Experiences and Attitudes of Registered Female Sex Offenders.

By R. Tewksbury. 2004

136 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ae680178473218143854808549d6e88b06dcad3c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Assessing the Impact of Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification On Sex-Offending Trajectories (2010, unknown): “…of family and social relationships, public shaming, and in some instances, violence (Levenson, 2008; Levenson & Cotter, 2005; Levenson, D’Amora, & Hern, 2007; Levenson & Tewksbury, 2009; Mustaine et al., 2006a, 2006b; Tewksbury, 2004, 2005; Tewksbury & Lees, 2006; Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2006, 2007).”
AN EXAMINATION OF THE SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION AND NOTIFICATION ACT AS APPLIED TO JUVENILES Evaluating the Ability to Predict Sexual Recidivism (2008, background): “…consequences for the registrant that include impeding employment and housing, disrupting supportive relationships, and subjecting the registrant to social harassment and rejection (Levenson, 2003; Levenson & Cotter, 2005a, 2005b; Redlich, 2001; Tewksbury, 2002, 2004, 2005; Zevitz & Farkas, 2000).”
Public Perceptions About Sex Offenders and Community Protection Policies (2007, background): “Another oft-cited concern is the potential for notification to create unintended consequences that interfere with offender reintegration by limiting opportunities for housing, employment, and social support (Levenson, 2003; Levenson & Cotter, 2005; Levenson et al., 2006; Petersilia, 2003; Tewksbury,”
Sex Offender Residence Restrictions: Unintended Consequences and Community Reentry (2007, background): “Indeed, a growing body of research indicates that sex offender registration and community notification can interfere with community reentry and adjustment (Levenson & Cotter, 2005a; Levenson, D’Amora, & Hern, 2007; Sample & Streveler, 2003; Tewksbury, 2004; Tewksbury, 2005; Tewksbury & Lees, 2006; Z”
Residential location and mobility of registered sex offenders (2006, background): “As both Tewksbury and Mustaine (in press) and Walker, Golden, and VanHouten (2001) have shown, significant numbers of RSOs live within close proximity to schools, day care centers and parks/playgrounds.”
Where to Find Sex Offenders: An Examination of Residential Locations and Neighborhood Conditions (2006, background): “These negative consequences may include increased collateral consequences, including difficulties securing housing (see Tewksbury, 2004, 2005; Zevitz & Farkas, 2000), isolation, financial and emotional stresses, and decreased residential stability.”
Stigmatization of Sex Offenders (2012, background): “…relationships, employment, housing, and mental health (Levenson 2011; Levenson and Cotter 2005; Levenson et al. 2007; Levenson and Hern 2007; Mercado et al. 2008; Mustaine and Tewksbury 2011, 2006; Mustaine et al. 2006; Tewksbury 2004, 2005; Tewksbury and Lees 2006, 2007; Tewksbury and Zgoba 2010).”
PERCEPTIONS OF SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION: COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES AND COMMUNITY EXPERIENCES (2006, background): “Only three studies have gathered data directly from sex offenders in the community, typically relying on survey data (Sack and Mason 1980; Tewksbury 2004, 2005), with these having sample sizes of 121 or less and response rates of 15%–20%.”
Collateral Damage: Family Members of Registered Sex Offenders (2009, background): “A growing body of research has highlighted the adverse effects of SORN laws for sex offenders in Kentucky (Mustaine et al. 2006; Tewksbury 2004; Tewksbury and Lees 2006), Connecticut (Levenson et al.”
Sexual victimization perpetrated by women: Federal data reveal surprising prevalence (2017, background): “One five-state study of sex offender registries found that between 0.8% and 3% of those on registries are female (Tewksbury, 2004); others have found fewer than 2% on registries are female (Sandler & Freeman, 2009; Vandiver & Kercher, 2004).”