Loathing the sinner, medicalizing the sin: Why sexually violent predator statutes are unjust

Douard, John

doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2006.04.004

Cited by 19 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This view is consistent with prior research showing that agreement to substitute jail sentence with community service was negatively correlated with anger, a main determinant of retributive actions (Feather, Boeckmann, & McKee, 2001). Requiring sexual offenders to register may be viewed as a shaming policy (Douard, 2007), seemingly with the main purpose of retaliation against such a blatant violation of community norms. Incarceration, finally, both removes the offender from society and serves the function of retribution (Carlsmith et al, 2002).…”

Section: Moral Violations and Punishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delineating the Influence of Emotion and Reason on Morality and Punishment

Olatunji

Puncochar

2014

Review of General Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present article examines the available literature on the association between emotion, conscious reasoning, morality, and punishment. Although conscious reasoning has traditionally been implicated in moral judgment, contemporary research suggests that emotions play a primary role in moral judgment. This article reviews the different lines of evidence supporting the role of emotion in moral decision-making. Disgust seems to be unique from other emotions in its ability to influence moral judgment. Immorality often elicits disgust, individuals sensitive to experiencing disgust tend to make more severe moral judgments, and experimental disgust inductions can influence judgments about moral violations. However, the extent to which the emotion-moral judgment association extends to decisions about punishment remains unclear. This review considers various concepts, including moral outrage, responsibility, and blameworthiness that may influence the extent to which emotion informs punishment decisions. The implications of these findings for current thinking on morality and punishment, and future directions for research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Moral Violations and Punishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delineating the Influence of Emotion and Reason on Morality and Punishment

Olatunji

Puncochar

2014

Review of General Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the same time, the fact that those committed under SVP statutes are virtual outcasts (Douard, 2007) does not excuse testimony lacking in rigor and clinical modesty. In the absence of aggressive judicial gate keeping, mental health professionals serving as experts must police themselves.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Because They Do Horrible Things: Fear, Science, and the Erosion of Civil Liberties in Sexually Violent Predator Proceedings

Petrila¹

2008

The Journal of Psychiatry & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United States Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of statutes that permit the indefinite confinement of individuals adjudicated sexually violent predators (SVP). Judicial decisions rejecting a number of challenges to such statutes have occurred against the backdrop of a broader abandonment by the courts of a rights-based approach to mental health law. The fundamental issue that determines whether an individual will be confined under SVP statutes, and if so, for how long, is whether the individual presents a future risk of violence to others. Although the courts have the authority to reject such testimony from mental health professionals, they rarely do so. As a result, SVP hearings are sometimes marked by testimony that overstates the scientific utility of the risk instruments on which it is based; confuses probabilistic with individual likelihood of future risk; and characterizes certain individuals as untreatable as a matter of scientific fact rather than opinion. The result is the erosion of individual liberties and ultimately the credibility of testimony on future risk.

show abstract

“…Indeed, contrary to prevailing notions about sexual offenders, they are generally not high recidivists when compared with other types of offenders (Zimring, Piquero, & Jennings, 2007; see also Tewksbury et al, 2012). Furthermore, in contrast to the notion of “stranger danger,” the vast majority of sex offenders are relatives, family friends, or neighbors of their victims (Douard, 2007; Janus, 2006). Without question, SVPs are the most serious types of sex offenders, and they represent a distinct societal concern.…”

Section: Literature On Sex Offenders and Svpsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responding to Sex Offenders

Bersot

Arrigo

2014

Criminal Justice and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The science examining institutional and community-based responses to sexual offending has been well documented. The responses to this form of criminal behavior include penal incarceration followed by civil commitment, community notification, and sex offender registration. To date, evidence-based findings report that these correctives and/or curatives yield limited effectiveness sufficient to justify their continued maintenance as statewide or even national criminal justice and mental health policy prescription. One official systems-level way that policy receives legitimacy is through the Courts. Interestingly, the precedent-setting sex offender case law indicates that current policy prescriptions are constitutionally permissible and therefore justifiable as regulatory practices, notwithstanding the empirical evidence that challenges their soundness. This article summarizes the science regarding sex offender policy from the point of imprisonment to reentry, recounts the relevant case law that judicially sanctions such institutional and community practices, and explains how the driver for sex offender law and policy is legal moralism grounded in and advanced by utilitarian reasoning and duty-based logic. This article concludes by suggesting how judicial reliance on legal moralism could further the interests of public safety and civil liberties if insights from virtue jurisprudence informed the analysis.

show abstract

Loathing the sinner, medicalizing the sin: Why sexually violent predator statutes are unjust

Cited by 19 publications

References 0 publications

Delineating the Influence of Emotion and Reason on Morality and Punishment

Delineating the Influence of Emotion and Reason on Morality and Punishment

Because They Do Horrible Things: Fear, Science, and the Erosion of Civil Liberties in Sexually Violent Predator Proceedings

Responding to Sex Offenders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About