Extended supervision or civil commitment for managing the risk of sexual offenders : public safety and individual rights

Abstract

Since the early 1990&rsquo;s, there has been a proliferation of legislative initiatives in North America, the United Kingdom, and Australasia that are intended to improve public protection from high risk sexual offenders. These laws include extended supervision of sexual offenders once released from prison and indefinite involuntary civil commitment to secure treatment facilities following the expiration of a prison sentence. The enactment of these laws has sparked intense debate and numerous legal challenges on a variety of issues, including the need to strike a proper balance between public safety and the rights of individual offenders. Recent challenges to Extended Supervision Orders in New Zealand have included the assertion that this approach is inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act. This article compares the use of Extended Supervision Orders in New Zealand to the use of civil commitment of Sexually Violent Predators in the United States, and particularly in California, which currently confines the largest number of offenders under this type of commitment. It is argued that Extended Supervision is more flexible, less intrusive, less punitive, and less costly than civil commitment. The degree to which it is effective in improving public safety remains an empirical question.<br /