Justice experts say sex offender registry ruins a juvenile's 2nd chance - Dallas Morning News

Justice experts say sex offender registry ruins a juvenile's 2nd chance

By DIANE JENNINGS / The Dallas Morning News
djennings@dallasnews.com

The faces of child sex offenders are startling – chubby cheeks, big eyes, a mop of hair, or wispy strands held back with barrettes. The descriptions on Texas' public registry are equally jolting: 4 feet tall, 65 pounds; 4 feet, 2 inches, 70 pounds.

"Those are not the people that we're walking around terrified of," says Michele Deitch, a University of Texas law professor.

The inclusion of children as young as 10 on the state's public sex offender registry is a little-known policy – even to juvenile justice experts such as Deitch.

"I'm absolutely a little bit shocked that kids that young can be on the list," says Deitch, who teaches juvenile justice policy at the LBJ School of Public Affairs.

She's stunned because public registration contradicts the purpose of juvenile justice: to give kids a second chance. In the case of some juvenile sex offenders, their criminal records are off limits, but information about their crime is easily accessible on the Internet.

"It is a terrible situation," Deitch says. "The juvenile justice system is designed to rehabilitate kids and to make sure that they can change."

According to the Texas Department of Public Safety, there is no minimum age for inclusion on the state list. But a child must be at least 10 to be handled by the state juvenile justice system, so a judge may order an offender that young to register. [...]

| News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Breaking News for Dallas-Fort Worth | Dallas Morning News

More

Abandoned to the State

Abandoned to the State

Thank you to Parental Rights for Up-To-Date Court Rulings

Did you know that your rights as a parent end at the door to your child’s public school?

When our child goes to public school, we, as parents abandon [our] responsibility to the state.”

[...]
District of Massachusetts in that case held that “Parents do have a fundamental right to raise their children. They are not required to abandon that responsibility to the state. [They] may send their children to a private school…. They may also educate their children at home.” In other words, the court outlined three options for parents: [1] send your child to private school, [2] teach them at home, or [3] “abandon [your] responsibility to the state.”

The court further held that allowing students to opt out of offensive materials “might also undermine the [school’s] efforts to educate the remaining other students to understand” the subject being taught.

In 2008, the Supreme Court refused to grant review to this case, leaving the District Court’s decision to stand as precedent nationwide. Parents who believe they have a right to opt a child out of offensive material in the public school, therefore, should think again; the courts have already decided otherwise. (Read more on this case here.

The proposed Parental Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution will restore the responsibility of all government institutions (including public schools) to treat parental rights as a fundamental right. As a result, these rights will have to be respected even inside the school, and not evaporate at the front door."


Take action now to restore this and other reasonable rights of parents by signing the petitionto support the Parental Rights Amendment.

Reference:
Abandoned to the state. Parental Rights. Retrieved with permission on October 8, 2010 at http://parentalrightsus.org/parker/
[Emphasis added]