Title: State Legislators' Handbook for Statutory Rape Issues
Series: Training Manual
Author: Noy S. Davis and Jennifer Twombly
Published: February 2000
Subject: Rape and Sexual Assault, Law Enforcement general
16 pages
33,400 bytes

----------------------------

Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text file.
To view this document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat graphic file
available from this Web site or order a print copy from Office for Victims of
Crime Resource Center at 800-627-6872. 

----------------------------

State Legislators' Handbook for Statutory Rape Issues

American Bar Association 

Center on Children and the Law

Noy S. Davis

Jennifer Twombly

February 2000

----------------------------

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
810 Seventh Street NW.
Washington, DC 20531

Janet Reno
Attorney General

Daniel Marcus
Acting Associate Attorney General

Laurie Robinson

Assistant Attorney General

Noel Brennan
Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Kathryn M. Turman
Director, Office for Victims of Crime

Office of Justice Programs
World Wide Web Home Page
www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Office for Victims of Crime
World Wide Web Home Page
www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc

For grant and funding information contact
U.S. Department of Justice Response Center
1-800-421-6770

OVC Resource Center
1-800-627-6872

OVC Resource Center Home Page
www.ncjrs.gov

NCJ 178238

---------------------------- 

This handbook was prepared by the American Bar Association Center on
Children and the Law under grant number 97-VF-GX-K008, awarded by the
Office for Victims of Crime, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of
Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this document are
those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or
policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

---------------------------- 

The Office for Victims of Crime is a component of the Office of Justice
Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of
Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, and the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

---------------------------- 

Message From the Director

The Office for Victims of Crime has been pleased to provide funding to the 
American Bar Association (ABA) Center on Children and the Law to manage
this project. ABA staff have done an excellent job reviewing current statutory
rape laws and literature and interviewing professionals who work on behalf of
teenage statutory rape victims across the country, resulting in this publication,
State Legislators' Handbook for Statutory Rape Issues. Through it, OVC
hopes to help State legislators develop effective and enforceable statutory rape
laws.

In recent years, prosecutors and service providers nationwide have reported
troubling findings regarding statutory rape, including increased occurrences and
their tragic impact on teens, teens' inability to see themselves as victims, service
providers' reluctance to report these crimes to police, prosecutors' reluctance
to prosecute these crimes, and juries' reluctance to convict the offenders. Many
States are confronting these problems by reviewing and amending old laws or
passing new ones.

Enactment of realistic, enforceable statutory rape laws requires consideration
and evaluation of many complex problems and issues. OVC recognizes that
legislators and their aides may need information and guidance as they determine
whether to amend existing laws or develop new ones. Through this Handbook,
OVC intends to raise relevant questions and issues for thorough discussion and
consideration while providing a framework for developing legislation that makes
sexual intercourse with a minor a crime based on the minor's age.

We at OVC hope that the information and suggestions found in this Handbook
help those in State legislatures keep the welfare of victims in mind as they craft
legislation. It is hoped that this collection of knowledge, experiences, and
insights of many hardworking professionals in the field and the victims they
worked with will provide legislators with the information and inspiration they
need to develop effective statutory rape legislation.

Kathryn M. Turman
Director
Office for Victims of Crime

---------------------------- 

Acknowledgments


OVC gratefully acknowledges Sharon G. Elstein, Project Director and
Coprincipal Investigator, and Barbara E. Smith, Coprincipal Investigator, of the
American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law for their efforts in
managing this project. OVC also gratefully acknowledges the project's 
volunteer advisory committee Cindy Nanetti, Esq.; Laura L. Chase, Esq.;
Scott Newman, Esq.; Commissioner R. Gil Kerlikowske; Assistant Chief John
Schaller; Carole DeLuca; Jo Kolanda; Dominic Trunfio, Esq.; Kim Hunter,
Esq.; JoAnne McCracken, Esq.; and Gael Strack, Esq.

OVC is grateful for the help and information of criminal justice and service
professionals in Onondaga County, New York; Baltimore City, Maryland; and
Alameda, San Diego, and Santa Clara Counties, California, where site visits
were conducted. These dedicated public servants allowed an unobstructed
view into their workdays and the decisions they make on behalf of teenage
victims of statutory rape. They showed the strength of their commitment by
accepting our intrusion into their work to help other jurisdictions.

In addition, OVC gratefully acknowledges those professionals with whom
extensive telephone interviews were conducted in Maricopa County, Arizona;
Marion County, Indiana; Dade County, Florida; Pontiac, Michigan; Clark
County, Nevada; and Jefferson County, Kentucky.

Finally, OVC gratefully acknowledges the guidance and support of the project
monitor, Olga Trujillo, Director, Special Projects Division, at the Office for
Victims of Crime.

---------------------------- 

Contents

I. Introduction

II. Background
 
III. Findings From a Survey of State Legislators

IV. Context and Questions 

V. Issues  

VI. Conclusion  
 
VII. Notes 

----------------------------
 
I. Introduction

The State Legislators' Handbook for Statutory Rape Issues is designed to help
State legislators develop effective and enforceable statutory rape laws that can
and will be used to prosecute offenders and prevent occurrences of the crime.
This Handbook provides a framework for developing and analyzing legislation
that would make sexual intercourse with a minor a crime based on the age of
the minor. Its purpose is to assist legislators and policymakers who are
amending their statutory rape laws. While each State must determine what laws
to pass, this Handbook provides a framework for discussing and considering
the issues.

This Handbook begins with background information and a description of what
led to its development. Next, specific issues are discussed, including raising the
age of consent, age differentials, pregnancy, reporting, and penalties. Then,
questions for each issue are offered for legislators and policymakers to consider
before drafting new legislation or amending existing law.

---------------------------- 

II. Background

Currently, all States have laws that prohibit sexual intercourse with persons
under a certain age. Although commonly referred to as "statutory rape" laws,
the term is not usually found in criminal statutes. Rape, sexual assault, and
unlawful sexual intercourse are some of the more commonly used terms. By
whatever name, these laws have been the focus of recent legislative interest. In
the last few years, more than 20 States have considered proposals to amend
these laws.[1]

---------------------------- 

III. Findings From a Survey of State Legislators

In 1997, under a cooperative agreement with the Office for Victims of Crime
of the U.S. Department of Justice, the American Bar Association (ABA)
Center on Children and the Law surveyed all States regarding statutory rape
legislation they had considered within the last few years from 1995 to early
1997. This Handbook is based on that survey. In addition, the ABA staff
reviewed current laws and other literature on the topic. 

The survey findings included the following amendments to existing statutory
rape laws. The States enacted these amendments between January 1995 and
January 1997: 

o Raising the age of the minor who is subject to protection by the law. North
Carolina and Pennsylvania raised the age of the minor up to 16 years who is
subject to protection under the criminal unlawful sex laws. North Carolina did
so as part of amendments that created different offenses based on the age of
the minor and the age gap between the minor and the defendant. Under the new
statute, sex with 13- to 15-year-olds is now a crime.

o Age gaps. Along with raising the age of the minor, North Carolina and
Pennsylvania also imposed age gaps. If the minor is above a certain age, a
crime is committed only if the defendant is a specified number of years older
than the minor (5 years in North Carolina and 4 years in Pennsylvania). 

o Impregnation of a minor as a separate offense. Florida passed several
provisions regarding unlawful sex with minors. Impregnation of a minor is now a
separate offense, and defendants may be liable for child support and related
medical expenses. If paternity is established in cases involving defendants 24
years or older, child support must be paid.

o Targeting much older defendants. Two States increased the possible
sentence when the defendant is significantly older than the minor. Delaware
increased the possible sentence when the defendant is 10 or more years older
than a minor under 16, and Georgia increased the sentence to a mandatory 10
years when the defendant is 21 years old or older. Florida rewrote one of its
laws so that persons 24 or older are prohibited from having sex with 16- and
17-year-olds.

o Possibility of civil penalties. California has authorized civil penalties ranging
from $2,000 to $25,000 for this crime. The amount depends upon the age of
the defendant and the age gap between the defendant and the minor. Moneys
collected will be used to reimburse the costs of prosecution, with the remainder
placed in an Underage Pregnancy Prevention Fund.

o Encouraging reporting. Tennessee passed a bill encouraging, but not
requiring, health care providers to report statutory rape, defined in Tennessee
as sexual assault on minors 13 to 15 years old. Reporting is already mandated
for children under 13. Florida passed legislation making sex with children under
16 child abuse if the offender is 21 or older. 

 
Below is proposed legislation considered by 13 other State legislatures that
was not enacted during their most recently completed session.[2]

o Expanded scope of laws/raising age of protected minor. Indiana and
Washington considered providing criminal penalties for men 21 years old and
older who have sex with a minor who is either 16 or 17 years of age,
respectively. Washington would also have required the defendant to be in a
position of authority. Both proposals included restitution. Hawaii, Mississippi,
and Utah considered raising the age of the minor protected under statutory rape
laws. Utah would have raised the age to 18; Mississippi would have raised it 
from 14 to 16 years of age. Hawaii considered several proposals on raising
the age, which is now the lowest in the country at 14 years.

o Prosecution grants, penalties for parents' failure to seek prosecution. New
York and Connecticut considered authorizing grant programs for statutory
rape prosecution. Connecticut considered imposing criminal penalties against
parents who fail to seek prosecution of a man engaged in a sexual relationship
with their daughter if she was under 16 and knew the offender.

o Mandatory reporting. Tennessee and Virginia considered legislation
requiring the report of statutory rape under mandatory child abuse reporting
laws.

o Penalties associated with pregnancy. Illinois and Oregon considered
increasing the penalties for statutory rape if a pregnancy results. 

o Mandatory minimum sentence. Massachusetts considered a 1-year
mandatory minimum sentence if the defendant is 18 years old or if there is a
5-year age difference between the minor and the offender. 

o Exemption to precondition for benefit eligibility. New Hampshire considered
adding statutory rape as an exemption to establishing paternity as a
precondition to eligibility for State public assistance benefits.

----------------------------
 
IV. Context and Questions

Several basic questions permeate the discussion of statutory rape laws. A clear
understanding of these questions will help put proposed legislation in context
and focus discussion of the legislation. We encourage legislators and their staff
to consider the following:

 
1. What is the purpose of statutory rape laws?

2. What does criminal prosecution mean?

3. Are the purposes furthered through the criminal laws?

4. What other State efforts and policies need to be considered?

o What is the purpose of statutory rape laws? Laws making sex with minors a
crime and the proposed changes to these laws may have more than one
purpose. Generally, the more specific a State can be in outlining a law's
purpose or purposes, the better. Knowing the specifics will further discussion
and help the State develop and pass laws that accurately address what the
State determines to be prosecutable. 

o What does criminal prosecution mean? Sometimes multiple purposes in
laws lead to different results. For example, if laws are aimed at "predatory,
exploitative" behavior, it is critical to define what "predatory and exploitative"
behavior is. If laws are designed to encourage responsibility by discussing
marriage and paternity, criminal prosecution may be in order. 

Reviewing the laws and practices in the particular State will educate legislators
about what outcomes may be expected from criminal prosecution for statutory
rape. It may mean one or more of the following outcomes: conviction of a
felony, conviction of a misdemeanor, incarceration, probation, child support,
sex offender therapy, civil penalties, and registration as a sex offender. Further,
legislators will understand the circumstances that must be met for an offender to
receive this charge and any conditions.

o Are the purposes furthered through the criminal laws? In the recent ABA
survey of 21 States that were considering proposed legislation, a number of
different motivations were observed on the part of State legislators, including:

--General intent to protect minors from sexual intercourse.

--Desire to protect minors below a certain age from predatory, exploitative
sexual relationships--for example, with much older partners.

--Prevention and/or reduction of the incidence of teen pregnancy.

--Reduction of the number of young mothers on welfare.

--Responsibility and accountability in sexuality and parenting.

A question often considered is whether the law's purposes are furthered by
criminal prosecution. With purposes clearly in mind, any proposed change to
the law can be better evaluated. This evaluation is best aided by reviewing
research studies, researching local- and State-level statistical information,
holding hearings to obtain assessments by criminal justice and agency
professionals, and conferring with legislative staff in other States. Such an
evaluation should help legislators determine whether the impact of the proposed
legislation is likely to further the law's purposes.

For example, if a proposal is aimed at reducing teen pregnancy and/or
reducing reliance on welfare, examination of the State's statistics may clarify
whether the proposal is likely to have the desired impact. While national
statistics may suggest an answer, State or local evidence is critical. In North
Carolina, statistics presented by the North Carolina Organization for Women
suggested that increased enforcement of the statutory rape laws would not
reduce teen pregnancy in that State. 

o What other State efforts and policies need to be considered? States and
localities may have a variety of efforts under way to reduce teen pregnancy.
They may work with adolescents on sexuality education, which may or may not
be enhanced by new legislation. For example, the ABA survey revealed that
some States are struggling to balance the desire to deter exploitation through
statutory rape laws with the concern that focusing on prosecution will result in
teens failing to seek appropriate health care, including contraceptives and
prenatal care. Some States find that this struggle may occur when States
consider raising the age of the minor subject for protection under statutory rape
laws.

Efforts to increase reporting of statutory rape have also resulted in a struggle to
balance conflicting concerns. Some States have reached consensus by defining
the scope of these laws to focus prosecution efforts on cases perceived as
exploitative. For example, a recent Florida statute prohibits persons 24 or over
from sexual activity with 16- and 17-year-olds. This effectively requires at least
a 7-year age gap for these older minors. Florida's legislators are comfortable
defining exploitation as a large age gap. 

---------------------------- 

V. Issues 

Raising the Age of Consent and Instituting Defendant Age or Other
Requirements To Limit the Scope of the Laws 

o The issue. Raising the age of consent by using the criminal laws to protect
minors up to age 16, 17, or 18 years presents a number of issues. Major
questions include how old the defendant must be and how much of an age
difference exists between the defendant and the minor.

o Discussion. The modern trend has been to raise the age of the minor
protected under criminal statutory rape laws. Currently, the highest ages
protected range from 14 to 18, with more than 90 percent ending protection at
age 16, 17, or 18 years. A recent ABA survey of State legislative proposals
indicates that 12 of 21 States considered raising the age of the minor protected
under statutory rape laws. A number of these States identified a challenge when
they raised the age of consent how to avoid making consensual "peer sex"
among teenagers a criminal offense. For this reason, a number of States have
considered or required either a minimum age for the defendant or an age
difference between the minor and the defendant. For example, North Carolina's
recently enacted legislation creates a new class of statutory rape to cover 13-,
14-, and 15-year-olds if the defendant is 5 or more years older than the minor.

Currently, 23 States have age differentials for at least one of their statutory
rape offenses. Twenty-six States have specified an age minimum for the
defendant under at least one statutory rape offense. The ABA survey indicated
that all States that considered raising the age of the minor protected also
considered age differentials between the minor and the defendant and/or age
minimums for the defendant. More-over, in 6 of the 21 States interviewed in the
ABA survey, the determination of an appropriate age differential set off
considerable debate. Under current laws, depending upon the State, the age
differential may be set at from 2 to 6 years older than the minor. Most often,
however, it is set at 3 or 4 years. In the survey, the age differentials reflected
these variations. 

Another category of persons some States choose not to penalize can be
found in the marriage defense/exclusion. Some statutes specify that marriage is
a defense. Although, generally, the marriage has to have occurred before the
sexual penetration takes place, in one State it will effectively "cure" the crime if
it occurs after the fact. In addition, some States only permit this defense if the
minor is at least a certain age. Moreover, in a number of States, the exclusion is
stated not as a defense but is included in defining the crime, such as sexual
penetration by a person who is not the spouse of the minor.

The ABA survey of issues in recent legislation and proposals indicates that
some States are targeting "older" offenders. In Florida, for example, the crime
of unlawful sexual activity with certain minors applies to sexual activity between
16- and 17-year-olds and persons 24 or older. Absent other conditions, such
as being in a position of familial or custodial authority, consensual sex with these
minors by those 18 or older does not fall within a crime. Viewed another way,
the law essentially imposes a 7- or 8-year age gap when 16- and 17-year-olds
are involved. As noted in the survey, other States have expressed similar
concerns about older offenders, viewing these relationships as "exploitative."
More often, however, this concern has arisen over the possible penalty to be
imposed.

o Questions to consider regarding legislation on raising the age of consent:

1. Why is the legislation being introduced? (See above discussion of purpose.)

2. What are the current laws and are they being implemented?

3. To what age should the criminal laws be used to protect a minor from
"voluntary" sexual intercourse?

4. Against whom should the criminal laws be used to protect a minor from
sexual intercourse? It may be useful to break this question down further: Who
should be penalized? Who should the laws target?

Available Penalties and Factors Warranting Increased Sanctions

o The issue. A variety of sanctions, penalties, and treatment may be associated
with statutory rape, including prison or jail, child support, fines, counseling, and
treatment services. Modern statutory rape laws usually reflect multilevel
statutory schemes with different penalties set forth depending upon the age of
the minor. In addition, laws may provide for increased penalties if the defendant
is much older than the minor, if pregnancy results, or under other circumstances. 

o Discussion. Sanctions or penalties set forth in State statutes typically include
possible or mandatory prison or jail time, child support, fines, and, at least in
California, civil penalties. In addition, restitution, counseling, therapy, and other
treatment services may be ordered.

Changes to the possible sentences have recently been considered by a number
of States. At least 10 States responding to the ABA survey indicated that they
had considered raising or lengthening the penalty for statutory rape.[3] Although 
most of these States considered raising the possible sentence, some considered
legislation that raised the penalty for one level of the crime, but lowered it for
another level. For example, Oregon recently considered decreasing the penalty
for rape in the third degree (sex with a minor under 16 years of age; a class C
felony) but increasing the penalty for contributing to the sexual delinquency of a
minor if a pregnancy results. Further, as discussed in the next section, other
States considered or established mandatory minimum sentences when the
defendant and/or minor met certain age requirements. For example, in Georgia
the minimum penalty is 10 to 20 years (increased from 1 to 20 years) when the
defendant has sex with a minor under the age of 16.

Child support. Some States authorize an order for child support as part of
their statutory rape statute. In addition, as noted below in the Pregnancy:
Sentencing and child support section, courts in a number of States are
authorized to award child support through other, more general authority.

Fines/civil penalties. Many statutes authorize imposing fines up to a certain
amount. In addition, California recently adopted a provision that allows the
award of civil penalties in statutory rape cases. The possible amount depends
upon the age differential between the offender and the minor; the range is from
$2,000 (age gap of 2 years) to $25,000 (minor under 16 and offender over
21). The district attorney is authorized to bring actions to recover the civil
penalties. An amount equal to the costs of pursuing the action is to be deposited
with the treasurer of the county in which the judgment was entered. The
remainder goes to a State Underage Pregnancy Prevention Fund.

Sex offender registration. A Federal law passed in 1994 ties Federal funds to
State passage of sex offender registration laws. This law has been amended
several times, most recently in 1997. All States currently have sex offender
registration laws. The Federal law requires a minimum 10-year registration for
a person convicted of "a criminal offense against a victim who is a minor." A
series of clauses in the Federal law further defines "a criminal offense against a
victim who is a minor." State statutory rape offenses would appear to be
covered under two of the clauses set forth in the Federal law. Thus, it appears
that statutory rape offenses should be covered under State sex offender
registration laws to comply with Federal law.

Age of the minor and/or age of the offender. By statute, a number of States
have determined that the age of the minor and/or the age of the defendant
should be a factor in sentencing. As noted previously, the modern trend is
toward multilevel statutes, with increased penalties associated with sexual
intercourse with younger minors. Moreover, as noted above, States in recent
years increasingly believe "older" defendants warrant increased or mandatory
minimum penalties. For example, the survey revealed the following:

--Delaware raised the penalty from 0 10 years to 2 20 years when the minor
is under 16 years of age and the offender is 10 or more years older or when the
minor is under age 14 and the offender is at least 19 years old. 

--In Georgia, the minimum penalty is now 10 20 years, up from 1 20 years,
when an offender at least 21 years old has sex with someone under 16 years of
age. 

--A bill proposed in Oregon in 1997 would increase the penalty for rape in the
third degree (minor under 16 years) when the defendant is at least 21 years of
age. The crime would then become a class B felony, punishable by up to 10
years and/or by a fine of $200,000.

Pregnancy: Sentencing and child support. As the ABA survey indicates, a
number of States considered legislation that focused on pregnancy. These
proposals reflect different, and possibly conflicting, penalties. When pregnancy
results, sentencing can include longer prison time and more severe financial
responsibility through restitution and child support. 

--Illinois proposed and Oregon passed legislation that  raises the penalty if a
pregnancy results by raising the felony up another level. 

--Eight other States indicated that pregnancy was considered an aggravating
factor at sentencing, generally not a criterion written into the statute, but
included as part of the sentencing guidelines.[4] 

--Several States permit the court to order restitution for costs associated with
the pregnancy dating back to the birth of the child. Some expressed concern
that this might permit offenders who can pay to go free, while poor offenders
who cannot pay are sent to jail. 

Use of drugs and/or alcohol. Some States have considered or passed
legislation increasing the criminal penalties for sex with minors when drugs or
alcohol are involved. Florida, for example, considered increasing the penalty for
sex with minors if the offense was committed while the minor was under the
influence of drugs or alcohol. 

Questions to consider regarding legislation on penalties:

1. What is the purpose of the penalty provision? Is it consistent with the
avowed purpose(s) of the statutory rape legislation?

2. Does State or local statistical information provided by service providers,
law enforcement, and prosecutors indicate the legislation is warranted?


3. Would more vigorous enforcement of existing laws reach the desired result
of the proposed legislation?

4. Are there other means, such as education, that can be used to reach the
desired goal, either to supplement the proposed legislation or to replace it?

Reporting

o The issue. All States have laws that require certain classes of professions,
such as school or medical personnel, to report child abuse and neglect. The
question of whether statutory rape laws are included within these mandatory
reporting laws is unclear in many States. More research on this issue is needed.

o Discussion. The ABA survey revealed that in recent years at least four States
considered making the reporting of statutory rape mandatory by redefining
child abuse to include statutory rape.[5] Some States have done so, usually
with the limitation that the minor is below a certain age, such as 15 years of age
in Florida. This change requires those who are mandatory reporters of child
abuse to report statutory rape. As previously noted, States may be concerned
that mandatory reporting requirements will discourage minors from seeking or
remaining in health and mental health care treatment. 

Delaware approached the reporting issue differently. Rather than redefining
child abuse in the law, a "memorandum of understanding" an informal agreement
among law enforcement, State agencies, and schools was adopted stating that
statutory rape cases are considered child abuse, and the child abuse reporting
mechanisms are to be used to their fullest extent to report it.

o Questions to consider regarding reporting laws:

1. Does the State child abuse reporting law include statutory rape crimes? Does
it cover all minors or only those up to a certain age? Does it only cover actions
of a parent or someone in a position of trust or authority?

2. Has the legislature obtained input from health and mental health care
providers on such issues as confidentiality and the potential impact that
reporting may have on delivery of needed services to victims of statutory rape?

Special Prosecution Units

o The issue. Some States are not actually focusing on revising their statutory
rape laws, but rather are channeling funds into creating special prosecution units
or are including these crimes in their child sex assault units.

o Discussion. The ABA survey revealed that at least seven of the States
interviewed considered creating special units or task forces to prosecute
statutory rape offenses.[6] According to these States, these units encourage
prosecutors to take statutory rape cases seriously even when faced with an
unwilling victim. Since some prosecutors typically focus efforts on prosecuting
cases with the highest probability of success, statutory rape cases are often low
priority because prosecutors anticipate unwilling witnesses or unsympathetic
jurors. Some States find that creating specialized units counters this low priority
status. In addition, States find that developing specialized units creates certain
efficiencies prosecutors become more familiar with issues in the cases, develop
expertise with the issues, and begin to establish working relationships with
others working with teens.

o Questions to consider regarding special prosecution units: 

1. Is legislation necessary to create or to fund a special   prosecutor/unit for
these cases, or can already existing  specialized child abuse units take on these
cases?

2. Do State and local prosecutors favor the specialized units or do they have
another proposal on how to increase enforcement?

3. Have States that have implemented specialized units met with continued
success in prosecuting these cases?

---------------------------- 

VI. Conclusion

Each State legislature must determine the need for amendments to statutes or
development of new legislation. However, legislators and their aides may need
guidance as they consider the questions of exactly what kind of laws to pass
and whether current laws require adjustment to reflect new realities. The
questions and issues posed in this Handbook are intended to support thorough
discussion and consideration of the issues surrounding statutory rape legislation.

OVC encourages legislators and their staff to clarify the purposes of their State
statutory rape laws. Legislators should also review existing laws, research State
and local statistics, review other research studies, and confer with other State
legislative staff members. Hearings should be held to assess the impact of the
current state of enforcement as well as the potential impact of enforcing any
new or amended laws.

---------------------------- 

VII. Notes

1. The U.S. Congress included provisions on statutory rape in the Welfare
Reform Act (Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
of 1996, P.L. 104-193, August 1996), which notes a need for the Federal
Government to study the issue.

2. Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New
Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Washington.

3. California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, North Carolina,
Oregon, Utah, and Washington.

4. California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Oregon, and
Washington.

5. Delaware, Florida, Oregon, and Tennessee.

6. California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, New York, and Utah.

---------------------------- 

For copies of this handbook and/or additional information, please contact:

Office for Victims of Crime Resource Center (OVCRC)
P.O. Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Telephone: 1-800-627-6872 or 301-519-5500

E-mail orders for print publications to puborder@ncjrs.gov

E-mail questions to askovc@ncjrs.gov

Send your feedback on this service to tellncjrs@ncjrs.gov 

Refer to publication number: NCJ 178238