Relevance of Sex Offender, Dissertation Chapter – Literature Example

Mexican Americans – Overview

As stated earlier, the Hispanic population has shown the most significant cultural growth according to census results over the past ten years (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). The group, although some self-defined as Latino and some self-defined as Hispanic, is often referred to by either name and the names are often interchanged as they will likely be throughout this paper. With that being said, however, depending on the geographic location of each particular group of Mexican Americans, often the location itself will depend upon how they prefer to classify themselves. Even while many descendent of Mexico are now born in the United States, 62 percent still identify themselves as being Mexican rather than simply ‘American’ (Kivisto & Ng, 2005).

Mexican Americans tend to adjust better to the demands of society if they are surrounded by more familiarity, specifically, other families of Mexican or Mexican American descent. This allows them to hold on to historically views cultures and traditions that were practiced before immigration to the United States and also support one another emotionally when dealing with the stress of acculturation and limited financial resources (Benson, 2003; Englekirk & Marín, 2012). Also, this emotional support helps families who cannot afford healthcare or choose not to trust the medicine practiced by western physicians.

Historically, Mexican families were more reliant on homeopathy and natural remedies to cure illnesses and entrusted their lives to those who were knowledgeable in this area of practice (Englekirk & Marín, 2012). This was passed from generation to generation through the Mexican culture. After immigration to the United States, much of the homeopathic medicinal practices still remain; however, they are now intermingled with western medicine when the families have the ability and are willing to visit a physician. While some families are able to visit physicians now, many families still do rely on the homeopathic remedies because of lack of insurance and low monetary sources (Englekirk & Marín, 2012). It is much easier to acquire herbs and make homemade concoctions than visit a physician and obtain a prescription for a medication that is very expensive and may or may not treat the entire problem with one visit to the physician. Also, in Mexico, prescriptions are normally handled over the counter and this is much different from that of the United State. This has taken an adjustment for many families and has not been something with an easy transition (Englekirk & Marín, 2012).

The structure of the Mexican American family is quite different than that of a Caucasian or African American family. There is an average of four to five persons in a normal sized home and many times this will include grandparents, aunts, uncles, parents, children, or other family members not usually associated with those living in the home of someone in another culture (Kivisto & Ng, 2005). The family is a patriarchal one and the woman’s place is in the home unless there is extreme economic distress and she is forced to work in order to provide for the family. She is considered, historically, to remain submissive to her spouse and much of this has not changed drastically throughout the last several decades (Kivisto & Ng, 2005).

Historically, it has not been encouraged for the female children of Mexican Americans to attend college; a high school education has been sufficient. Some modern Mexican Americans are challenging this now because they realize without a college education there is a lower chance of earning higher wages and being able to support one’s family (Falcon & Gilbarg). Slowly, we are seeing this transition take place. Even now, new immigrants will search for a distant family member in order to establish some sort of unity so there is a support network while they are attempting to adapt to the culture shock of the American way of life (Benson, 2003).

The majority of immigration to the United States is for economic opportunities and in pursuit of the American dream. Even so, many Mexican Americans must overcome many obstacles in order to obtain this dream because of the economic and social hindrances set forth by society (Falcon & Gilbarg). The majority of Mexican Americans do not attend college and many do not graduate from high school, causing a dissonance in relation to their ability to obtain jobs that will support their families and ensure their ability to climb the career ladder in order to gain job stability over the course of their career lifetime. Many do not have health insurance and the majority of Mexican Americans live at or below the federal poverty line (Falcon & Gilbarg). It is because of many of these reasons combined with the stress of acclimating to the cultural differences of the new society in which they reside that some Mexican Americans turn to alcohol use as a means to escape the confines of daily life in a poverty stricken situation (Blume, Resor, Villanueva, & Braddy, 2009).

Alcohol Use Among Mexican Americans

Blume et al. (2009) published a study using a community model to examine the correlation between the use of alcohol, acculturation, lack of hope, anxiety, and trauma in 100 residents of a Mexican community. They anticipated a significant amount of comorbidity between the factors and that the comorbidity would be further increased proportionate to the amount of alcohol consumed. Historically, Mexican American adults have been known to be at a higher risk than the rest of the population for alcohol related problems according to the National Epidemiological Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. They reported a prevalence rate of alcoholism in an average of 4% of Mexican Americans during the years 2001-2002 (Blume, Resor, Villanueva, & Braddy, 2009).

Various other studies were also reported in the article by Blume et al. (2009), but the basis of these studies was similar. The hopelessness among Mexican Americans due to socioeconomic factors such as living conditions, poor wages, and an overall poor lifestyle has been known to be a large contributor to depression and this has been believed to help lead to a lifestyle of drinking and alcoholism. This is not surprising when one views firsthand the conditions of poverty that Mexican Americans experience in the United States on a daily basis (Gonzales, et al., 2011). These immigrants come to the United States for a better life and work in ‘better’ conditions only to live in low socioeconomic neighborhoods that are ridden with crime, drugs, and violence. If a family lives in these conditions on a daily basis, works and attempts to make a better life only to find themselves barely getting by, it is almost understandable why they will feel hopelessness and anxiety. All of these factors will combine and contribute to alcoholism in the Mexican American population (Ehlers, Gilder, Criado, & Caetano, 2009).

As many as 27% of the Mexican American women and 20% of the Mexican American men interview actually met the criteria for an anxiety disorder during the study conducted by Blume and associates (2009). This anxiety along with an increased use in alcohol eventually causes dependence and Mexican Americans reportedly relate these issues to the acculturation, social disadvantages, racial and ethnic stigmas encountered as being a minority group in the United States (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). No matter the reason behind the dependence, this alcohol abuse is a large problem and leads to even more significant issues if individuals spiral further out of control (Chartier & Caetano, 2010).

Sex Offenders- Overview

Many of the crimes committed by adults and juveniles in the United States are the result of problems that have spiraled out of control, first caused by things such as drugs and/or alcohol abuse and exacerbated due to other anxiety related issues in the home or workplace. Unfortunately, one group is sex offenders. There are an estimated 747,408 sex offenders in the United States today according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (Number of registered sex offenders in the US nears three- quarters of a million, 2012). This includes every sex offender act from accessing child pornography to voyeurism to the actual molestation of a child. It encompasses every category and often this is a problem for those offenders who might not be pedophiles. Still, they are placed on the same list and privy to many of the same mandates as the rest of the sex offenders in other categories.

Some citizens have questioned whether it was fair to ‘lump’ all of the offenders into the same category and go to such extremes to alert the community when an offender moves into the neighborhood. These offenders face huge repercussions from society due to the mistakes they made in the past and most are attempting to adjust to life as best as they can. The laws, however, were put into place to protect those children who were hurt by pedophiles interested in committing the worst sex offenses possible.

In 1994, the Jacob Wetterling Crimes against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Action of 1994 brought about a formal method of registering sex offenders in state databases throughout the nation. These registries were adapted through federal legislation that allowed the inclusion of an offender’s demographics, place of residency, and description of offenses. The offenders were required to remain on the list for a minimum of ten years unless certain offenses had been committed and those offenders were required to maintain a listing on the registry for a lifetime. All states were mandated to comply with this legislation (Tewksbury & Lees, Perceptions of punishment: How registered sex offenders view registries, 2007).

Megan’s Law, which was passed in 1996, is the law that ensures the public release of certain information pertaining to sexual offenders. This federal legislation was further enhanced with the addition of the Pam Lynchner Sex Offender Tracking and Identification Act, which gives the FBI the authority to maintain a nationwide database of sex offenders who are released from prison and also mandates the lifetime registration for reoffenders and first time offenders who commit certain specific types of crimes. It was the hope in 1996 that the formation of these two protocols would increase the public’s awareness of sex offenders and ensure the safety of the community’s children (Tewksbury & Lees, Perceptions of punishment: How registered sex offenders view registries, 2007). Megan’s Law has had a positive impact in making communities aware when a sex offender is moving into the neighborhood (Levenson & Cotter, 2005).

Sex Offender Treatment

Although the reasoning behind the implementation of these laws and statutes were a positive thing for those hardcore criminals who committed numerous offenses and were known to be nomadic in nature, not every sex offender can be classified in that particular category. Unfortunately, for those offenders who committed crimes when they were quite young or perhaps committed crimes without the realization that these would forever haunt them due to the sex registry, they are now emblazoned with a scarlet letter of sorts by community standards and there is much stigma associated with the simple fact of being imprisoned, much less the reason behind this imprisonment.

There have been widespread community efforts by almost every state in addition to the federal database in order to help individuals maintain awareness and monitor the actions of offenders. These efforts by the communities have served a two-fold purpose: first, to promote awareness of their presence when they arrive in the community and second, to reduce the opportunities and temptations for them to ensnare unsuspecting victims and commit future crimes. Although these intentions are positive in theory, they can bring negative consequences to sex offenders who are attempting to adapt and re-immerse themselves back into the community (Tewksbury, Collateral consequences of sex offender registration, 2005).

There have been data collections from community meetings which pointed towards increased anxiety of being alerted that sex offenders were moving into the area. Also, this data has shown more likelihood of barriers and obstructions hindering the sex offender upon his entrance back into the community before he has the chance to obtain housing or employment, thus making it quite difficult to form any kind of stability or life in the community (Tewksbury, Collateral consequences of sex offender registration, 2005).

Tewksbury (2005) states the assumption of the listing on a sex offender registry in itself is stigmatizing to an individual as well as to that individual’s family and any friends he may have. This makes it very difficult to have any kind of a support network. This can cause the sex offender to react in one of several ways. Tewksbury (2005) states the first way of reaction is for the sex offender to work and attempt to correct the characteristic that stigmatizes them in the eyes of the community. Unfortunately, if they are stigmatized because of the sex offender registry, this will be highly improbable. They perhaps could attempt to overcompensate through another talent and overcome the stigma this way. Again, due to the registry, this is highly improbable. If not given a chance for redemption by a community, a sex offender is unable to show remorse or change.

It is understandable to some degree that the community is leery of this individual and anxious because he is in the neighborhood where children are playing and attending school. It is not a horrible thought to be leery of sex offenders when one has children and wishes to protect them from strangers, especially when these offenders have indeed been convicted of crimes already. It is important, though, to remember these men have served time for the crimes they committed and are attempting to redeem themselves and fit into society to a certain extent.

When both of these methods fail, the sex offender most often will feel helpless and not extremely worried about reoffending. Sadly, this could potentially be avoided by a small amount of neighborhood civility, especially if this offender is one who was convicted of a crime such as voyeurism or a crime when he was a juvenile and did not realize the extent of his actions.  It is during this time that Tewksbury (2005) believes repeating the sex offense is at its height. Because of this, most sex offenders are tight-lipped about their offenses and do not speak openly about what kind of offense caused their imprisonment. In the instances where the offenders have publicly acknowledged their  offenses, there have been reports of being denied housing, jobs, being harassed, treated rudely, and even worse (Tewksbury, Collateral consequences of sex offender registration, 2005).

It is not only in the community that sex offenders are ostracized, but in prison as well. Sex offenders are considered the ‘worst of the worst’ in the prison system and often they are beaten and bullied beyond what is normally accepted by prison guards and other inmates. Many times, offenders who have been convicted of atrocious crimes must actually be separated from the general population for their safety in order to remain alive. Often, however, ‘accidents’ will occur and offenders will be found dead in the shower or outside as a result of gang related violence or other attacks (Waldram, 2007). There is a certain hierarchy system in the prison system for these sex offenders and pedophiles are the ultimate pariahs of all. Any person convicted of raping a stranger is only slightly higher on the totem pole. A ‘date rapist’ is considered to be the top of the hierarchy, if you will (Waldram, 2007).

Mexican American Sex Offenders

The Mexican American population is an ever growing population that has been showing high rates of mental health behavioral problems during adolescence. Many times these problems have been attributed to the risk factors of low socioeconomic status, poverty, poor living conditions, increased exposure to alcoholism, and a myriad of other negative issues that the teenagers have faced and began building a resentment towards, thus festering their aggression and anger without a proper outlet in which to express this in a positive manner (Gonzales, et al., 2011). The study performed by Gonzales et al. (2011), examined these patterns and the parenting styles of the adolescents. They found decreased levels of parental care in the areas where increased aggression occurred. This is not to say that parents are the reason adolescents have behavioral problems. It is important to note that in areas of poverty, positive relationships are important because increased aggression will inadvertently lead to criminal activity and many times this criminal activity can manifest itself in the form of sex crimes while the offenders are still juveniles. Once this begins, it is hard to leave the legal system (Kilgust, 2009).

A different study examined the three most predominant ethnic groups in the United States and what their beliefs were as to the term “Child Sexual Abuse”. White Americans, African Americans, and Mexican Americans were all part of this research. The investigation also examined at what point the general ethnic group would feel it was deemed appropriate to report an incidence of child abuse. Researchers found no significant differences between the definition of child sexual abuse or when the three different ethnic groups felt it was appropriate to report such abuse. This indicates that the Mexican American ethnicity, as a whole, understands the significance of abuse and what constitutes the United States’ definition of the sexual abuse of a child (Lowe, Pavkov, Casanova, & Wetchler, 2005).

Many times Mexican American sex offenders will have problems with housing and actually be forced to move to another neighborhood where they may or may not have cultural or ethnic similarities with those surrounding them. In a report by Harkins (2011), it was found that many white and Mexican American sex offenders were living in almost entirely African American communities on the South and West sides of Chicago. One explanation given was the lack of housing options in their old neighborhoods and the need for affordable housing in an area where they would not be ostracized.

Most of the current theories in sex offender treatments are focused on the Caucasian population, but it is important to have a diverse competency in the ability to treat sex offenders of every culture and ethnicity because there will be African American and Mexican American sex offenders who demonstrate differences in their actions that might be normal in their society and yet be considered different in the Caucasian society. For instance, acting ‘macho’ is a common Mexican American self-esteem tool according to Carrasco and Garza-Louis (1997). This can have negative consequences if a Mexican American were to not understand the current culture of the United States and approach a Caucasian female while acting ‘macho’. It could cause this Mexican American to actually be arrested for harassment in severe cases. This could perhaps answer some of the questions as to why more Mexican American men are sentenced to jail time than Caucasian men. There could be issues with cultural differences and miscommunication between the two ethnicities that easily can spiral out of control.

Another issue of consequence with Mexican Americans and their classification as being labeled ‘sex offenders’ is that many times the city or state does not classify them correctly and they are actually listed as Caucasian Americans or, at times, not categorized at all (Siese, 2012). This actually gives a skewed number to the already inaccurate data concerning the number of sex offenders in the United States. Because Mexican Americans are often listed as Caucasian, the numbers for Caucasian Americans appear increased and the numbers for Mexican Americans appear lower than they actually are. This can cause repercussions for the Mexican American community and sex offenders who are Mexican American because other cultures do not want to be misrepresented, just as Mexican Americans would not want to be misrepresented in statistics concerning their ethnicity.

This could possibly be another reason treatment is harsh when MASOs are convicted and why the sentencing is longer. Combine this with low socioeconomic status due to the conditions in which many of these men were found to begin and, in essence, they are treated differently than Caucasian males who have been convicted of some of the same crimes. Several researchers have investigated the situation with minorities and the length of their prison sentences versus Caucasians who have been convicted of similar crimes. Zatz (2000) examined several factors such as prior criminal records, type of offense, and employment status to determine that minorities were actually given harsher sentences when similar situations were presented in courtrooms of similar types within the same geographical areas.

Spohn and Holleran (2000) performed research specifically with Mexican Americans and found they were 15.3% more likely to be convicted of felonies in Chicago than Caucasians and 10.3% more likely to be convicted in Miami. Ethnicity had a more significant influence in areas of Pennsylvania where that was a larger ratio of Mexican Americans to the number of Caucasians and the sentences they received upon conviction were harsher in comparison (Ulmer & Johnson, 2004). In cases of sexual assault where the victim is Caucasian and the defendant is not, there is a much greater chance of conviction as well as longer sentences and a decreased chance of early parole (Spohn & Holleran, 2000).

Self- Medication Hypothesis (SMH)

The Self-Medication Hypothesis is important when speaking of sex offenders and their coping strategies. The hypothesis indicates that any addict will use his drug of choice, whether that is a substance or alcohol, to decrease the symptoms of a disorder or condition such as stress or anxiety (Achalu). Studies by Fenichel and Rado actually pointed out that depression was the motive for drug abuse, while Glover suggested the drugs were used to cope more with aggression and rage due to life circumstances (Achalu).         The hypothesis was demonstrated in patients with histories of aggression well before they had ever tried any substances or alcohol. They actually reported turning to these substances in order to escape the aggression and rage they felt (Achalu).

Khantzian was, by far, the father of the self-medication hypothesis and performed many studies relevant to this nature. He believed the basis of becoming an addict was directly proportional to problems with aggression and anger. The repeated use of drugs as a coping mechanism resulted in the development of dependence (Khantzian, 1977). This hypothesis was expanded to encompass the abuse of alcohol as well and rationalized the reasons behind an individual’s ability to choose drugs and alcohol rather than relationships when they were feeling lonely and experiencing a decrease in self-worth (Khantzian, 1977).

The modern day version of Khantzian’s 1977 hypothesis explains that addiction happens because of vulnerabilities within one’s self. It is primarily due to the difficulties with coping with one’s self-esteem, relationships, and overall care of one’s self. The addicts will suffer greatly from these negative feelings and become overwhelmed with emotions that are too painful to tolerate or they will not have any emotional feelings at all. The various drugs used by the individuals (substances and alcohol) will initially help them with the relief of these painful emotions or either helps them to actually feel emotions. They will eventually become addicted (Achalu).

Empirical Support of SMH

Gillman and Abraham (2001) performed a study examining the odds of whether major depression would follow alcohol dependence after one year or whether alcohol dependence would follow major depression after one year in what is known as the Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study. It was performed in two phases or ‘waves’. They found the odds for developing major depression in association with alcoholism levels on a scale of low, medium, and high to be 1.66, 3.98, and 4.32 for the female population. They were reported to be 1.19, 2.49, and 2.12 for the male population. It was decided that the dependence on alcohol and the diagnosis of major depression were both risks to individuals, especially if the condition was left untreated for the course of one year. One problem often led to another (Gilman & Abraham, 2001).

Another research article was published in 1987 that used the Diagnostic Interview Schedule to examine the frequency of major depression, abuse of alcohol, and substance abuse. This study used a population sample of 424 college students. Researchers found the occurrence of depression to be 6.8%, the abuse of alcohol to be 8.2%, and the abuse of substances to be 0.4%. They further were able to associate alcohol abuse and the abuse of other substances with depression. They concluded that, in the case of these college students, the onset of their depression almost always happened before any alcohol or substance abuse began (Deykin, Levy, & Wells, 1987).

A study was conducted to examine the behavior problem and self-medication theories of alcohol abuse in juvenile males who were incarcerated. An estimated 84% of adolescent males with alcohol problems before incarceration had reported use of alcohol to self-medicate and much of this was in response to or associated with aggressive and rebellious behavior. These adolescents also reported increased levels of mood related disorders, decreased social support from family members during their time of incarceration, and more symptoms of defiance with adults in general (Esposito-Smithers, Penn, Stein, Latcher-Katz, & Spirito, 2008).

The research performed prior to this study suggested a relationship between internalization of symptoms and substance abuse with adolescents. Therefore, it is possible these substances are used by adolescents to self-medicate in order to mask depression, hopelessness, and other issues they internalize. The study compared youth with alcohol problems versus youth without alcohol problems prior to incarceration to test if the self-medication hypothesis was true in this circumstance. The hypothesis was that, with no alcohol, the youth with alcohol-related problems before incarceration would have increased rates of negative symptoms and less success with coping strategies. Eighty-four percent of those tested reported alcohol use for self-medication purposes and 73 percent reported that the use of alcohol was associated with aggressive and rebellious behavior. The hypothesis was reported to be true (Esposito-Smithers, Penn, Stein, Latcher-Katz, & Spirito, 2008).

Limitations of SMH

The main limitation of the self-medication hypothesis is the question of ‘which came first’. It is often difficult to pinpoint which comorbidity exists to begin with pertaining to depression and alcohol or substance abuse. Many times the depression will present first and other times the alcohol abuse will present first. According to our studies, it appears the depression actually is an underlying condition that acts as a catalyst when alcohol or drugs are introduced and the self-medication begins (Achalu).

In the research study performed by Hall and Queener (2007), a limited geographic area and small sample size was chosen as well as a select group of participants who were already addicted to opioids and participating in a treatment protocol. This would be considered a limitation of the self-medication hypothesis due to the limited area in which the study was conducted, the size of the sample population, and the select characteristics of the participants involved. Also, the participants were all volunteers and not chosen at random or from a pooled group of patients at the facility.

Tailoring a study in such a way will inadvertently lead to results which are biased or unreliable unless great care is taken to ensure their validity. The written inclusion of these limitations are crucial for a study of this significance to be carried out and published in order for the community to gain a better understanding of the self-medication hypothesis and its effects of every population in every geographical area possible.

Another limitation to the self-medication hypothesis is that the studies performed are normally with patients who are incarcerated from crimes committed many times while under the influence of drug and/or alcohol abuse. Also, many of the studies are performed on participants in institutions who have been addicted to substances due to underlying conditions such as anxiety and/or depression or some other mood disorder. It is important to know there is a limitation to the self-medication hypothesis because many times, as stated before, it can be hard to pinpoint which problem occurred first. Often depression will precede alcohol abuse; however, alcohol abuse can precede depression in some cases because of conditions that might not have been detected at all during physical or mental examinations before the patient was admitted into any hospital or institution. It is important while conducting studies to understand and be open-minded that the self-medication hypothesis is indeed a hypothesis and is prone to error just as is any other hypothesis. It is the most likely reason for our sex offenders who abuse alcohol because of the hopelessness and anxiety or stress they face on a daily basis due to daily life and being ostracized from society because of labeling and other issues beyond their control.

References

Number of registered sex offenders in the US nears three quarters of a million. (2012). Retrieved from National Center for Missing and Exploited Children: http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=4615

Achalu, E. (n.d.). The self-medication hypothesis: A review of the two major theories and the research evidence.

Benson, S. (Ed.). (2003). The Hispanic American almanac : A reference work on Hispanics in the United States (3rd ed.). Detroit: Gale.

Blume, A., Resor, M., Villanueva, M., & Braddy, L. (2009, September). Alcohol use and comorbid anxiety, traumatic stress, and hopelessness among Hispanics. Addictive Behaviors, 34(9), 709-713.

Carrasco, N., & Garza-Louis, D. (1997). Hispanic sex offenders: Cultural characteristics and implications for treatment. In Sex Offender: New Insights, Treatment Innovations, and Legal Developments (pp. P13.1- P13.10). Kingston: Civil Research Institute.

Chartier, K., & Caetano, R. (2010). Ethnicity and health disparities in alcohol research. Alcohol Res Health, 33(1-2), 152-160.

Deykin, E., Levy, J., & Wells, V. (1987). Adolescent depression, alcohol, and drug abuse. American Journal of Public Health, 77(2), 178-182.

Ehlers, C., Gilder, D., Criado, J., & Caetano, R. (2009, December). Acculturation stress, anxiety disorders, and alcohol dependence in a select population of young adult Mexican Americans. Journal of Addictive Medicine, 3(4), 227-233.

Englekirk, A., & Marín, M. (2012). Mexican americans. Retrieved from Countries and Their Cultures: http://www.everyculture.com/multi/Le-Pa/Mexican-Americans.html

Esposito-Smithers, C., Penn, J., Stein, L., Latcher-Katz, M., & Spirito, A. (2008). Self-medication theories in incarcerated adolescent males. Journal of Child and Adolescent Substance Abuse, 17(4), 41-56.

Falcon, L., & Gilbarg, D. (n.d.). Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and Cubans in the labor market: An historical overview. Handbook of Hispanic Cultures in the United States: Sociology, pp. 57-79.

Gilman, S., & Abraham, H. (2001). A longitudinal study of the order of onset of alcohol dependence and major depression. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 63, 277-286.

Gonzales, N., Coxe, S., Roosa, M., White, R., Knight, G., Zeiders, K., & Saenz, D. (2011, March). Economic hardship, neighborhood context, and parenting: Prospective effects on Mexican American adolescent’s mental health. American Journal of Community Psychology, 47(1-2), 98-113.

Hall, D., & Queener, J. (2007, June). Self-Medication Hypothesis of substance use: Testing Khantzian’s updated theory. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 39(2), 151-158.

Harkins, G. (2011, February 15). For some Chicago communities, sex offenders don’t look like their neighbors. Retrieved from MEDILL Reports Chicago: http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=178528

Khantzian, E. (1977). The ego, the self, and opiate addiction: Theoretical and treatment considerations. International Review of Psychoanalysis, 189-199.

Kilgust, A. (2009, December). Sentencing and risk characteristics of Latino sexual offenders. Pacific University.

Kivisto, P., & Ng, W. (2005). Americans All: Race and Ethnic Relations in Historical, Structural, and Comparative Perspectives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Levenson, J., & Cotter, L. (2005, February). The effects of Megan’s Law of sex offender reintegration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(1), 49-66.

Lowe, W., Pavkov, T., Casanova, G., & Wetchler, J. (2005). Do American ethnic cultures differ in their definitions of child sexual abuse? The American Journal of Family Therapy, 33, 147-166.

Siese, A. (2012, August 14). SFPD misclassifying, underreporting minority arrests. Retrieved from SF Appeal: http://sfappeal.com/news/2012/08/sfpd-misclassifying-underreporting-minority-arrests.php

Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. (2000). The imprisonment penalty paid by young, unemployed black and hispanic male offenders. Criminology, 38(1), 281-306.

Tewksbury, R. (2005, February). Collateral consequences of sex offender registration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(1), 67-81.

Tewksbury, R., & Lees, M. (2007, July). Perceptions of punishment: How registered sex offenders view registries. Crime and Delinquency, 53(3), 380-407.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2011). Overview of race and Hispanic origin: 2010. United States Census Bureau.

Ulmer, J., & Johnson, B. (2004). Sentencing in context: A multilevel analysis. Criminology, 42(1), 137-178.

Waldram, J. (2007). Everybody has a story: Listening to imprisoned sexual offenders. Qualitative Health Research, 17(7), 963-970.

Zatz, M. (2000). The convergence of race, ethnicity, gender, and class on court decisionmaking: Looking toward the 21st century. In J. Horney (Ed.), Criminal Justice 2000: Policies, processes and decisions of the justice system. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.