In America: Guam Purposes Long-Term Protective Orders To Shield Victims From Offenders
Guam legislation has introduced a bill directed towards protecting crime victims. The Victim Protection Continuity Act of 2025 ensures protective orders don't expire due to offenders being in prison and attempts to provide stronger safety protections to victims when offenders are released from prison.
Victim Protection Continuity Act
If the Victim Protection Continuity Act becomes law, it will create several changes to Guam’s justice system. Currently, protective orders can expire when offenders are incarcerated. The Act will ensure protective orders do not expire and will automatically be extended when an offender is released. Guam’s Court systems lack the authority to issue protective orders. The Act will provide courts the power to issue order of protections if an offender is released and is still considered a credible threat to victims. Courts would be authorized to issue protective orders at the time of sentencing in cases involving abuse, harassment, stalking, sexual offenses, or threats of violence—even if a victim has not filed a separate civil petition. Senator Parkinson has openly asked the public to share their perspectives to help improve the Act and its impact.
Senator Parkinson introduced the Act and has advocated for it deeply. He believes, when offenders are released from prison, there needs to be stronger safety measures for victims during these high-risk periods. Parkinson supports extending the duration of order of protections and providing courts the power to issue order of protections at sentencing.
“There should be no opening for intimidation or retaliation…Do not contact, do not approach, [and] do not intimidate…This bill is about continuity. A victim should not lose protection simply because a clock ran out while an offender was behind bars.”
Order of protections are used in the justice system to protect victims of crimes by prohibiting offenders from having contact with their victims. To obtain an order of protection, victims must file a petition to a court. After a court finds sufficient evidence of a threat or harm to a victim, an order of protection may be placed temporarily or permanently. Failure to comply with an order of protection can result in legal consequences for offenders. Individuals who violate an order of protection can face arrest and prosecution.
Are There Misconceptions About Recidivism?
Advocates argue stronger protective orders support the reduction of intimidation, retaliation, and repeat victimization. When protective orders are clear, current, and enforced, they are associated with lower recidivism rates. A 2025 study with the Journal of Developmental and Life‑Course Criminology found protection orders significantly reduce repeat violence over time. In the long-term, the study found protective orders act as a deterrent stopping offenders from reoffending. The research did find that with high-risk offenders, there are spikes in breaching orders of protections immediately after it is issued.
Supporters of criminal justice reform argue stories and statistics regarding criminals reoffending are weaponized and push back on important changes in the legal system. Due to the Will Horton effect, reform policy is often challenged by public fear. Examples of high-profile criminal cases where criminals used their freedom to reoffend creates a concern with establishing preventative measures to avoid recurrence.
The Prison Policy Initiative (PPI) argues recidivism statistics are widely misunderstood and used to block reforms in the criminal justice system. It argues recidivism statistics are misleading without context. Misconceptions can be made from different measures like re-arrest, re-conviction, and re-incarceration not being properly explained. The PPI claims rates from these kinds of studies can be questionable due to different methods of calculations. PPI argues despite violent and sex-related crimes being the cause for harsh policy, these kinds of offenders make up the minority of rearrests. People convicted of violent or sex-related crimes have the lowest recidivism rates when compared to other offense categories. The PPI believes harsh policy makes it so non-violent offenders have limited access to opportunities for retribution. The PPI urges policymakers to consider additional statistics like employment, housing stability, education, substance use, family/community ties, and successful completion of supervision when deciding different forms of punishment for non-violent offenders. The Initiative encourages justice reform advocates to support policy that provides shorter probation/parole terms, fewer technical requirements, ending incarceration for technical violations, and investment in reentry-heavy communities.
