The problem of what to do with the habitual sex offender has become a major issue in American society today and of vital interest in a society where the pictures of missing children adorn milk cartons, where more and more offenses against children are being reported in the media, and where the issue of repeat offenders has become a scandal. A number of children have been killed in recent years in media-featured cases where a sex offender who has been released from prison at the end of his sentence takes and kills another victim. Different states have imposed new laws and restrictions on sex offenders as a result, and one of the issues that has developed is the question of notification, whether the neighbors of a released sex offender should be told that the offender is in their midst. Traditionally, parole or release from prison has been a matter kept between the offender and his or her parole officer and the state, and the people in the community are not told where released sex offenders are living. The notoriety of some recent cases has produced a change in the climate, with the public now demanding to be told when a sex offender is living in the community. Arguments have been offered on both sides, and the issue has to be seen finally as one of balance. No one can know that a sex offender will or will not commit another offense, but members of the community want to take extra precautions to protect their children when they know an offender is nearby. The issue is a balance of rights, the rights of the released person against the rights of potential victims. The decision has to be made on this basis.
The argument for notification is clear--parents want to protect their children from potential harm by knowing that sex offenders are nearby so they can warn their children and take extra precautions. Precisely what precautions they might take is an important question that proponents of these laws often fail to answer. Atten...