Kare 11's Botched Investigation Into Sex Offenders

To anyone living in Minnesota, Kare 11 is a household name in news. They are largely a reputable company with many investigations and news articles under their belt. However, a recent investigation into sex offenders, and the follow-up to that investigation, should appall you. Why? Because their investigation not only was extremely incomplete, but touts a single example as the legal norm in Minnesota for sex offenders, and argues that all sex offenders are dangerous. In fact, their opening headline for the primary investigation reads:

KARE 11 Investigates: Minnesota's Secret Sex Offenders

A LITTLE-KNOWN LEGAL LOOPHOLE IS ALLOWING HUNDREDS OF CHILD SEXUAL PREDATORS IN MINNESOTA TO SLIDE UNDER THE RADAR, LEAVING PARENTS IN THE DARK ABOUT THE DANGER THEY MAY POSE.

Hundreds Of Predators?

If you read very far into their report, however, you see that "hundreds of child sexual predators" includes a fair amount of juveniles who received a stay of adjudication and 210 other adults 22 years old and older. A stay of adjudication means that an offender must complete a series of requirements, and their crime is not available in public databases unless they do not complete the requirements.

Some of the requirements, for example, are to complete a lengthy probation sentence and complete sex offender treatment (treatment which usually requires at least two years to complete). Standard probation requirements for sex offenders typically involves no contact with anyone under 18 years old, and no pornography. 

What their investigation completely ignores is that Minnesota is home to 17,654 registered sex offenders as of December 6th, 2016. The ability to find out just how many of those 17,654 offenders are considered "high-risk" by the state is challenging at best. To the best of my recall, the amount of level 3 sex offenders in the state does not exceed 2,000 people. 210 people, compared with these numbers, is miniscule. The worst thing about risk level in Minnesota is that it is not determined by an actual risk-assessment administered by a trained psychologist: It is determined based entirely on Minnesota's own criteria, which was developed by studying sex offenders released from prison.

To the average person, that may sound like a good thing... until you realize that many low-level sex offenders, including those convicted of child sexual abuse and sexual abuse material crimes, are frequently given probation if they are a first-time offender. The screening tool that Minnesota uses to determine the risk level of its sex offenders does not have as much reliability as other screening tools, like the Static-99R. More work is needed.

What About Recidivism And Megan's Law?

To make these matters worse, Minnesota's Department of Corrections has done two "recent" studies on sex offenders that would matter to the average person: The 2007 report on recidivism, and the report on Megan's Law in 2008. Both of these reports are as flawed as the system they use to assign risk level: The 2007 report on recidivism looks at 3,166 sex offenders released from a correctional facility (read: prison) between 1990 and 2002, which means their report does not look at the vast majority of sex offenders, only those released from prison. 

The report discussing Megan's Law is also extremely narrow in its scope, and contains methodological errors that would shame any statistician: They conclude, based on their study of recidivism rates of 155 level three offenders subject to notification and 125 who were not, that notification has a strong deterrent effect and reduces recidivism. They essentially claim that correlation proves causation, with no control methods used to distinguish  between the results of these groups. 

Overall Sex Offender Statistics

The statistics discussed in the aforementioned reports are shockingly incomplete, and give the public just enough data to shut up. However, a plethora of other studies have also been done on sex offenders. You have heard me mention them here numerous times: A study done in New York on 21 years of arrest data found that 95% of new sexual crimes were committed not by registered sex offenders, but first-time offenders new to the criminal justice system. Other studies have yielded similar results, usually finding that at least 90% of sex crimes are committed by first-time offenders. This means that the numerous processes we have to address sex offenders attempts to answer approximately 5-10% of new sex crime. 

That study, combined with the numerous meta-analyses done on sex offender recidivism, point to the idea that sex offenders are not nearly as dangerous as people believe: Around 12% of sex offenders will re-offend with a sexual crime, and around 30-40% will reoffend with any crime. That contrasts to the national average for criminal recidivism being around 60-75%. It has been said in media articles on the subject that the only crime with a lower recidivism rate is murder. 

Cost

I know from previous experience with the Minnesota legislature that Minnesota spends a few hundred thousand on preventing sexual assault, and I learned recently that we spend $93 million on managing and tracking sexual offenders. I believe this is very imbalanced, and makes it clear that our focus is not on preventing sexual crimes, but on reacting where they do occur.

The Take-Away

Kare 11 focuses on a miniscule fraction of 5% of new sex criminals in the making. Already, some of Minnesota's legislators, including Gov. Mark Dayton and Rep. Tony Cornish are promising to fix how stays of adjudication are used. But nothing is being promised to address and prevent 95% of new sex crime, which is not committed by sex offenders, but by those new to the criminal justice system. Minnesota, like so many other states, is focusing its efforts on endlessly punishing those who pose the smallest amount of risk in terms of future sex crimes, and focusing next to nothing on preventing sexual crimes before they can happen. Indeed, Minnesota spends $93 million a year on SORN policies, and only $300,000 on sexual assault prevention. Our priorities are not on keeping the public safe.

As an advocate pushing the end of child sexual abuse before it can happen, I am outraged that not only Minnesota's leaders, but also its major media outlets, are doing nothing about the majority of sexual crimes in Minnesota. We are weak: The only statement worth supporting in Kare 11's investigation is that Minnesota has created an atmosphere of legal tolerance of sexual violence. While that statement was intended to address how sex offenders are treated in the legal system, I think that statement is used far too narrowly. 

I am ashamed to call myself a Minnesotan.

Alternative Solutions

There are several solutions that many of my readers may already be familiar with, like knowing the facts and the warning behaviors in potential abusers, and many of my other suggestions center around reforming sexual offender laws to be more effective at protecting the public. Some of them concern educating families, and educating children.

Sex offender registration needs reform, primarily because it lumps low-risk and no-risk offenders in with high-risk and recidivist sex offenders, which means law enforcement has a harder job investigating sex crimes. Instead, it would be best to use the money currently allocated to the sex offender registry in each state to perform psychological risk assessments on each offender. These risk assessments would divide only into low and high risk. These assessments would be done by an independent board of expert psychologists in each state, and only those who score as high-risk will be registered with law enforcement. The specific statute being charged and convicted should have no bearing on risk level, and the circumstances of the offense and risk assessments should be used as the determining factor for risk. As risk level and offender registration are not punitive measures, they could only be used as a factor when determining a criminal sentence. 

The trend in research identifies several issues with publicly identifying sex offenders in the community, commonly known as sex offender notifications. Many of these issues can be solved by only notifying the community in certain special circumstances: Multiple sex crimes, a high-risk score on risk assessment, release from prison, and two or more psychological disorders could be some of the criteria. The compliance patrols that are currently aimed at low-risk and no-risk offenders could instead be aimed at those who meet enough criteria to warrant public notification. Not all high-risk offenders would warrant public notification, only those who meet enough criteria would qualify. Anyone subject to sex offender notifications would be incarcerated for life if they commit another offense of any kind.

The research surrounding residency restrictions is nearly unanimous in saying that they do not keep the public safer, and in some cases, can lead to increased homelessness. This increased homelessness has been shown to increase risk factors for further offending, as well as making it more difficult for offenders to reestablish themselves as productive members of society. Therefore, residency restrictions should be completely abolished except for those warranting community notification, as covered in the heading "sex offender notifications". As such, any such offender committing another offense of any kind would be subject to a life sentence.

In many states, sex offenders are restricted from random things that do not have any effect on public safety. For example, sex offenders in some states cannot use the internet, or cannot use certain aspects of the internet, such as for gaming, social media, or even commenting on the news. In other places, sex offenders cannot participate in Halloween or attend the state fair. As 95% of new sex crime is perpetrated by those without criminal convictions, these restrictions do nothing to keep the public safer and put onerous enforcement requirements on supervising corrections officers and law enforcement that could be better spent detecting new sex crimes or educating the community regarding safety and prevention. 

Some funding originally directed at sex offender registration in the past must be directed to educating families about appropriate safety plans, facts around child sexual abuse and sexual assault, warning behaviors in potential abusers, resources for individualized help on a variety of topics, and normative vs. atypical sexual behavior in children and teenagers. This education plan would be created using accurate terminology, research-based factoids, and produced by experts in these areas. 

In line with the aforementioned education of families, schools and families should have access to age-appropriate sexual education covering a wide variety of topics to prepare each child for life in the adult world. Such education should be covered both at school and at home, and the standards for this education should be a principled skeleton of topics. It would then be decided on the local level how to cover each principle, so that each community has a say in practicing this education. These principles should include:

• Legal and ethical specifics on the subject of consent
• Anatomical health practices including STD's, safe sex, and physical boundaries
• How to form and keep social and emotional boundaries
• Resources that a child can use for a variety of situations including but not limited to, sexual abuse, mental health disorders, physical health concerns, and relationship health.

Thoughts on Residency Restrictions

I would like to present, for your amusement, Fox News:

This came up in my Google news feed. Maybe I am just a contrary jerk, but I chose not to play the video. I guessed at what they might say. Given their full report, it appears I guessed wrong. I did, however, recall another article I read out of Milwaukee several months ago:

It seems to me that our communities are much safer when sex offenders have homes that law enforcement can check in on, rather than being... somewhere not with a home, wandering the streets, doing whatever it is homeless sex offenders do. Look for jobs? Wallow in misery? I am not entirely sure, but 200 homeless sex offenders being the result of a single ordinance restricting where they can live does not increase my confidence that Milwaukee knew what it was doing by enacting such a restriction.

That, combined with the facts about residency restrictions, tells me that residency restrictions do more harm to our communities than good.

ADDENDUM:
Fox News has now released their full report, for which the aforementioned video was just an advertisement. I am happy to report that their full report did a fantastic job of investigating the facts on the issue, and reporting them accordingly. The rest of this post has been updated to reflect this new information.

Areas Of Concern In Sexual Abuse Prevention

Introduction

There are a great many challenges to tackling sexual abuse prevention, and these challenges must be addressed so that sexual abuse prevention can even be effective.

Terminology

This may be obvious to anyone who has read much in this blog, but people just do not use words right. The incorrect use of terminology can lead to people believing myths about child sexual abuse that simply are not true, sometimes dangerously so. Some obvious examples:

Child pornography (instead, use child sex abuse images or child sexual exploitation material

Pedophile (instead, use sex abuser, child rapist, preferential offender, etc.)

Pedophilia (pedophilia is a condition, a noun, not the act of child sexual abuse)

Child sex worker (children cannot consent, use sexual exploitation victim)

Sexual predator (most do not really fit the category of a true predator, and seems to imply that all abusers are the dangerous recidivists when most are not)

Sex offender (most people who abuse children are not on any registry)

For a full list, check my specificpost on the subject. The media is notorious for using improper terminology, because they attempt to bring pertinent facts about a very wide range of subjects… which means their knowledge in any one subject is extremely limited.

Underreporting... And Methods That Seek To Correct It

The bottom line is that most children do not disclose when they are sexually abused. It is estimated that for every one child that does come forward, another eight do not. In the United States, there has been a big push to pass Erin's Law (predictably named after a sexual abuse survivor named Erin). The idea of Erin's Law is that children are taught fire drills, tornado drills, car safety, water safety, etc... but not about body safety and how to get away from a sexual abuser. The message to children is to get away and tell an adult.

The problem with these educational methods is that it puts the responsibility on children not only to stop abuse, but to overcome the fear and confusion enough to tell an adult. It is a method that I do not endorse or agree with. It is one thing to teach boundaries and body safety, to teach children that they have a right to their bodies and they and only they can decide what is okay and what is not (be it hugs or anything else, the ability to set healthy boundaries is a great thing). But teaching a child, directly or indirectly, that it is their job to get away from an abuser will add to the confusion of sexual abuse.

Any methods involving the education of children must be well-researched and based in factual research, not feel-good methods that sound like a good idea. Plus, it relies on abuse to be occurring to be effective, which makes it a tertiary prevention method, not a primary prevention method. Teaching junior high and high school students about consent, the availability of mental health help for sexuality and sexual issues, and how to find resources to help them with a variety of topics would go a long ways when integrated with a sexual education program.

Disgust

This may be another obvious factor, but most people refuse to touch the subject of child sexual abuse with a ten-foot pole, never mind talk about it. This means that myths abound, no one is aware that it is a serious issue even in their community, and the veil of secrecy that enables abuse to happen is firmly in place.

People are also disgusted by anything related to pedophilia, because the mere idea of people finding children sexually attractive is enough to make people run away from any meaningful discussion. This means that the people remaining to discuss abuse, instead of being average, concerned citizens who could do good, are academics, ethicists, researchers, prevention advocates, activists, and those directly affected by the issue like sex offenders and survivors. This is all fine and good, but when the majority of people are not discussing a serious issue that affects 10-20% of children, all the laws in the world will make a very limited difference.

Mental Health Stigma

This is a vast subject all by itself, but the stigma against mental health issues still persists, and it drives people away from seeking a psychologist, therapist, or psychiatrist that could help them. This stigma is create not only by bullies, but by people in everyday speech through the language they use to refer to people with mental health issues. People use challenged, touched, disabled, retarded, nutcase, and many other terms to describe people with mental illness, and often, people with mental illness are defined by their mental illness.

What this means is that the myriad of factors that can contribute to mentally unhealthy people can also contribute to crimes like child sexual abuse. People with pedophilia do not seek help because of the stigma against them, and if they have no support system, their lives can turn into a spiral of depression, suicidal thoughts, and desperation that can make it feel like the only way out is to act out sexually. This potential is not limited just to those with pedophilia, and a great many people act out sexually as a way to cope with the internal strife that their lack of mental health can cause. A great many crimes could be avoided if people were readily able to get mental health help without fear of judgment, stigma, and ridicule. Thus, the stigma against mental health is a barrier to primary prevention.

Policy

Many of the laws that aim to prevent child sexual abuse are ineffective in doing so because they are based not in the facts and figures that experts and researchers know and trust, but by the opinions held by politicians, interest groups, and average parents. These groups largely are unaware that the policies they are pushing are ineffective. Why are they ineffective? They target people who have already acted and are unlikely to do so again, or they target children who are unlikely to be able to stop an abuser. They miss the majority of abusers, those we know and trust who have not yet acted or have not yet been caught.

The rights of sex offenders, while certainly relevant to the concerns about policies that seek to address child sexual abuse, are besides the point. The simple fact of the matter is that many of the sex offender laws and policies in place either do not have evidentiary support, or the evidentiary support for them indicates that they make the problems worse and not better by making it more difficult for sex offenders to engage in the sorts of activities that can keep them from re-offending (like starting a family, getting gainful employment, or finding a decent place to live). If our focus is truly the protection of children, then we must look exclusively at the facts and put policies that are based in these facts in place. In much of the United States, Canada, and Europe, we have not done this.

Politics

This may be another obvious area, but primary prevention is an area that is laden with politics. Not every single group supports initiatives that are based in fact, and some support initiatives and laws that have been shown to have an adverse affect on prevention efforts. In other words, not all prevention groups have done their research to know what works, and many prevention groups support initiatives that do not support prevention. Not everyone is on the same page, and there is often a divide between interest groups that aim to prevent, aim to educate, or aim to help survivors of sexual abuse. Not only this, but there are Republican efforts to prevent sexual abuse, and most of these efforts are tertiary prevention methods, while Democratic efforts tend to lean more towards softer approaches like rehabilitating and making resources available. These efforts appear to be as opposed as the rest of the two-party system is. As long as this divide remains, children will continue to suffer.

Wrap-Up

Primary prevention can prevail, and is a serious trend among many prevention agencies. While it may remain foreign in the minds of most people, it will eventually win out over the "punishment first" mentality that many of our current laws were written with. I believe these challenges will eventually be overcome, particularly if people continue discussing these hard issues.

The Politics Of Prevention

Prevention… Political?

Yes, the area of prevention is very political. Unfortunately, preventing child sexual abuse is not nearly as straightforward as researching the facts surrounding the issue, forming policies to address the facts, and getting those policies put in place. There are interest groups, such as the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA), the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), Rape Abuse Incest National Network (RAINN), Darkness to Light (D2L), Stop It Now, Abuse Stoppers, Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), Parents For Megan’s Law (PFML), and a number of other state-specific prevention organizations or abuse survivor networks. The problem? None of these organizations is united in the things that can help stop sexual abuse.

For example, the NCMEC this year pushed heavily for the passing of the Adam Walsh Renewal of 2016, a number of laws related to the sex offender registry. As I have stated many times, the facts do not support a sex offender registry being the most effective method of protecting children, given that most who are caught and sentenced do not repeat their crimes. PFML obviously pushes for Megan’s Law to be broader and works with the state of New York to monitor registered sex offenders. Yet none of these approaches is based in fact, and that should be disturbing to many people. Yet, it is not.

The One With The Most Resources Wins

A basic fact of any legislative battle over anything these days is that the party with the most resources to throw at an initiative is going to win. What this means is that, regardless of the efficacy of the initiative, if it has enough backing by enough money and people, that initiative takes the cake. That is why the Adam Walsh Renewal Act of 2016 passed this year. That is why International Megan’s Law was passed this year, even though it has zero basis in fact: People believe what politicians, media outlets, and interest groups tell them, even if what they are being told has no basis in fact.

Two Parties And A Lot Of Stupidity

I suppose that stupidity is a rather strong word that is best left out of academic circles, but the basic fact of the matter is that Republican candidates consistently vote down initiatives to provide comprehensive sexual education to children and that Democrats generally support these initiatives. Republicans often vote up measures to be “tougher on crime”, and Democrats generally vote up measures that provide “restorative justice”.

This is stupid. Why is this stupid? Because politicians are not experts in these fields. Psychologists, criminologists, researchers… all of the people dealing with the facts of these issues do not side with a particular political party. They side with what is effective, but that is not what gets popularity, votes, or public approval. One might ask what the point of having experts is if no one is willing to listen to them and do what they suggest.

The Rub

The political nature of these things amounts to a huge rub in the face of humanity. That rub is that putting in place systems and policies that are ineffective at rectifying the very problem they seek to correct means that, no matter what the issue is, the problem is not addressed in the most effective method possible. When that issue is child sexual abuse, that rub is not just a rub. It is pathetic and appalling, and should have every single person up in arms protesting the policies that do not do nearly enough to stop children from being sexually abused.

I wish I could say something light-hearted, like, “If the American public was aware of half of the facts around child sexual abuse, they would demand abolishing sex offender registries for all but the most heinous of recidivists.” The problem with that… is that most Americans do not even read up on the issue of child sexual abuse. No one cares enough, or they are uncomfortable discussing it, reading about it, and learning about it. Say what you will about effective marketing, but my blog only has a total of 6,300 page views to date. Yet I think most people would agree that the best method for solving a problem is to prevent it from becoming a problem in the first place. But when it comes to child sexual abuse, one must know why that is more effective before they can support primary prevention.

My Wish

My hope is that America, and indeed the rest of the world, wakes up to the reality that child sexual abuse is a large issue that affects a significant portion of the population, and that is just the statistics we know about. Sexual abuse and sexual assault are very underreported crimes. So my wish is that we stop bickering over what the solution is, listen to the experts that deal with this issue every day, and put systems in place that are based not in a political agenda, but on facts and research. I suppose that holds true for any issue, but child sexual abuse is too big an issue to get wrong. What will your contribution be?

Why Sexual Education Is Necessary To Primary Prevention

Sexual Education Should Be Mandatory

Sexual education of children is essential to the prevention of sexual abuse, before it can happen. This also applies to sexual assault. I believe that sexual education should be required of all children in every country in an age-appropriate format. But I am sure that saying that much may have shocked you, and you may wonder what the reasons I have are.

Say What?

Let us begin with defining what sexual education means. Sexual education is the educating of children about the topics and mechanics involved in sex and sexuality, but that is not all that it is. Sexual education means teaching children about safe sex practices, about consent, and about sexual boundaries. It also means teaching children that if they are having an issue of a sexual nature, they can get help for it.

Let me expand what I mean by that. If a child has been the victim of sexual abuse or assault, it means that the child hears they can get help and they can tell someone. They may not even realize that what was done to them was abusive. If a child has sexual thoughts towards someone else that they would like to act out, but have no idea how to go about that, they might seek help if they know they can. Some have no idea that is even an option.

It also means that if someone is wrestling with pedophilia, or a sexual attraction to children, they hear the message that there is help and they do not have to face it alone. You see, sexual education does not just mean teaching children about sex. Facing reality, they will find out about sex eventually. As rational human beings, we would prefer that they do not find out by watching pornography and getting an unrealistic idea of what sex is. Right?

Guidance Versus No Guidance

So… what happens when a child starts having sexual feelings, but they have no guidance for them? We know that there is age-appropriate and age-inappropriate sexual behavior, and we know that it is possible for children to sexually abuse other children. In the absence of knowing what to do with sexual feelings, or unwanted sexual advances, or sexual issues and struggles, they will do what children often do: Experiment. Sometimes, that experimentation is expected and does not harm other children. But sometimes, the other child is traumatized by such experimentation.

It is obviously beneficial for children to have guidance so that they learn what is and is not socially acceptable, and so that they can avoid harming someone else. Sexual education is essential to preventing child sexual abuse for that reason.

Everyone Makes It Political

Sexual education is a political topic for many, because there are differing approaches to sexual education. Some want abstinence education, or trying to teach children that they should abstain from sex before marriage. Some want comprehensive sexual education, or teaching children everything from the mechanics, boundaries, and expectations around sex to the physical health aspects of the risk of STD’s, AIDS/HIV, and safe sex. Others want to teach children about LGBTQ issues, so that children who have attractions to their same sex have resources to utilize, support groups to go to, or someplace to go to know they are not alone.

Let me cut through the political messes on this issue and ask you a simple question… If sexual education is not taught in school, and you are a parent, are you willing to honestly answer every question your child has about sex? Are you capable of having that conversation in a professional, calm atmosphere, without freaking out because it is your child asking the questions? Do you have what it takes to ensure that your child does not walk away with the message that sex is inherently wrong or evil?

I ask that because many parents struggle with how to have those conversations, because of how emotionally involved they are and because they may not know what to say or how to teach their children what they need to know about sex. They may have no idea what their child even needs to know about sex, or why they need to know it. Sexual education should not be a political issue. Part of being human for the vast majority of humanity is having sexual feelings, just as the vast majority of humanity needs a job, shelter, food, clothing, etc. We teach children about these things, but we sometimes expect them to just figure the sex aspect out on their own.

That is a dangerous expectation for reasons I have already outlined. It is also possible for children to commit crimes because they do not know that what they did is a crime. Sexual education can teach children not only the parts about sex that make us squirm, it can teach them ethics of how to behave so that they do not harm others, or themselves, through sexual behavior.

Putting Facts First

Rather than making the issue political, we should go where the facts go. Are there studies that look at which kinds of sexual education are more effective at teaching body safety? Are there studies that look at the sexual behaviors of children with differing kinds of sexual education? Are the results of some forms of education more advantageous compared to others? These are the kinds of questions we should be asking, for the sake of our children. I am not going to propose studies or link you to any. Go Google it. Go find out the information. Explore the topic.

I have no idea what political background you, dear reader, may be coming from. But let me explain mine: My father is a republican, and my mother does not care about politics. We never discussed politics much in our house. I formed my own ideas. I am neither a democrat or a republican. There are issues that I find to be important, and I vote on those issues and choose the candidate I prefer based on that. I do not believe it is rational or sane to stick to a particular political platform. I suppose it is possible I just insulted someone, but my point is that sticking to a particular ideology is fallacious because it can all too easily lead us to conclusions that are not based on facts.

On issues involving crime, when we form ideas based solely on ideology and not on the facts of varying approaches, we can enable more crime to happen through negligence. That is not in anyone’s best interests, particularly where children are concerned. Child sexual abuse is an epidemic that demands that the facts be placed above ideology, religion, political party platform, or opinions. We cannot prevent child sexual abuse before it happens by only doing what we think is best. We must consult facts, studies, and experts on the subjects involved so that the best course of action to protect children is taken.

Conclusion

I hope you can see better my perspective, and the perspective of primary prevention, on why sexual education is necessary. I hope you have the time to research what works and what does not work, and I hope that children are important enough to you that you are willing to put aside your own ideas and look at the facts. Sexual abuse and sexual assault cannot be adequately prevented if the facts do not matter.

Issues In Mandatory Reporting

Introduction

Mandatory reporting can be an immensely complex topic to cover. Given the pushes in the United Kingdom for mandatory reporting, I think it is necessary to address some of the failures that mandatory reporting can have, as well as some of the misconceptions of what mandatory reporting calls for. I think that in the United Kingdom, there are particular concerns about whistleblowers who may wish to report what they know to be an abusive situation, but fear that their job may be on the line. This is a separate issue from mandatory reporting. So, this post will aim to address the difference between mandatory reporting and whistleblower protection, and the pitfalls of mandatory reporting.

Issues In Mandatory Reporting

One of the biggest issues that comes to mind with mandatory reporting is the reality of who sexually abuses children, or for that matter, the reality of who abuses children in general. The public perception seems to continue to be that dirty strangers and sex offenders abuse children, or sexually abuse children. However, the reality is that over 90% of those who sexually abuse children are people known and trusted by both the child and the community around the child. With sexual assault as a whole, that statistic is still above 80%. In other words, in the majority of these cases the perpetrator is someone who is known, trusted, and well-liked in the community of the child.

When you love someone, the last thing you want for them are the legal hassles of being arrested, charged, or convicted of a crime. You can tell yourself until you are blue in the face that it does not matter who the person is, if they are sexually abusing your child, you will report them immediately. I really do not care what you tell yourself, but the reality is not at all that simple. Say you are married with children, and you find out that your husband or wife is sexually abusing one of the children. You want them and the child, first and foremost, to get mental health help to wade through the issue and ensure it does not happen again.

Another common public perception is that most of the time someone does sexually assault or abuse someone, they will inevitably reoffend. Please stop here. Go to the right-hand side of this blog, and at the top you will find, “Resources:Studies And Articles”. Click it. You can pick any number of studies and articles in this resource, but the facts and statistics firmly establish the fact that most people who sexually take advantage of someone else will not do so again. The facts also show that help is effective in dropping the number of people who re-offend. While recidivism rates are far from perfect, they are a great general indicator of how likely to re-offend a particular criminal population is.

So, let us visit a few scenarios:

1.      A single parent who discovers that a teenage son or daughter is sexually abusing a younger sibling.

2.      A married couple with children, and one of the couple discovers that the other is sexually abusing the children.

3.      A married couple without children, and one of the couple discovers that the other is volunteering with children, and takes individual children to private places for unknown reasons. They suspect something might be going on.

4.      Someone who has sexual attractions to children, and fears they might someday act upon their attractions.

5.      Someone who has sexually abused a child and wants to get help to stop and make sure it does not happen again.

In each of these scenarios, which are likely very common, you have people who, under mandatory reporting laws, would not be mandated to report the abuse. However, if any of these people see a therapist, that therapist would be required, under mandatory reporting, to tell law enforcement about that situation. All of these people are either very close to the abusive person (1-3), or they are the abusive person (4-5). If they are aware that seeing a therapist means the involvement of law enforcement, how likely are they to seek help?

That just covers five scenarios not involving mandatory reporters. Now, let us take a glance at some situations that could involve mandatory reporters, under mandatory reporting laws:

1.      A social worker, teacher, or church official that becomes aware of abuse within the child’s family.

2.      A social worker, teacher, or church official that becomes aware that a coworker is abusing a child.

3.      A police officer that becomes aware that their partner or boss is abusing a child.

4.      A doctor or nurse that becomes aware that their direct supervisor is abusing a child.

5.      Someone who works in any one profession that requires mandatory reporting, but knows someone in their personal life who is abusing a child.

Suddenly, mandatory reporting stops being straightforward. Does the person in the first scenario do their duty and rip apart the child’s family, which is also traumatic for a child? Does the person in situations 2-4 shatter their workplace with such a revelation? If their country does not have whistleblower protection laws, which shield someone in those situations from losing their job, will they be risking their job? How likely are any of these people to say anything in the absence of mandatory reporting laws? How likely is it that, under mandatory reporting laws, these people will be making a difficult situation even more traumatic, not only for the child, but all of the people around them?

Mandatory reporting may sound like the right thing to do at first, but these ten situations raise a number of questions that do not have solid answers. Countries that have mandatory reporting, like the United States and Canada, sometimes will have procedures in place for law enforcement to limit the trauma of involving the police. These procedures are not in place in every situation, and come places will have child protective services, family court, or a similar setup to ensure that fairness and justice are both in place. Child advocates, lawyers, judges, juries, therapists, social workers… the complications to each of these situations are not as simple as “make them report it to police”.

Whistleblower Laws

Some countries, like the United States, have what are called “whistleblower” laws to protect people who know of illegal activity within the company from facing retaliation for reporting the illegal activity to the police. These whistleblower laws do not mandate that people report such activity, but they do give them legal protections and courses of action to take if their employer retaliates against them if they choose to make such a report. These laws give added protection and are aimed at limiting the actions that employers can take in response to such a report being filed.

Pedophiles

I must stop a moment to address something that most people do not consider, and that is the reality that pedophiles do not always abuse children. A pedophile is someone with sexual attractions to young children, and there is academic evidence to suggest that not all pedophiles are even a danger to children. Observing that reality does not make me some kind of “sex offender advocate”, or mean that I am “taking the side of sex offenders”. It means I recognize a fact that is related to the issue of child sexual abuse. I have discussedthe estimates that can be made based on what we know about these issues, and these estimates show that using the most conservative estimate of the number of pedophiles, only 8% or less are known to sexually abuse children.

With that being said, and as you probably realize with me having to dedicate an entire paragraph to explain it, pedophilia is an extremely stigmatized condition. If you wish to know more about this stigma, please copy “stigma against pedophiles” into Google, as it is not the main focus here.

However, it should be pointed out that most mental health providers do not have specific experience with pedophilia or other sexual issues. There have also been many horror stories of pedophiles being reported to the police merely for talking with a therapist about their attractions in order to get help with them. Therefore, the common assumption among pedophiles is that if their country has mandatory reporting, it is not safe to talk with a therapist about the issues they are experiencing. Sexual abusers who are sexually attracted to children (“pedophilic”, in other words) make up about a third of sexual abusers. Imagine if even half of those people felt they were able to get professional help, before they had sexually abused a child.

Conclusion

Mandatory reporting is not an ideal solution to child sexual abuse. It can cause more issues than it solves by pushing people further away from mental health help, and it can have the added effect of stigmatizing mental health issues. Other solutions besides mandatory reporting, like whistleblower laws, should be considered in the UK instead, and a closer look must be paid to the child sexual abuse prevention program Don't Offend: Germany's Prevention Program. The United States has had a “Help Wanted” study this year to look at what pedophiles report that they needed in adolescence to help them with pedophilia. A great many organizations exist to reduce and eliminate the stigma around mental health issues. We must investigate other alternatives to mandatory reporting. 

The Statute Of Limitations

A Bit Of Backstory

Have you ever been to law school? I have not either. I got the same basic overview of how the government works that you probably did: The three branches exist to create checks and balances, blah, blah, blah... It has been quite a few years since taking those classes.

But one thing I do know is that the United States Constitution and its amendments exist to ensure that people are treated with fairness and equality, even those accused of crimes. They exist to ensure that the government does not create laws that single people out, deal cruel or unusual punishment, and create a system in which people are treated as people. The recent trend with sex offender laws has been to ignore these rights and laws when it is convenient to "protect the public" and other non-proven fallacious reasons.

There has been a push lately in several states to eliminate the criminal statute of limitations for child sex crimes. Here in Minnesota, that push came several years ago and resulted in eliminating the civil statute of limitations. In other words, victims can come forward at any time in their life to sue and get money from their abuser. This sounds like a great idea, given the financial and other impacts that child sexual abuse has on its victims. However, there is one problem with pushing for this for the criminal statute of limitations: It does not prevent child sexual abuse.

It is yet another piece of legislation, like our current sex offender registry, that is created to punish and ostracize people for committing a particular crime. Yes, that crime is gruesome and has horrid consequences for the victims. However, the criminal justice system is not in place to exact vengeance on criminals, but to ensure that they pay a cost for what they did, and be reformed enough to make sure it will not happen again. That idea of reform is why probation and parole exist.

Many, if not most, child sexual abusers in larger counties will get a sentence of probation, maybe with a little bit of jail time. While repeat abusers and abusers in smaller counties do end up in prison, they are usually paroled if they have good behavior. While I am unfamiliar with the legal concepts involved here, I will say this: Getting a conviction well past the statute of limitations for a crime like child sexual abuse is unlikely to yield prison time or even jail time, particularly if the accused has spent any length of time in the community without similar allegations coming forward. As I have discussed before, the likelihood that sex offenders and child sexual abusers will repeat their crimes is much lower than that of an average criminal. So the whole "prevent another child from being abused" is just a distraction, not a real argument.

I Am Against Changing The Criminal Statute Of Limitations

I am against changing the criminal statute of limitations for child sexual abuse, because doing so would not only draw out a victim's pain when they do decide to come forward (by way of a trial that rehashes old memories and feelings), it is extremely unlikely to assist in the prevention of the crime in the first place. It is aimed at punishing people well after their transgressions have occurred, at which point the aim is not justice, restitution, or closure, but about exacting vengeance upon the accused. While child sexual abuse is certainly a crime with very low false reporting, changing the criminal statute of limitations can create a system in which someone literally has no defense against an accusation because of the nature of the crime involved, and that can be abused. I am also against changing the criminal statute of limitations for child sexual abuse because of the impact it has on the victims. Holding onto that baggage further by seeking "justice" against the abuser means that the abuser continues to have control over the victim... by the victim's own choice.

For Victims

I would encourage victims to forgive, heal, and move on so as to not give any more power to the abuser that had such a large impact on their life. Holding that grudge does not affect your abuser, it affects you. Perhaps I am being overly harsh and direct in saying that. Perhaps I have no idea what sort of pain you went through. Perhaps I do not know enough about the legal issues involved. However, your abuser already took things from you when they abused you. Holding a grudge against them means you are letting them take more time, emotion, and energy from you, but this time by your choice and not theirs. Most programs will tell you that someone goes from being a victim, to being a survivor, to being a thriver. You cannot get to being a thriver by holding onto what happened. You need to let it go: Not for them, not so they get away with it (they already have), but for you. You deserve peace.

"Help!" Life With Pedophilia: An Article By Ender Wiggin

Introduction

I recently joined Twitter to grow my ability to advocate and share resources, and I have had several interactions with Ender Wiggin, who wrote an outstanding article about what it is like to grow up with pedophilia and why pedophiles do - and do not - need help. This article was originally found here. Ender Wiggin has also written other articles on the topic of pedophilia.

The only thing I would add to this story is that there are organizations that offer expert guidance and know exactly who to connect a pedophile in your area to the help that they need, and have sex-specific training to know when someone really is a risk to children and when they are not, regardless of mandatory reporting. If you live in Germany, they have a program for that also. There is also an online support system available as well that Ender also mentions.

I would add that I was treated by a therapist who is a member of the referral link, and I can personally vouch for them. While they may refer a pedophile to sex offender treatment regardless of whether they have had contact with a child, that treatment will be tailored to the individual's needs. Within this organization, their goal is to come up with an individual plan for someone to stay safe and address their ongoing mental health needs. Their goal is not to stigmatize, report, or abuse their position: It is to identify the risks, needs, and beliefs that Ender mentions so that one can know how to respond to them and manage them.

But enough of my introduction. Here is his story:

Help!

What help do pedophiles need?

One of the most common things us pedophiles get told by people online — other than “kill yourself” — is “get help!” Of course, by that they mean to imply that every pedophile needs psychiatric or psychological help or treatment to either a) be “cured” of our terrible “illness” or b) to help us “manage” our condition and resist our “urges” and not abuse a child.

The former comes from the misunderstood idea that pedophilia is a “disease” that can somehow be “cured”. While it is true that pedophilia is currently regarded as a mental disorder, there are many nuances and the same could be said not that long ago about homosexuality. In addition, even if considered a disorder, it is widely accepted by the people that research pedophilia and treat pedophiles that the condition of being sexually attracted to children is impossible to change or “cure”. It is not the purpose of this post to explore this though, I will do so shortly in a dedicated post.

The latter is simply based on biased and prejudiced views and a misunderstanding of pedophilia as a condition. The reality is that the only pedophiles people hear about are those that have made it to the news headlines for having molested children or been caught producing, distributing or downloading child pornography, so it is only natural for the public to believe that all pedophiles indulge in one or more of those things and only through a very close monitoring can they be persuaded or prevented from doing so. In their view, a pedophile has to be constantly supervised or otherwise they are a threat to every child they encounter, which is simply ridiculous.

Others believe all pedophiles should be chemically (if not physically) castrated — given testosterone-reducing or otherwise libido-reducing medication — which is apparently the only way they believe a pedophile is able to refrain from acting on our attraction. The reality is quite different though. I will address child pornography in other posts in the future, but when it comes to actually sexually molesting children, it is generally as simple as knowing that it is wrong and that there is a very high risk of causing the child severe harmfor a pedophile to refrain from ever doing so. We are not by definition monsters who wish to inflict pain and suffering onto others in order to achieve our own pleasure. We can be as empathetic as anyone and the desire to not cause harm is more than enough for the majority of us to abstain from acting on our attractions. Everyone is in control of their own actions at all times, and if anyone doubts their ability to refrain from acting on their attractions it is a self-inflicted doubt caused by internalizing the prevailing narrative that all pedophiles are bound to molest a child sooner or later, but not because pedophilia somehow impairs one’s self-restraint, because it just doesn’t. As I explained in my article about sexual fantasies, pedophilia is not a compulsion or an irresistible urge, and the notion that it is so is a misguided one based on prejudice and stigma.

Do pedophiles need therapy?

If the attraction to children cannot be made to disappear through therapy, do pedophiles need therapy at all? Like I mentioned above, many pedophiles have self-inflicted doubts about their ability to refrain from acting on their attractions because they have internalized the message that they are destined to do so at some point in their lives. These deeply internalized beliefs are often accompanied by feelings of desperation and self-loathing, and often even suicidal feelings. Pedophiles have no inherent desire to harm children, and the thought that they will inevitably harm one is distressing to the core. In addition, there is a very real risk that these beliefs turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is not something I’m simply making up on the spot; it’s widely acknowledged by psychologists. In this article you can read about how your beliefs about yourself that you have internalized since childhood have a very important impact on your behavior. I’ll quote here just one sentence, which I think sums it up pretty nicely:

«Your beliefs about yourself are like an invisible, underlying script from which you unknowingly act out your life.»

Allowing pedophiles self-confidence is key in preventing child sexual abuse

If you insist on perpetuating the false narrative that pedophiles are nothing more than ticking time bombs waiting to explode, you are actually hindering pedophiles’ ability to refrain from acting out on their attractions. Of course some people are more susceptible to those external messages than others, and many are able to realize they are not true and overcome their self-inflicted doubt. But sometimes it takes time, and support. Peer support through online forums like Virtuous Pedophiles can be extremely important, and I read testimonies daily about how the support received there has helped improve a pedophile’s self-confidence in their commitment to never offend. That is not always enough, however, and some pedophiles would greatly benefit from professional mental health support from a good psychologist or psychiatrist, in order to overcome the deeply internalized belief that they will inevitably offend.

In addition, you have to understand what it is like to grow up and realize you are sexually attracted to children. The loneliness, the isolation, the fear that someone will discover this part about you, the knowledge that most people out there would hate you if they knew… these are things many people growing up with more mainstream but still unconventional sexual orientations know very well, and should at least be sympathetic to what it’s like. As I mentioned in one of my first articles, the suicide rates among LGBT teens are four to six times higher than among the general population of teenagers. The fear that the people that are supposed to love you unconditionally — such as your parents and your close friends — would reject you can be the most crippling for a young person. Furthermore, pedophiles face the messages they hear and read in the news and on the internet about how they are the scum of the earth, less than human and deserve to be slaughtered painfully and mercilessly, or physically castrated. Being exposed to these can be incredibly disheartening, and it can take a long time to grow the skin to be able to realize they’re only based on ignorance and prejudice, and that they can be dismissed as the product of blind hatred and little rational thought.

For all these reasons, many pedophiles develop severe depression, anxiety disorders, paranoia and live in a state of constant distress which is not conducive to remaining non-offending. Anyone who knows anything about the subject knows that pedophiles who offend often do so when they are at their lowest. Being in a healthy state of mind is also key in building that self-confidence I talked about earlier. That is not true just for child sexual abuse though, anyone that knows anything about crime prevention will tell you the same thing about any other crime.

Do pedophiles have access to therapy?

People often say that there’s nothing stopping pedophiles from going to a therapist, but the reality is not so simple. Many countries have bought into the incorrect assumption that all pedophiles eventually molest, and have enacted mandatory reporting laws. If someone admits to a licensed therapist that they are attracted to children, they could automatically be deemed a risk and be reported to the authorities, even if they have never done anything wrong in their entire lives. In theory, therapists should only report if the pedophile is admitting to be actively committing abuse or if there is a clear risk for a specific child. The latter, though, is subjective enough that it could spell disaster for any pedophile that has contact with children in their life in any capacity — whether has his own children (like many of us do) or works with children in any way, such as being a teacher, a youth coach, a camp counselor, etc. Additionally, imagine if someone disclosed their attractions to a therapist, the therapist decided not to report him and the individual ended up sexually abusing a child. The consequences for the therapist would be devastating, and therefore they’re much rather be trigger-happy when it comes to reporting than favor patient-doctor confidentiality. Last but not least, although that is thankfully not something too widespread, therapists are human beings often subject to the same prejudices as everyone else, and some genuinely believe the ticking time bomb theory, and that it is right to report a pedophile to the authorities even if they haven’t actually done anything wrong. Since they will face no legal consequences for violating confidentiality, they are free to report that filthy pedo without fear of losing their license.

I have read horror stories of what happened to pedophiles that had never committed a crime or harmed anyone and confided in a mental health professional, only to be reported and have their lives turned upside down, being outed to their friends and relatives, being removed from their homes and essentially affecting their lives in a very negative way. Thankfully, many other pedophiles have found non-judgmental and sympathetic therapists that have been able to help them overcome their depression and self-hatred, and build up their self-confidence. Knowing the risks involved in even admitting your attractions to a therapist, most pedophiles simply never go see one, and even more so those who have the highest levels of self-doubt about their ability to refrain from acting, since they would be the most likely to be reported. So far from helping to protect children, these mandatory reporting laws are deterring the pedophiles that feel like they need the support not to offend the most from getting it. It is as backwards and counterproductive as it could possibly be.

The only way out of this situation is for the public — and over time the legislators — to really understand pedophilia. Refusing to discuss the topic, shoving it under the rug, does nothing to prevent child sexual abuse. The only way forward is to destigmatize the condition of being attracted to children—but never the action of having sex with children — and allow pedophiles to freely, and without fear, seek the help that they so much desire us to get. And that’s why I’m here, doing what I do. In hopes that one day people will not equate pedophile with monster or ticking time bomb, and those of us who feel like we need access to mental health support, either to build that self-confidence in our ability to never harm a child or simply to learn to accept ourselves as decent human beings whose attractions don’t make us evil, can do so without fear. Perhaps that day we will also be able to confide in our closest relatives and friends, because knowing that people accept you for who you are, without you having to hide such an important part of yourself is also incredibly valuable and works wonders in improving you self-esteem and, with it, your self-confidence.

You can help

In summary, I would say that indeed yes, pedophiles need help, just probably not the kind of help you would assume, or for the reasons you may think. And the great thing is that you can actually help.

And you don’t have to be an expert to be able to help. Here are some very simple things you can do:

• Care about your fellow human being who did not choose to feel what he feels and only wishes to live his life peacefully without causing anyone harm.
• Consider that perhaps you don’t know all the facts about pedophilia and child sexual abuse. That maybe what you’ve been told to be true, what you’ve read in the media or heard in the news, isn’t exactly the way it is portrayed.
• Realize that perhaps it is worth listening to the perspective of a pedophile who is committed to never harming a child, that we actually deserve to have our voices heard.
• Understand that pedophile and child molester are not one and the same, and that the former doesn’t automatically lead to the latter.
• Challenge yourself, your prejudices and those of the people you encounter perpetuating the stigma of pedophilia, and contributing to the status quothat is preventing those you so much desire to “get help” from doing so.

By doing these simple things you will be helping pedophiles live happier and more fulfilling lives, confident that they will never act on their attractions. And by doing that you will be helping to reduce child sexual abuse, and I can’t think of a more important reason for you to realize that it is in your hand to make a change. While it is true that pedophiles account for a minority of sexual offenders against children, a single child spared from abuse is already a victory. Wouldn’t you agree?