Should a pedophile be granted parental visits?

jillio said:
There are techniques being used in sexual offender treatment programs that are actually showing high success rates over time. It is a common misconception by the general public that pediophilia is never amenable to treatment.
Click to expand...

Now who is making an assumption!!
 
Glenn said:
Yeah, that phrase "too great a danger" comes up every time these people are mentioned. It seems to be the prevailing thought regarding the situation.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that "too great a danger" is not based on anything factual, but is simply an emotional reaction.
 
jillio said:
Yes, and that "too great a danger" is not based on anything factual, but is simply an emotional reaction.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and that is why some say it is not constitutional to lock them up indefinitely. :dunno:
 
Glenn said:
Yeah, and that is why some say it is not constitutional to lock them up indefinitely. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Agreed. Once again, these decisions need to be made on each individual case based on the unique circumstances of that case and that case alone. Not just type of offense, but also progress in treatment.

Thank goodness we tend to do that in practice rather than lumping all into one single category and condemning for life.
 
Call me crazy, but I am going to go out on a limb and say the only REAL psychologist in this thread knows what she's talking about when it comes to the mental state of sex offenders.
 
jillio said:
Agreed. Once again, these decisions need to be made on each individual case based on the unique circumstances of that case and that case alone. Not just type of offense, but also progress in treatment.

Thank goodness we tend to do that in practice rather than lumping all into one single category and condemning for life.
Click to expand...
I am fairly sure that only certain offenders are sent to McNeil Island. The rest are everywhere else and can be found on the sheriff's department website.
 
TheWriteAlex said:
Call me crazy, but I am going to go out on a limb and say the only REAL psychologist in this thread knows what she's talking about when it comes to the mental state of sex offenders.
Click to expand...

There are -many- psychologists and psychiatrists which hold the opinion that there is no currently effective therapy for pedophilia and the like.

Don't assume that because one psychologist believes that some serious sex offenders are capable of re-entering society, that she somehow represents all psychologists, or that she believes that a widely effective treatment exists- because even among those who believe an effective treatment exists, few are deluded enough to believe it works on most or all offenders.
 
Aleser said:
There are -many- psychologists and psychiatrists which hold the opinion that there is no currently effective therapy for pedophilia and the like.

Don't assume that because one psychologist believes that some serious sex offenders are capable of re-entering society, that she somehow represents all psychologists, or that she believes that a widely effective treatment exists- because even among those who believe an effective treatment exists, few are deluded enough to believe it works on most or all offenders.
Click to expand...

Pedophillia is a psychiatric diagnosis that is not dependent upon sexual activity with minors. Just because someone has a diagnosis of pedophillia does not mean they have acted on their fantasy.

No treatment works on all offenders. That is why I have said repeatedly in this thread, that cases must be considered on an individual basis. But neither is it logical to state that sex offenders cannot be treated, and they should never be released or allowed to see their children is wrong, given empirical evidence that there are treatment modalities that are effective and prevent recidivism.
 
jillio said:
Pedophillia is a psychiatric diagnosis that is not dependent upon sexual activity with minors. Just because someone has a diagnosis of pedophillia does not mean they have acted on their fantasy.

No treatment works on all offenders. That is why I have said repeatedly in this thread, that cases must be considered on an individual basis. But neither is it logical to state that sex offenders cannot be treated, and they should never be released or allowed to see their children is wrong, given empirical evidence that there are treatment modalities that are effective and prevent recidivism.
Click to expand...

Have you suddenly determined that I'm a moron? Because you're sure acting like that's the conclusion you've come to.

One could gather from the context of this thread that I meant pedophilia in the context of people who've already acted on it, or in this particular case a parent who has already acted on it.

Likewise, I wish you'd stop throwing out that those of us who disagree with you are "Teh Uneducated General Publics" who are clearly merely acting upon knee-jerk reactions. You find it an acceptable level of risk that some sexual offenders in treatment re-offend, many people (psychologists and psychiatrists included) are not of that opinion.

You are expressing your personal beliefs that these conditions can be treated to an acceptable extent, and while some of the psych community shares that belief with you, it is by no means all.

There are "effective" medications on the market which work for 10% more patients in the active group than they do the control group. I could tout that they're "effective and fda approved!", but I've still got 83% of the patients pissed off and unwell. "Effective" is a rather meaningless word in this context. How effective in each group? And if you took a vote to the general public in the community these people are being released into, do you think your levels of effectiveness could convince the community to embrace that person back into community life? No.

Why then, indeed, should a psychologist be able to make the call that a person with a non-0% risk of re-offending is perfectly fine to be wandering around a society wherein pretty much everyone else does not want them there or accept their right to be there?

It seems to me an awful lot like the psychologists who do deal with these sorts of criminals are either the sort deluded enough to believe their treatments are effective enough to ever be socially acceptable, or more commonly, simply the sort that categorize risk as best they can and hope, not very strongly, that the legal system might do something based on their decision.

Quite frankly, you live in a country about as likely to jail someone for a serious sex crime as they would be if the person happened to be living in a mudhut in Africa. Personally, I'm worried about getting more people into the system where they belong, not acting so "humanely" upon them so as to infringe on other (innocent people's) rights to live safely in their communities.

But what do I know, I only have to deal with the victims, right? :hmm:
 
Aleser said:
Have you suddenly determined that I'm a moron? Because you're sure acting like that's the conclusion you've come to.

One could gather from the context of this thread that I meant pedophilia in the context of people who've already acted on it, or in this particular case a parent who has already acted on it.

Likewise, I wish you'd stop throwing out that those of us who disagree with you are "Teh Uneducated General Publics" who are clearly merely acting upon knee-jerk reactions. You find it an acceptable level of risk that some sexual offenders in treatment re-offend, many people (psychologists and psychiatrists included) are not of that opinion.

You are expressing your personal beliefs that these conditions can be treated to an acceptable extent, and while some of the psych community shares that belief with you, it is by no means all.

There are "effective" medications on the market which work for 10% more patients in the active group than they do the control group. I could tout that they're "effective and fda approved!", but I've still got 83% of the patients pissed off and unwell. "Effective" is a rather meaningless word in this context. How effective in each group? And if you took a vote to the general public in the community these people are being released into, do you think your levels of effectiveness could convince the community to embrace that person back into community life? No.

Why then, indeed, should a psychologist be able to make the call that a person with a non-0% risk of re-offending is perfectly fine to be wandering around a society wherein pretty much everyone else does not want them there or accept their right to be there?

It seems to me an awful lot like the psychologists who do deal with these sorts of criminals are either the sort deluded enough to believe their treatments are effective enough to ever be socially acceptable, or more commonly, simply the sort that categorize risk as best they can and hope, not very strongly, that the legal system might do something based on their decision.

Quite frankly, you live in a country about as likely to jail someone for a serious sex crime as they would be if the person happened to be living in a mudhut in Africa. Personally, I'm worried about getting more people into the system where they belong, not acting so "humanely" upon them so as to infringe on other (innocent people's) rights to live safely in their communities.

But what do I know, I only have to deal with the victims, right? :hmm:
Click to expand...

I am expressing my beliefs based on empirical evidence. That is quite different that one expressing their belief based on emotion.:cool2:
 
jillio said:
That is not an assumption. It is empirically proven.:roll:
Click to expand...

Yes, empirically proven to be a <10% percent success rate. Would you trust you own child around these people based on that rate!!! You have no problem saying; Once a drug addict, always a drug addict. So why do you think these sex offenders are any different. Deep within in them, just like a drug addict, they have had a "taste" and WANT another.
 
rolling7 said:
Yes, empirically proven to be a <10% percent success rate. Would you trust you own child around these people based on that rate!!! You have no problem saying; Once a drug addict, always a drug addict. So why do you think these sex offenders are any different. Deep within in them, just like a drug addict, they have had a "taste" and WANT another.
Click to expand...

You have never seen me say anything of the kind.

Again, you are making assumptions that are not valid.
 
There was an instance of a sex offender actually videoing himself raping a baby....Can a person like that be rehabilitiated?...Even if he could, would anybody want him around?

I'm not sorry to say that I have not one iota of sympathy for sex offenders. They "may be mentally illl"...but the victim(s) are scarred far beyond the help that is given to them. And some, are too ashamed to admit what has happened to them. Hence, a lifetime of distrust and depression, and never ever being able to wipe the incident(s) from their minds.
 
Like I said, each case has to be considered for it's individual circumstances. You can't paint everyone with the same brush, no matter who they are.
 
It's a common myth that most sex offenders would re-offend. I used to think that but it was my friend who worked as a cop in sex offense dept in police who told me it's untrue.

I looked up and it turned out he was right. Statistics show it's not the case. All the attention is often paid to hardcore dangerous pedophiles who have trouble not to re-offend but the majority of sex offenders with a minor don't repeat. After all, a lot of them have kids and understand it's wrong.

"The high recidivism rate among sex offenders is repeated so often that it is usually accepted as truth, but in fact recent studies show that the recidivism rates for sex offenses is not unusually high. According to a U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics study ("Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from Prison in 1994"), just five percent of sex offenders followed for three years after their release from prison in 1994 were arrested for another sex crime. A study released in 2003 by the Bureau found that within three years, 3.3 percent of the released child molesters were arrested again for committing another sex crime against a child. Three to five percent is hardly a high repeat offender rate."

Predator Panic: Reality Check on Sex Offenders | LiveScience

Sexual relations with a child is absolutely wrong but adults must be calm when children discuss sexual molestation.

Pedophilia is a mental illness - it disrupts normal sexual development. Pedophiles have poor relationships with adults. We don't understand them but to call death for them is ridiculous. Kids can recover and adjust well after molestation so don't assume all kids will be permamently damaged goods after the incident. Proper and swift counseling can help them a great deal. I also believe that parents of victims should be counseled as well because it affects them adversely as well.

A lot of pedophiles are not violent and rarely violently rape kids. They develop "relationships" with kids and often seduce them. It's NOT exactly like they're going to kidnap and rape them and throw them out. It does NOT work that way for most pedophiles. It's usually someone close to the kids - it could be uncles, fathers, stepfathers, relatives, friends, and it's rare that it's a random stranger. They "love" kids but have inappropriate sexual attraction to them and that's the problem they struggle to deal with.

So, like what jillio said, you cannot paint all with one brush. It doesn't work that way.
 
netrox said:
It's a common myth that most sex offenders would re-offend. I used to think that but it was my friend who worked as a cop in sex offense dept in police who told me it's untrue.

I looked up and it turned out he was right. Statistics show it's not the case. All the attention is often paid to hardcore dangerous pedophiles who have trouble not to re-offend but the majority of sex offenders with a minor don't repeat. After all, a lot of them have kids and understand it's wrong.

"The high recidivism rate among sex offenders is repeated so often that it is usually accepted as truth, but in fact recent studies show that the recidivism rates for sex offenses is not unusually high. According to a U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics study ("Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from Prison in 1994"), just five percent of sex offenders followed for three years after their release from prison in 1994 were arrested for another sex crime. A study released in 2003 by the Bureau found that within three years, 3.3 percent of the released child molesters were arrested again for committing another sex crime against a child. Three to five percent is hardly a high repeat offender rate."

Predator Panic: Reality Check on Sex Offenders | LiveScience

Sexual relations with a child is absolutely wrong but adults must be calm when children discuss sexual molestation.

Pedophilia is a mental illness - it disrupts normal sexual development. Pedophiles have poor relationships with adults. We don't understand them but to call death for them is ridiculous. Kids can recover and adjust well after molestation so don't assume all kids will be permamently damaged goods after the incident. Proper and swift counseling can help them a great deal. I also believe that parents of victims should be counseled as well because it affects them adversely as well.

A lot of pedophiles are not violent and rarely violently rape kids. They develop "relationships" with kids and often seduce them. It's NOT exactly like they're going to kidnap and rape them and throw them out. It does NOT work that way for most pedophiles. It's usually someone close to the kids - it could be uncles, fathers, stepfathers, relatives, friends, and it's rare that it's a random stranger. They "love" kids but have inappropriate sexual attraction to them and that's the problem they struggle to deal with.

So, like what jillio said, you cannot paint all with one brush. It doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that, netrox. I always have a great deal of admiration for anyone who can say, "I used to think that but I was wrong."
 
netrox said:
So, like what jillio said, you cannot paint all with one brush. It doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...

So, would you be okay with your child/niece/nephew/sister/partner being a victim of the "mere" 3% who are -caught- for an additional crime in a narrow study in a short period of time?

After all, 97 "non-reoffending" (more specifically, not caught reoffending) people got freed, it just happened to have the price tag of at least 3 new victims of sexual offenders. A fair price, in your estimation, yes?
 
Back
Top