Halloween, safety and sex offenders
Efforts by Maryland parole and probation officials to protect trick-or-treaters from sexual predators is lauditory. Agents plan to check up on convicted offenders to make sure they follow the rules -- stay inside, keep their lights out and hang a sing on their door that says, "No candy at this residence."
There is a new twist. The once bland sign is now adorned with a picture of a pumpkin.
The head of parole and probation, Patrick McGee, said he was caught off guard by criticism of the pumpkin. Will it attract kids intstead of keep them away? Will it provoke strange questions by children confused at what could be construed as a mixed message?
Dr. Fred Berlin, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins University and director of the National Institute for the study of prevention and treatment of sexual trauma, believes that the signs, with or without pumpkins, could cause unnecessary hysteria.
Berlin said the overwhelming majority of sexual offenders do not go after strangers, but family members and friends, and then only after building a relationship that results in sex. Rarely, he said, do offenders go after "a child who has just knocked on the door."
My gut reaction is why give a sex offender the chance to meet -- and possibly start a relationship -- with a child in the first place?
Berlin said he isn't knocking law enforcement for trying to protect children from sex offenders, he just thinks that too many resources go into initiatives such as the Halloween crackdown at the expense of protecting kids from other crimes: like older youths stealing or attacking younger kids out on Halloween night.
"We have to protect children," Berlin said. "But do we want to do it in a way that stigmatizes and embarrasses a group of people when it doesn't serve any useful purpose and begs the question why?"
I'd love to hear what parents and parental advocates think? Is it better to be safe than sorry? Does we even care about stigmatizing a convicted sex offender, or does making them put up a sign raise more questions than answers?
Here is the letter the state has sent to violent and child sex offenders, as well as some tips from authorities on having a safe Halloween:
Comments
1. Is it lawful to compel and individual to display personal information on the front of a private residence? Because of the standardized design of the sign, it doesn't MEAN no candy here, it MEANS sex offender lives here. The last time a potentially hated class of people had to signal their occupation of a specific private residence was when the Nazis made Jews put Yellow stars of their doors. Ever since i could remember, if an individual wished to not participate in trick or treat, he turned the porch light off, maybe left a personal note, and went to bed early. This does nothing but to identify RSO's and you're going to end up with bricks through peoples windows.
2. Did it ever occur to anyone that children can't read? The sign is a BIG ORANGE PUMPKIN, which to a six year old looks like an invitation.
This is at best, woefully ill-conceived, probably unconstitutional for one reason or another because the symbol of the pumpkin flat out says "Hey! sex offender here" , and because of the universal use of that sign, smacks of Nazi Germany forcing Jews to put the star of David on their door and the concomitant abuse from displaying such a universally recognized symbol.
I heard about this on Saturday Night Live, and right now I am really embarrassed to live in this state.
Matthew Williams
Posted by: Matthew Williams | October 29, 2008 8:03 AM
I disagree with not "calling attention" to where sex offenders live. People in the community should know where sex offenders live on Halloween, the day after Halloween, Christmas and forever. Sex offenders have an opportunity to strike 365 days. Our children, who are old enough to go out without a parent, should have a clear sign of where not to go.
Posted by: Mrs. Cephus | October 29, 2008 9:10 AM
Mr. Williams, thanks so much for you comment. I too raised some of your very questions with state officials. They said that in the two years they've mandated signs, no offenders' house has been targeted. We'll see if that remains true with the pumpkins.
As far as I can tell, it is legal for them to mandate the signs. Offenders on parole and probatioin are still wards of the state, and are subject to many restrictions.
I do agree that the pumpkin could attract children -- but also children that young should be out with their parents. I think the best thing would be to require the offenders to keep their house dark, no decorations, no lights, and that's a clear signal that the occupants are not participating in halloween
Posted by: Peter Hermann | October 29, 2008 9:11 AM
thats just sad that we have so many sex offenders in our neighborhood
Posted by: kearaburrell | October 29, 2008 1:20 PM
Many people choose not to participate in Halloween, and not to give out candy. The signs do not stigmatize sex offenders. Anyone that does not give out candy can use a sign to not have to answer thier door every five minutes. When I was a kid, a porch light turned on meant there was candy, if the porch light was turned off, we wouldn't even knock at the door.
Posted by: Mindy | October 31, 2008 6:28 PM