the climate of attitudes uncovered by the current study, may prove Ireland to be close to the cutting edge in relation to tackling this issue effectively. The final chapter will provide conclusions on the current study.
46
Chapter 6
Conclusion
This dissertation strove to explore public attitudes towards sex crime and sex offender reintegration with the aim of identifying a publically perceived scale of sexual deviance. It also sought to investigate the public’s knowledge of the prevalence of sex crime and legislation in the area of sexual offending. This chapter will outline conclusions which may be drawn from the current study.
At the outset of this dissertation, it was noted that empirical research in relation to the topic in question was scarce. Previous studies had explored the effect of policy on the reintegration of sex offenders and had attempted to gauge levels of public support with regard to such policies. They had also considered how offenders themselves experience the reintegrative process and explored reasons for recidivism. Research which focused on punitive attitudes at a general level had been carried out to a degree but little attention had been given to deconstructing public attitudes towards sex offenders specifically and little relevant research in an Irish context was found to exist. As such, this study was somewhat novel.
In the introduction chapter, Beckett’s (1963) concept of deviants as “outsiders” was put forth, followed by Spencer’s (2009) conclusion that sex offenders are “homo sacer” (outside the walls of citizenship) and thus, outsiders among outsiders. International findings had given weight to this theory and had shown evidence that, not only are sex offenders outcasts among outsiders but, amongst sex offenders, a publically perceived pecking order exists. As such, it had been shown that offenders who abused children exhibited the most punitive public responses and were most likely to be associated with the “sex offender” label. The current study addressed this hypothesis by using a web-based survey method to gain insight into Irish attitudes in this respect. It questioned participants’ knowledge of legal measures in this domain, their opinions on the prevalence of sex crime and asked them to respond to scenario-based questions on suitable punishments for and reintegration of the offenders in question.
Findings suggested that public knowledge of sex crime was weak. They also showed that while sex offenders are often described as a homogenous group, the public distinguishes
47
between various types of sex offenders and various levels of sex crime. This confirmed that those who commit crimes against children tend to be seen as the worst kind of offenders, generating the most punitive responses and being most strongly associated with the “sex offender” label. In this way, it is to be concluded that another layer should be added to Spencer’s aforementioned theory: child abusers as beyond “homo sacer”. It should also be noted that responses were indicative of a potential gender and age bias in terms of defining deviance levels.
This perceived scale of deviance was found to have implications in relation to reintegrative attitudes, with the least reintegrative support for those seen as most deviant. Notably, participants expressed a desire for rehabilitative treatment in all cases and appeared to be in favour of the implementation of community-based, social-inclusion programmes, with at least some participants agreeing to volunteer with such programmes in each scenario.
As the previous chapter noted, best practice tends to take the form of effective reintegration and community-based treatment. Therefore, these findings would suggest that there is certainly hope for Ireland in relation to tackling the issue of sex crime effectively. While public attitudes may not be exactly in line with best practice, it would seem that this feat is nigh. As policy approaches become increasingly founded on empiricism and expertise, Ireland is moving towards, what McAlinden (2012) terms, a “social-democratic” response to sex crime, and public attitudes do not seem too far behind in this respect. Attitudes supportive of community-based inclusion programmes and a commitment to the rehabilitative ideal must not be ignored, but nurtured through greater education.
Now is the time to expand on research in this area. Ireland bore the brunt of the secrecy and scandal surrounding sexual offending and abuse for many years. It is vital that a lesson is learned from this and that expertise continues to go into the development policies that are proven to work. As such, the Irish public need to be convinced to engage with best practice and achieving this will not be possible without a continuation of attitudinal research in this domain.
It is hoped that this research has laid the foundations for more in-depth explorations of public opinion and attitudes within the realm of sexual offending. The findings presented throughout have not only answered pressing questions but have posed new ones and set the stage for more detailed examinations of sexual offending as seen by the public. In particular,
48
attention should be paid to gender and age as factors in how deviance is perceived. It is believed that the knowledge gained from such investigations will not only address the lacuna that exists in this respect but will also be of benefit by way of informing policy and practice in an area which can often attract reactionary legislation and highly emotive responses.
49
References
Acton, C., Fullerton, D., Maltby, J. and Miller, R. (2009). SPSS for social scientists. (2nd ed.).UK: Palgrave MacMillan.
Akerstrom, M. (1986). Outcasts in prison: The cases of informers and sex offenders. Deviant Behaviour, 7, 1-12
Alvarez, S., Levenson, J. & Mercado, C.C. (2008). The impact of specialised sex offender legislation on community re-entry [Online]. Sex Abuse, 20(2), 188-205. DOI: 10.1177/1079063208317540.
Antonowicz, D.H., Furac, C.J. & Valliant, P.M. (1994). Attitudes towards sex offenders by female undergraduate university students enrolled in a psychology program. Social Behaviour and Personality, 22(2), 105-110.
Baker, J.N., Brannon, N.Y., Fortney, T. & Levenson, J.S. (2007). Attitudes about community notification: A comparative analysis of sexual offenders and the non-offending public [Online]. Sex Abuse, 19, 369-379. DOI: 10.1177/107906320701900403.
Baker, T.L. (1994). Doing social research. (2nd ed.). USA: McGraw-Hill.
Barlow, B.A. & Olver, M.E. (2010). Public attitudes towards sex offenders and their relationship to personality traits and demographic characteristics [Online]. Behavioural Sciences and the Law, 28, 832-849. DOI: 10.1002/bsl.959.
Bates, A. (2005). Circles of support and accountability: The first three years. London: Quaker communications. Retrieved from http://www.quaker.org.uk/files/Circles-of- support-first-3yrs.pdf
Baumer, E.P., Hughes, N. & O’Donnell, I. (2008). Recidivism in the Republic of Ireland [Online]. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 8(2), 123-146. DOI: 10.1177/1748895808088991.
Becker, H. (1963). Outsiders. In G. Hughes, E. McLaughlin and J. Muncie (Eds.), Criminological perspectives. (2nd ed.) (pp. 239-248). London: Sage.
Bernard, T.J., Snipes, J.B. & Vold, G.B. (2002). Theoretical criminology. (5th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
50
Beirne, P. & Messerschmidt, J. (1995). Criminology. (2nd ed.). London: Harcourt Brace & Company.
Ben-Yehuda, N. & Goode, E. (1994). Moral panics. The social construction of deviance. Massachusetts: Blackwell.
Benfield, J. A. & Szlemko, W.J. (2006). Internet-based data collection: Promises and realities. Journal of Research Practice, 2(2), Article D1. Retrieved from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/30/51.
Benz, C.R. & Newman, I. (1998). Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. USA: Southern Illinois University Press.
Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1991). The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Blumstein, A. & Cohen, J. (1980). Sentencing of convicted offenders: An analysis of the public’s view. Law and Society Review, 14(2), 223-261.
Bratton, J., Gertz, M., Mancini, C. & Mears, D.P. (2008). Sex crimes, children and pornography: Public views and public policy [Online]. Crime and Delinquency, 54(4), 532-559. DOI: 10.1177/0011128707308160.
Brewer, J.D. & Miller, R.L. (2003). The A-Z of social research: a dictionary of key social science research concepts. London: Sage.
Brown, S., Deakin, J. & Spencer, J. (2005). A pilot study of public attitudes towards sex offender reintegration. Final report. Manchester: IMPACT. Retrieved from
www.equal-works.com/resources/contentfiles/4193.pdf
Brown, S., Deakin, J. & Spencer, J. (2007). Barriers and opportunities to employment for sex offenders. Final report. Manchester: IMPACT. Retrieved from http://www.equal- works.com/resources/contentfiles/4194.pdf
Bryman, A. (2004). Quantity and quality in social research. London: Routledge.
Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bryman, A. & Cramer D. (2009). Constructing variables. In B. Bryman & M. Hardy (Eds.),
51
Burchfield, K.B. and Mingus, W. (2008). Not in my neighbourhood: assessing registered sex offenders’ experiences with local social capital and social control [Online]. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 35, 356-374. DOI: 10.1177/0093854807311375.
Byrne, J., Conroy, R., de Barra, M., Garavan, R. & McGee, H. (2002). The SAVI report. Sexual abuse and violence in Ireland. Dublin: Liffey Press and The Rape Crisis Centre. Retrieved from http://www.drcc.ie/about/savi.pdf
Capron, T. & McCaghy, C. (1994). Deviant behavior: Crime, conflict, and interest groups (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan College Publishing.
Central Statistics Office. (2012). Recorded Crime. Quarter 4 2011. Dublin: CSO. Retrieved from
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/crimejustice/2011/re cordedcrime_q42011.pdf
Centre for Sex Offender Management. (2010). Exploring public awareness and attitudes about sex offender management: Findings from a national public opinion poll. US Department of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.csom.org/pubs/CSOM- Exploring%20Public%20Awareness.pdf
Clarke (2011). Feasibility study into circles of support and accountability (COSA) for Ireland. Final report. Dublin: Probation Service. Retrieved from
http://www.probation.ie/pws/websitepublishingdec09.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/Feasibili ty+study+into+circles+of+support+and+accountability+for+Ireland+/$FILE/COSA+Fe asibility+Report.pdf
Clemmer, D. (1958). The prison community. New York: Rinehart & Company.
Cohen, S. (2002). Folk devils and moral panics. The creation of the mods and rockers. (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Coombes, H. (2001). Research using IT. Basingstoke: Palgrave. COSC. (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.cosc.ie/en/COSC/Document%20in%20DRAFT%203rd%20Progress%20Re port%20on%20National%20Strategy%2020-05-
52
11.pdf/Files/Document%20in%20DRAFT%203rd%20Progress%20Report%20on%20 National%20Strategy%2020-05-11.pdf
Cotter, L.C. & Levenson, J.S. (2005). The impact of sex offender residence restrictions: 1000 feet from danger or one step from absurd? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49(2), 168-178.
Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Crossman, A.M. & Kutateladze, B. (2009). An exploratory analysis of gender differences in punitiveness in two countries [Online]. International Criminal Justice Review, 19(3), 322-343. DOI: 10.1177/1057567709338921.
Curry, J. (2003). Irish social services. (4th ed.) Dublin: Institute of Public Administration. Death Penalty Information Centre. (2012). Death penalty for offences other than murder.
Washington: DPIC. Retrieved from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-penalty- offenses-other-murder
Denscombe, M. (2010). The good research guide for small -scale social research projects. (4th ed.). England: McGraw-Hill.
Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government. (2008). The way home: A strategy to address adult homelessness in Ireland 2008-2013. Retrieved from
http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/DevelopmentandHousing/Housing/FileDownLo ad,18192,en.pdf
Department of Justice. (2009). The management of sex offenders. A discussion document. Retrieved from
http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/JELR/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf/Files/FINAL%20REPORT.p df
Department of Justice and Law Reform. (2009). Summary of views received on discussion document on the management of sex offenders. Retrieved from
http://www.cosc.ie/en/COSC/Summary%20of%20views%20Received%20on%20Mana gement%20of%20Sex%20Offenders.pdf/Files/Summary%20of%20views%20Received %20on%20Management%20of%20Sex%20Offenders.pdf
53
Edwards, W. & Hensley, C. (2001). Contextualizing sex offender management legislation and policy: Evaluating the problem of latent consequences in community notification laws. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45, 83-101.
Embry, R. & Lyons, P.M. (2012). Sex-based sentencing: Sentencing discrepancies between male and female sex offenders. Feminist Criminology, 7(2), 146-162.
Extern. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.extern.org/Circles-of-Support--Accountability- 6611.html
Farkas, M. A. & Zevitz, R. (2000). The law enforcement role in sex offender community notification: A research note. Journal of Crime and Justice, 23, 125-139.
Field, A.P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS: (and sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll). (3rd ed.). Los Angeles; London: Sage.
Freeman-Longo, R. (1996). Prevention or problem? Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 8, 2.
French, L.A. & Wailes, S.N. (1982). Perceptions of sexual deviance. A bi-racial analysis [Online]. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 26, 242-249. DOI: 10.1177/0306624X8202600306.
Friendship, C. & Thornton, D. (2001). Sexual reconviction for sex offenders released from prison in England and Wales: Implications for evaluating treatment. British Journal of Criminology, 41(2) 285–92.
Genders, E and Player, E. (1989) Race Relations in Prison. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Gomm, R. (2004). Social research methodology: a critical introduction. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Grace, R. & Willis, G.M. (2008). The quality of community reintegration planning for child molesters: Effects on sexual recidivism [Online]. Sex Abuse, 20(2), 218-240. DOI: 10.1177/1079063208318005.
Griffin, L. (2010). Megan’s law and Sarah’s law: A comparative study of sex offender community notification schemes in the United States and the United Kingdom. New York: Pace University. Retrieved from
54 http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1749&context=lawfaculty &sei- redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.ie%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%2 6q%3Dsarah%2527s%2Blaw%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D19%26ved%3D0CGUQF jAIOAo%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fdigitalcommons.pace.edu%252Fcgi%25 2Fviewcontent.cgi%253Farticle%253D1749%2526context%253Dlawfaculty%26ei%3 Dr1SET- asDommhAeVy_CxCA%26usg%3DAFQjCNGCNT5XGJx2ueuyos6Yd8yqpK- Dmw#search=%22sarahs%20law%22
Hall, D. & Hall, I. (2004). Evaluation and social research. Introducing small-scale practice. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Hanson, R.K., & Harris, A.J.R. (1998). Dynamic predictors of sexual recidivism. Ottawa, Canada:Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
Hanson, R.K., & Harris, A.J.R. (2001). A structured approach to evaluating change among sexualoffenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research & Treatment, 13(2), 105-122. Hanson, R.K. Harris, A.J.R. (2004). Sex offender recidivism: A simple question. (UserReport
2004-03).Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.
Hogg, M.A. & Vaughan, G. (1995). Social psychology: An introduction. London: Prentice Hall/Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Irish Penal Reform Trust. (2007). Public opinion poll on attitudes to prison. Dublin: Irish Penal Reform Trust. Retrieved from
http://www.iprt.ie/files/IPRT_TNS_MRBI_Poll.pdf
Jeglic, E.L and Schiavone, S.K. (2009). Public perception of sex offender social policies and the impact on sex offenders [Online]. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 53, 679-695. DOI: 10.1177/0306624X08323454.
Keenan, M. (2012). Child sexual abuse and the Catholic church. Gender, power and organizational culture. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kennedy, M. & O’Caollaí, E. (2010, July 7). Council takes sex offenders off housing list. The Irish Times. Retrieved from
55
Kent, G. (2000). Ethical principles. In D. Burton (Ed.), Research training for social scientists (pp. 61-67). London: SAGE.
Kitzinger, J. (1999). The ultimate neighbour from hell? Stranger danger and the media framing of paedophiles. In B. Franklin (Ed.), Social policy, the media and misrepresentation (pp. 207-221). London: Routledge.
Lappi-Seppala, T. (2007). Penal policy in Scandinavia. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime, punishment and politics in comparative perspective (pp.217-296). USA: The University of Chicago Press.
Lewin, C. and Somekh, B. (2011). Theory and methods in research. (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Lundstrom, F. (2002). The development of a new multi-disciplinary sex offender
rehabilitation programme for the Irish prison service. Dublin: Irish Prison Service.
Retrieved from http://www.iprt.ie/files/sex_offerder_programme.pdf
May, T. (2011). Social research. (4th ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Maxwell, G. & Morris, A. (1999). Understanding re-offending, Wellington: Institute of Criminology, Victoria University of Washington.
McAlinden, A. (2012). The governance of sexual offending across Europe: Penal policies, political economies and the institutionalization of risk. Punishment and Society, 14(2), 166-192.
McAvoy, J. (2011). Can a perceived decline in social and moral values be linked to individual punitiveness? (Unpublished undergraduate dissertation). DIT, Dublin. McCorkle, R.C. (1993). Punish and rehabilitate? Public attitudes toward six common crimes.
Crime and Delinquency, 39(2), 240-252.
McFarland, S.G. (1981). Effects of question order on survey responses. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 45(2), 208-215.
McGhee, M. (2008). Two strikes and you’re dead: Public opinion on capital punishment for sex offenders. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Oklahoma. Norman, Oklahoma. Retrieved from
56
http://books.google.ie/books?id=f2Yupu0FR4EC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge _summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Meloy, M.L. (2005). The sex offender nextdoor: an analysis of recidivism, risk factors and deterrence of sex offenders on probation [Online]. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 16, 211-236. DOI: 10.1177/0887403404270601.
Miethe, T.D. & Schaffer, D.K. (2011). Are similar sex offenders treated similarly? A conjunctive analysis of disparities in community notification decisions [Online].
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 48(3), 448-471. DOI: 10.1177/0022427810393017
Miller, R. & O’Leary, R. (2003). Questionnaires and structured interview schedules. In J.D. Brewer & R.L. Miller (Eds.), The a-z of social research (pp. 253-255). London: SAGE.
Morton, A. (2010). Public perceptions of criminal justice responses towards sex offenders and the impact that parenthood has upon these. HCS Student Journal. (Published dissertation). Retrieved from http://www.cjp.org.uk/student-journal/published- dissertations/anna-morton/
National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA). (1999). Sex offender registration and notification: Problem avoidance and barriers to implementation & Sex Offender Registration and Notification Costs Survey results. Washington, DC: National Criminal Justice Association.
Nestor, J. (2009). Law of child care. (2nd ed.). Dublin: Blackhall Publishing.
O’Connell, M. (1999). Is Irish public opinion towards crime distorted by media bias? [Online]. European Journal of Communication, 14(2), 191-212. DOI: 10.1177/0267323199014002003.
O’Donnell, I. and O’Sullivan, E. (2003). The politics of intolerance-Irish style. British Journal of Criminology. 43, 41-62.
O’Malley, T. (2008). The ends of sentence: imprisonment and early release decisions in Ireland. Paper delivered at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, June 2008 and due for publication in in Padfield, van Zyl Smith and Dünkel (eds), Tom O'Malley, Release
57
from Prison: European Policy and Practice (Willan Publishing, UK, January 2010). Retrieved from www.irishsentencing.ie/en/ISIS/...doc/Files/Parole%20Paper.doc
Peter, T. (2006). Mad or bad? Making sense of mother-daughter sexual abuse [Online]. Feminist Criminology, 1(4), 283-302. DOI: 10.1177/1557085106292779.
Petrunik, M.G. (2002). Managing unacceptable risk: Sex offenders, community response and social policy in the United States and Canada [Online]. International Journal of
Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 46, 483-511. DOI: 10.1177/0306624X02464009.
Petrunik, M.G. and Deutshmann, L. (2008). The exclusion-inclusion spectrum in state and community response to sex offenders in Anglo-American and European jurisdictions [Online]. International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology, 52(5), 499-519. DOI: 10.1177/0306624X07308108.
Picheca, J.E., Prinzo, M., & Wilson, R.J. (2005). Circles of support and accountability: An evaluation of the pilot project in South-Central Ontario. Canada: Correctional Service of Canada. Retrieved from http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/reports/r168/r168_e.pdf
Robbers, M.L.P. (2009). Lifers on the outside: Sex offenders and disintegrative shaming [Online]. International Journal of Offender therapy and Comparative Criminology, 53(1), 5-28. DOI: 10.1177/0306624X07312953.
Roché, S. (2007). Criminal justice policy in France: Illusions of severity. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime, punishment and politics in comparative perspective (pp.471-550). USA: The University of Chicago Press.
RTE News (2012, April 3). Call for Arbour Hill sex offender treatment programme to be extended, RTE News. Retrieved from http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0402/105-prisoners- in-sex-offenders-treatment-programme.html
Sapsford, R. (2006). Data collection and analysis. (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications in association with the Open University.
Sapsford, R. & Wilson, M. (2006). Survey Research. London: Sage.