Sex Offender Supervision in Context: The Need for Qualitative Examinations of Social Distance in Sex Offender–Supervision Officer Relationships

Danielle J.S. Bailey, Lisa L. Sample

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Social distance, or the level of familiarity and rapport, within the officer–offender relationship is important in reducing recidivism and promoting desistance. Although examined in a variety of contexts, few researchers have studied the social distance between sex offenders and community supervision officers. When this has been examined, little attention has been paid to the legal and regulatory structure in place specifically for sex offenders or the cultural perceptions that citizens hold about sex offenders and sex offending. Within these structural and cultural contexts, we argue that sex offenders are a unique offender group, and thus, their relationships with supervision officers are likely qualitatively different from those formed between non-sex offenders and supervision officers. Using interviews with community supervision officers and convicted sex offenders, we highlight the structural and cultural contexts under which sex offenders are supervised and the ways in which the social distance in sex offender–officer relationships may vary from non-sex offender–officer relationships.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)176-204
Number of pages29
JournalCriminal Justice Policy Review
Volume28
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

social distance
supervision
offender
examination
community
citizen
interview

Keywords

  • community corrections
  • sex offenders
  • social control

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Cite this

@article{07c0ee3d7b7d4e3b8e7e6636c4a8bf38,
title = "Sex Offender Supervision in Context: The Need for Qualitative Examinations of Social Distance in Sex Offender–Supervision Officer Relationships",
abstract = "Social distance, or the level of familiarity and rapport, within the officer–offender relationship is important in reducing recidivism and promoting desistance. Although examined in a variety of contexts, few researchers have studied the social distance between sex offenders and community supervision officers. When this has been examined, little attention has been paid to the legal and regulatory structure in place specifically for sex offenders or the cultural perceptions that citizens hold about sex offenders and sex offending. Within these structural and cultural contexts, we argue that sex offenders are a unique offender group, and thus, their relationships with supervision officers are likely qualitatively different from those formed between non-sex offenders and supervision officers. Using interviews with community supervision officers and convicted sex offenders, we highlight the structural and cultural contexts under which sex offenders are supervised and the ways in which the social distance in sex offender–officer relationships may vary from non-sex offender–officer relationships.",
keywords = "community corrections, sex offenders, social control",
author = "Bailey, {Danielle J.S.} and Sample, {Lisa L.}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0887403415572876",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "176--204",
journal = "Criminal Justice Policy Review",
issn = "0887-4034",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Sex Offender Supervision in Context

T2 - The Need for Qualitative Examinations of Social Distance in Sex Offender–Supervision Officer Relationships

AU - Bailey, Danielle J.S.

AU - Sample, Lisa L.

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Social distance, or the level of familiarity and rapport, within the officer–offender relationship is important in reducing recidivism and promoting desistance. Although examined in a variety of contexts, few researchers have studied the social distance between sex offenders and community supervision officers. When this has been examined, little attention has been paid to the legal and regulatory structure in place specifically for sex offenders or the cultural perceptions that citizens hold about sex offenders and sex offending. Within these structural and cultural contexts, we argue that sex offenders are a unique offender group, and thus, their relationships with supervision officers are likely qualitatively different from those formed between non-sex offenders and supervision officers. Using interviews with community supervision officers and convicted sex offenders, we highlight the structural and cultural contexts under which sex offenders are supervised and the ways in which the social distance in sex offender–officer relationships may vary from non-sex offender–officer relationships.

AB - Social distance, or the level of familiarity and rapport, within the officer–offender relationship is important in reducing recidivism and promoting desistance. Although examined in a variety of contexts, few researchers have studied the social distance between sex offenders and community supervision officers. When this has been examined, little attention has been paid to the legal and regulatory structure in place specifically for sex offenders or the cultural perceptions that citizens hold about sex offenders and sex offending. Within these structural and cultural contexts, we argue that sex offenders are a unique offender group, and thus, their relationships with supervision officers are likely qualitatively different from those formed between non-sex offenders and supervision officers. Using interviews with community supervision officers and convicted sex offenders, we highlight the structural and cultural contexts under which sex offenders are supervised and the ways in which the social distance in sex offender–officer relationships may vary from non-sex offender–officer relationships.

KW - community corrections

KW - sex offenders

KW - social control

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011559252&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85011559252&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0887403415572876

DO - 10.1177/0887403415572876

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85011559252

VL - 28

SP - 176

EP - 204

JO - Criminal Justice Policy Review

JF - Criminal Justice Policy Review

SN - 0887-4034

IS - 2

ER -