Megan’s Law for nursing homes gaining traction in Harrisburg
A state lawmaker is making good on a promise to repair a flawed system that permits aging and ailing convicted sex offenders to quietly enter long-term care facilities — often unbeknownst to patients and staff — where some easily are finding their next victims.
A bill set to be introduced next week by state Rep. Rob Matzie, D-Ambridge, comes in response to a Tribune-Review investigation published last month detailing what experts termed a simmering crisis involving more than 900,000 sex offenders on Megan’s Law registries across the nation.
On Friday, Matzie said his measure — which has drawn widespread, bipartisan support — calls for nursing homes, adult daycare centers and personal care homes to vet new admissions through the state’s Megan’s Law registry, create patient safety plans to protect others from the offenders, and notify staff and residents when convicted sex offenders are admitted.
But the registry isn’t punishment? Yeah, right (sarcasm)
Just saying
If the registry isn’t punishment I’d hate to see what these people think is punishment. It’s definitely a pig in a poke that’s gone rabid. Makes a boar look tame.
He admits that the majority of registrants don’t reoffend, so why the need for this bill. Just because one incident occurs doesn’t mean it will continue. Another politician making a name for themselves.
Just goes to show that the public has no clue who those on the registry really are. The 900,000 number is used to scare and put fear in people. Those that know the truth aren’t saying anything because they are benefiting from it.
Just as Putin May use a “false flag” invasion of Ukraine, the US is using a “false flag” excuse as a way to justify a registry in an attempt to fool the public .
They put hundreds of thousands of people unjustly on a registry . Than use that number to justify there assault on a portion of the population that are absolutely no threat to anyone.
They criticize Putin for attempting to do something that they are already doing.
Where is the article/study showing the total number of “sex offenses” that occurred in long term care and retirement homes in Pennsylvania over the last decade and the number of them committed by registrants. My guess is they don’t exist of if they do, none of these state legislators will bother looking for them. Because as always, it is not about the facts, it is about passing emotional legislation they can put on a mailer to send out to the uneducated at reelection time. “Look what I am doing to protect you”.
My guess is if it is available, they would find just like everywhere else, only a small percentage are committed by registrants and the legislation will have little effect other than making it hard for registrants to find care.
Imagine how many people were in nursing homes and had sex offenses LONG BEFORE the registry and we never heard of ANY issues. People in positions of power are literally just making shit up and they need to be called out on it.
Why bring up Meghan’s law, if it pertains to children, while this scenario pertains to senior citizens? Last I checked, sex offenders and predators prime targets, certainly aren’t adults! At least according to the knuckle heads who come up with all this crap, so this law should be moot.
Not to mention that the man who caused Megan’s Law to happen was obviously a killer and would never have seen the ramifications of the registry he helped create.
I’ve often wondered why the fact that Megan Kanka was killed is completely overlooked.
Or that there’s no Murderer Registry…
Yes, that’s part of the great and sad irony of sex offender registration laws. Every single one was born out of a horrific abduction, rape and murder of a young child. Yet politicians and lawmakers mostly ignore the kidnapping part and completely ignore the murder part, focusing only on the sexual assault component. Every day, I continue to be punished for having had consensual sexual activity with a 17 year-old almost 25 years ago (before Florida’s sex offender registry even existed) because society is trying to get its revenge on child rapist-murderers. That’s like advocating for the death penalty for a barfight. How does continuously punishing me make anyone safer? It certainly doesn’t reduce the risk that a child will be kidnapped, raped and murdered.
The whole management of sex offenders and the registry is wrong but is not being well addressed. It does not give politicians ‘good press” and their “tough on crime” image. It is not a popular subject with the press, though it should be. The public are uninformed – “out of sight- out of mind.” No one is listening to the citizen groups, family members, and academics yelling for justice. The courts are politicized.
I read with interest the efforts lawmakers in PA are making on a law to make access to homes for the elderly more difficult, which in turn, further punishes persons convicted of sex related crimes. There are several matters that perhaps, this article does not fully consider. I would like to think justice might demand lawmakers address these before simply creating more legal restrictions that further distract from citizen life, liberty, and happiness.
First, we use the registry to define a threat by persons convicted of a sexually-related crime. That ignores the fact that those on the registry have paid their debt in confinement, have completed a treatment program in probation, and have the lowest recidivism rate next to murderers. History has shown that we are awfully quick to use racial and religious divides to rid communities of undesirables. Most of these undesirables are US citizens and have rights to freedom. In this case, police hold records of fingerprints and DNA on these persons, making reoffending almost a suicide gesture. Finally, academics have shown that sex crimes are mostly committed by neighbors, dates, friends, and family members, inquisitive kids, not persons already tracked on the registry.
Second, we use the registry to create more draconian laws that further take away from families and former offenders. We use these laws, not for justice, but for building the reputation of ‘tough on crime politicians, “without their accountability for America having the largest prison population in the world.
Most important, thirdly, the registry is obsolete. Over time, we have added more minor sex-related crimes to a registry that can no longer can be used for managing risk and threat. It simply becomes a “minority report,” like the movie, where we would like to forecast future behavior on a subject like sex, which all humans share. The registry that they are using to justify new laws includes kids who park and engage in consensual sex, people who send their partner sexually explicit images, hikers and construction workers that urinate in the woods, prostitutes and Johns, college streakers, pranksters, those that download illegal images free off the internet, nudity on a beach or woods or a hotel pool late at night, sex in the woods. Yet, people are led to believe all people on the registry are monsters and dangerous. Before you offer more restrictions, the registry needs to be reduced in size to violent criminals that pose an actual threat.
The proposed law presumes these old, sometimes feeble men and women pose a threat to the other residents. There is no evidence to that effect, such that a whole class of citizens is pushed to the street when they most need help and grace. On the surface, the law sounds good to the uninformed.
I would ask that politicians study the effect of the registry on this segment of Americans before blindly adding to the misery that we already impose on them. Thank you.
Politicians like the cash cow of “tough on crime…especially Sex Offenders.” Even they get confused: tell the people this, but know it’s actually that. If they really wanted to “protect the children,” they would see the illogic of the SOR and what even further restrictions do.
For some reason, my probation says I can’t go to a bar, yet my crime was CP. Uh, bars are places known to not serve minors… One guy I know, under the same PO, got to cruise wherever he wanted, whereas I had an ankle shackle; he had gone to prison for breaking into someone’s home and attempted rape.
If they approve something like elderly and ill ex-sex offenders into hospices and retirement homes, then it would have to spread to places where inclement weather produces temporary shelters from storms such as hurricanes. Believe me, people who are uninformed don’t want that to happen either.
Robert….Very Well Said and Kudos to You!
Once Again, There is No Empirical Data Presented By Another Politician Who is Parading for Re-Election!
So, Therefore, This Politician’s Motivation To Get Re-Elected, Once Again, Overshadows, The Real Truth, Facts, Science, and Math!
As I understand it, they’re not banning registrants from nursing homes. They’re just creating the circumstance where it’s easier for nursing homes to reject them in the first place. Like how they don’t actually bar registrants from Facebook – that would be illegal (perish the thought).
Well, if the aged sex offenders can’t be placed in a nursing home they will just have to live with their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Wait, aren’t those the people that they are supposed to be staying away from?
Probably three worst thing in the article is where the facility was given a large fine because it wasn’t in the patient’s file that he was on the registry.
Then later it says they don’t have to take people, they can turn people away.
No punishment to see here.
Can’t even die with a shred of dignity. If someone is in such poor health they need to live in a skilled nursing facility it’s pretty highly unlikely they’re trolling for victims
One of the guys at our house was in a nursing home in the Sarasota area. He’s in a wheelchair because of an amputation of his left leg. He is also a veteran. For some reason he never explained, he left the nursing home to live in Orlando. He’s 72, I’m 68 (69 in March) and the third guy is 57. All of us on the registry. Considering we cannot go to homeless shelters nor hurricane shelters because families with children are there, now nursing homes and hospices are locked up.
If he is an honorable discharged veteran the VA policy is SO’s get treated the same as other patients and no flag is to be put in their file. There are some living at the VA hospital nearby in the inpatient mental health. So not sure why he wouldn’t be able to stay there.
Seems like the VA won’t help with burial services for anyone with a SO. My state won’t even allow a PFR the morbid (ha!) job of preparing the dead.
According to the VA only SO’s who have been found guilty of a tier 3 and sentenced to life in prison are not eligible for burials.
From what he told us, he was not allowed to be buried at Arlington Cematery like much of his family there.
Megan wasn’t killed at a nursing home and what does this bill have to do with protecting children. Just another empty suit wanting fame by coming after registrants!!
The argument about that is the fact that they worry about the grandkids coming to visit grandpa or grandma or both. “Or any place children may congregate”. On my residency restrictions it gets specific as to location, schools, parks, daycare centers, etc ad infinitum; and then it ends with that quote “or any place children may congregate”. Homeless shelters and storm shelters operate under the same quotation.
I don’t recall this article being posted late last month, but here is the referenced article which started the entire movement (with others ref’d at the bottom of it): Registered sex offenders often go undetected in care homes, sometimes at an unspeakable cost (https://triblive.com/local/regional/hidden-danger-registered-sex-offenders-often-go-undetected-in-care-homes/)
The PA house member in question can be found here (https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/house_bio.cfm?id=1173) if interested in sharing your thoughts on the matter. Remember, be polite, short, and succinct. I personally would like to know how they’ll guarantee this won’t prevent people from being denied elder care if they have to also register…perhaps put it in the bill that this fact can’t be used against them.