I am commenting as the father of a young man who is required to register every 90 days for the rest of his life. He is required to do this even though two evaluations, one by the state and one independent, found him to represent a very low chance of reoffending. However, due to the arbitrary and non-objective tiering used in Ohio, my son faces a lifetime of state surveillance, with no opportunity for removal from the registry. We know that these registries do not work as purported. We know that over 90% of sexual offenses are committed by someone not on the registry. We know that the recidivism rate for people on the registry is around 5%, which is remarkable when one considers all of obstacles that registrants must overcome. We know that maintaining these registries are costly to local authorities and that many of them resent the additional burden of insuring compliance with something that doesn’t work.

When reading these proposed rules, I get the feeling that the authors don’t see the registrant as a human being. They don’t seem to recognize that when that human being pays their price to society, that they should not be subject to an inhumane,invasive and ineffective system of state surveillance. We claim to be a country of second chances and new beginnings, but regulations such as these show that to be a hollow promise when it comes to human beings required to register.

(17 / 1)
The opinions expressed within posts and comments are solely those of each author, and are not necessarily those of Women Against Registry. Women Against Registry reserves the right to edit or delete any content submitted.
Leave a comment.