Sex-offender registries: Should kids be listed?

[shawn703]

NEW YORK (AP) — Government authorities should end the practice of placing juveniles' names on publicly accessible sex-offender registries, Human Rights Watch says in a report warning of lasting and unwarranted harm to some youths.

Some law enforcement officials and victims' rights advocates agree the current registry system is flawed and support steps to allow more discretion in juvenile offenders' cases. Offenses triggering inclusion on the registries can range widely — from rape to consensual sex between children to "sexting" of photos that depict nudity or sexual activity.

"You've got to create a system that keeps the public safe but does not stigmatize a young person for the rest of their life," said Mai Fernandez, a former prosecutor who is executive director of the National Center for Victims of Crime.

Human Rights Watch said its report, being released Wednesday, is the most comprehensive examination to date of the impact that registry laws have on juvenile sex offenders.


Read more:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/01/sex-offender-registries/2125699/

[el_bryanto]

1. well if sexting can get you on that list - that's a pretty low bar to climb

I kind of think that it makes sense - but on the other hand a minor who commits rape is still someone who has committed rape.

Bryant

[Pelican]

3. That is exactly it...

The problem is not putting out names of any age. It is with what is currently defined as a sex offender..

[riqster]

2. A blanket solution either way is wrong.

Some juvenile sex offenses are truly egregious, and the perp needs to be designated for the public good.

But sexting, passing notes, flirting? C'mon.

[geek tragedy]

4. stigmatizing rapists as sex offenders, oh the horror.

If an offense is egregious enough to warrant inclusion on the sex offenders list, then yes potential victims of the sexual predator deserve notice so they can protect themselves.