Perhaps the real difference is between having money and not having money, having influence and not having influence. I wonder if, given equal knowledge of the cases, Mike Huckabee would stand up for Josh Gravens and say that he was also forgiven? Would he condemn Josh Gravens because he does not agree with his politics, even though he has paid the price for a developmentally normal childhood behavior 1,000x over and now is potentially being punished again for simply misunderstanding the convaluted laws of the state?

Thought, I was thinking the same thing about the Duggar sisters. How many people are looking at them and wondering which ones were touched by their brother. How much are they being re-traumatized? What effect is there on their family?

There are a number of things that make me angry when I look at these two cases together.

One, is the total unfairness of rich v. poor. Rich got away with circumventing the law for a long time. Poor is ruined for life (although, in this case, Josh Gravens was able to reinvent himself magnificently).

Two, politics! Who has intervened and stood up for Josh Gravens?

Three, that we have to have this discussion in the first place. A few years back my state was debating whether or not to put youthful sex offenders on the registry for life. I went to the hearing. It was shocking to hear what people were saying. It is hypocritical to claim that we as a society care so much for children, going totally against what we know about them, apply this lifetime punishment. Of course, it is now law in my state that youthful offenders get 25 years to life on the registry.

There is hope, however. Someone a while back posted a link to a DOJ website that is supposed to teach the difference between normal childhood behavior and offensive behavior.

Also, I have spoken about the Moore Center for the Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse. They are trying to identify the best approaches to both prevention and intervention BEFORE a behavior becomes a police matter.

Right now, of course, there are really only two ways to deal with these issues. Make it a police matter (by essentially doing anything through the system, including counseling) or handling it privately like the Duggars did. Did they really get the appropriate counseling for their children? Of course not. That would have made it a police matter, wouldn't it? And what is the appropriate counseling, anyway? I'm not sure anyone really knows...although there has been tremendous research and development of more effective treatments over the past few years.

Lastly, and this is the thing that makes me the most upset, is that with the way things are set up now, everyone loses.

I totally agree Aladdin.
Mwhen my step-daughter was molested by her cousin.My in-laws wanted us to deal with it "in house" I had already called the police. I'd already had my "wrestling match" with that one. My step-daughter didn't want the police involvedeither,but we really didn't have much choice. If it had later gotten out that I hadn't reported it, I would be in a world of crap as well.
We really do need better alternatives.
As it is, I know that we're in this situation now, because my in-laws manipulated my step-daughter into falsely accusing her dad, in part as a means for revenge.

I agree Peek, with the way we have it now, everyone looses.

I know as it is right now, with everything we have gone through and what we know now, daughter said she wouldn't have disclosed the abuse. The justice she wanted wasn't given. People ignored her request and did what they wanted, not what was best for her. I know in the eyes of the law, she isn't the victim, but the state is...but the way things are going now, many victims and their families DON'T report because they don't want to ruin their family.

I had a friend who was molested by her grandfather, she disclosed the abuse to her father. The father confronted his dad and took steps to protect my friend from further abuse, but didn't disclose the abuse to authorities or his mother as it would have killed her. She and her dad still lived with her grandparents and was never harmed again. She wasn't given the counciling she needed and harbors a lot of hate for her grandfather- even years after his death. Maybe if she was able to seek help and talk to a councilor without getting police involved, she could have received the help she needed to heal.

We do need better prevention and intervention processes to address abuse BEFORE police are involved causing more harm to the family. We need to help both offender and victim before getting police involved which only makes matters worse for all.

Yes in FL if it is found out that you knew about abuse and did not report it it is a felony now for all people - and no statute of limitations - so no more keeping it in the family here

Thought, I am so sorry that happened to your daughter. That happened in my family, too. Everyone was damaged by it. The legal way of thinking about this problem is very black and white. Its about getting the "bad guy", not about what is good for people.

As a country, we've really gone way too far into this legalistic way of thinking. People are brainwashed by TV into thinking this is the only way to handle things...at great damage to others. The biggest problem we have as people who care about someone who is involved with sex offense in some way is that these errors of thinking (meaning not being able to look at the alternatives) have been codified into law and it is very difficult to change.

Also, the types of damage done, especially to children, by sex offense (and other kinds of abuse, too) is just beginning to be understood due to rapidly increasing knowledge of the brain and the effects of childhood trauma on development and, actually, on people's total health throughout their life.

In the minds of most people,THIS is what sex offenders are being punished for...the damage done over the person's total lifespan. Its a legal way of thinking about the problem. If there is a victim, there needs to be a bad guy. The solution to the problem is to punish the bad guy proportionally to the damage done to the victim.

While certainly, this is understandable from an emotional standpoint, it doesn't make sense from the perspective of families and society as a whole. If we were thinking about the well-being of people, we would take a Restorative Justice approach, which is focused on healing within the family and the community. This approach does not excuse. People are held accountable for their actions, but that accountability includes learning the understand the damage that was done to others by those actions. Its about healing and being able to move on. The way we do it now just holds people in a kind of psychic limbo with their pain---like Thought's friend---because punishment of the offender is so highly prioritized over healing and moving on.

But, unfortunately, the law has a very firm grip (as we all know) on this problem making it close to impossible to do anything other than what they want. I really do feel for the Duggars. They did the best they could with the situation. I know they must be feeling the kind of damage that we have all been through and continue to go through. I wonder what will happen with them next...will they choose to discuss it openly or will they just try to hide?

The last two comments here especially are very important to our understanding of the way we'd prefer for these things to be handled by our society. And that matters. Sadly the state rarely, if ever looks at these situations from a restorative rehabilitative perspective. Most people have come to understand that they will not act in the best interest of families where forgiveness and reconciliation are being sought by all parties. They assume and proceed as if every perp is a one dimensional coercive brut and must be squashed. Most of you on this board feel the sting everyday of the way the state addresses the issue of sexual abuse. Not to mention the public's ignorance.

These factors are a large part of why many of the 90% who abuse and are undetected will not reach out for the help they desperately need. My experience has been many wish to stop but are trapped in a cycle akin to addiction, even those who are not sex addicts. The fact they feel they can't reach out means at least as many unknown victims will never experience relief. In this way the states stance working hand in glove with the climate of fear and shame exacerbates the problem of sexual abuse rather than curtailing it. All choices and options are taken away. And frankly that's how they'd prefer it because they don't weigh the unseen costs.

It's made all the more difficult because in a case like this, the family has to hold it's self accountable, and when that does not occur or blame gets passed around the victim continues to suffer. If shame, fear and or pride are at the heart of the decision to keep the matter private, I fear for the victim. If it is based on love and focused on recovery for all, then I think a family can have a powerful win win. However if this well intentioned family private healing approach were later discovered, in our current state of sex offender hysteria it could be dangerous for the parties that did not report. Aladdin4d is right, these are enormously difficult circumstances and to through around judgments so flagrantly I feel is very shortsighted.

I don't wish to oversimplify because I no all cases are different, but I was abused as a child and found forgiveness, not bitterness bent on revenge was the panacea for my wounds. The fact that my abuser knew I loved her and forgave her was the panacea for her wounds.

Aladdin,

I do agree with your view, I really believe if the system was just they would help these young men instead of wanting to send them to prison and a life time on the registry. What Josh did was clearly wrong, now the part where someone said he had been caught and continued his actions have me puzzled, I think he might have blew his second chance when he continued. I do think the young man needed counseling but not the kind the system would have done. Unfortunately his sisters and his life as he knew it has just crashed and burned and I wish that on no one.

Regards
buildingupslow

Well said Marty.

buildingupslow

I agree we should be helping these folks and not condemning them. I also think the age of these offenders should be considered as well - but in many states it is not -

The fact is, Josh Duggar has been treated with favoritism in contrast to how the average Joe is treated for the same type of criminal acts, by the system, by these organizations that purport to stand up for children, family values, and by others. I do not agree with this. If you are going to preach a message then you had better live by that message if and when it knocks at your door.

I do not see any real accountability here. This seems to be a pattern among the rich or the politically connected whereby its only after the statutes of limitations expires that the crime(s) are exposed and suddenly they have remorse. Here in Missouri, our House Speaker recently got busted sending sexual text messages to an Intern. Under Missouri law, he committed a criminal act, yet, he sustains no legal accountability by a charge and prosecution. Rather, he gets off with just resigning from his office.

Josh Duggar resigned as CEO only because his criminal acts finely got exposed, and of course only after the statute of limitations ran out to charge and prosecute him. Up until then, he continued working in the same position judging the behaviors, morals, and values of others with him, his family, and the church knowing what he did. Sorry, but that does not show me that he or anyone else involved has any degree of truthful remorse over what he did to these children, only some of whom were his sisters.

The fact all these folks knew what happened and did their part in keeping it hidden is a criminal act itself, but as a society, we seem to want to ignore that part. It;s one reasons why these kinds of criminal acts keep going unpunished and why we have victims.

So, disagree with me all you want, but my points are no less valid than anyone else's here no matter how unpopular my views are because they do not side with the popular views.

Legal, you do have valid points, and yes the rich, the powerful and the connected most of the time live in a glass house, they will say do as I say not as I do, this is really not a surprise nor is it a surprise that a family decides to protect their child from more harm, the legal system would have never helped him, it is not designed for true rehabilitation, it is only punishment that our present system is capable of. I myself will not be critical of the parents actions,

I agree that this was wrong, I also think he should be more careful of his words when he and his family denounces other people for their actions or beliefs.

But in the long run he and his family have lost, he may never wear the scarlet letter of being labeled a sex offender which in JMO is good but he will suffer the same which is not what it should be about.

regards

buildingupslow

My question is, is harsh punishment always the answer; which is what I take from the subtext of your comments Legal, respectfully. I would contend the reason we have so many victims is because we aren't willing to have an adult discussion about the topic of sexual abuse in this country. It's because we aren't willing to look at this as the public health crisis it is, and instead want to treat it purely and simply as "crime" and punish the pants off of it. Seems like we tried that a while back. Anyone remember the the War on Drugs, or was it the war on Drug Addicts? Didn't work out so good. US prisons are the largest warehousers of mentally ill drug addicts on the planet. And I don't mean that in a disparaging way.. toward the addicts. Once they're in the system, most come back again and again, doing life on the installment plan. Proof you can't punish sick people into health.

I just want to point out that a persons ongoing destructive behaviors are not a clear indication of wether or not they are truly remorseful. An addict can be remorseful as he ruins his, his wife and children's lives the whole time he's engaging the behavior. Social status has little to do with this. It happens like this in all walks of life. I'm looking in the mirror right now guys.

Many people in this state of mind whether its alcohol, drugs overeating or sex hate themselves for the damage they're causing but are powerless in the throws of their compulsive cycles to stop without intervention.

I don't know this young man or much about his story but his judgment of others piece being discussed, his homophobia, is also indicative of an addict who's moral pendulum swings wide from own extreme to the other. The perp shelters the super ego with a facade that he is really a good person of high moral standards to buffer the self loathing he feels over his "other life". This is not a conscious act, it's more akin to a self preservation reflex. When he is engaged in what he deems good, the bad guy vanishes into obscurity. Perhaps this is why he was so high on the high horse so often. Apart from his spiritual blind spot of self righteous judgment, In many ways he may be a very good guy, but that makes his sexual behavior that much harder for him to face. this is called denial and it's a tough nut to crack. As we all know, we must first come to grips with a problem before we can begin to deal with it.

It's not prudent to judge people suffering from mental and emotional illness with the same measure we tend to level at people we deem healthy. My point is that if we want to see a change in the way sexual offenses are handled in our world i.e. therapy and restoration vs. incarceration and ostracism as the best means, we need to get off the bitter bandwagon of self righteous judgment. When you judge someone like this harshly without a complete picture of what made him, or examining your own brand of wretchedness, you fall into the same mentality of the state, meaning just lock 'em ALL up... We don't have the time or the resources to treat this with any nuanced understanding.

I say this over and over because its critical to get this. Only 10% are adjudicated for sexual offenses. That means 90% are still out there and we may never know who they are. If we are intent on perpetuating a climate of judgment and fear based on ignorance; if we are saying let the state sort 'em out, we are insuring that not one of the 90% will reach out for help in stopping their behavior. This is tantamount to willfully turning a blind eye to their unknown victim's pain. I've seen that a lot of people who were caught desperately wanted help but had no idea where to turn or were simply too afraid of the radical consequences. Some contemplate or actually commit suicide, others swear to themselves, I can handle this on my own to their fall. Bottom line is they became isolated in shame and there illness just grew until they derailed. Only a sociopath can live with themselves comfortably over these kinds of behaviors, the vast majority of those who abuse are not sociopaths.

The people on this post feel this one size fits all judgment of their loved ones in a very personal way. They didn't ask for this nightmare in their lives. I really doubt very many ex or current abusers while thy were children woke up one day thinking; when I grow up I'm want to hurt people. I just think a little deference is called for here.

@LegalGuardian be angry at the hypocrisy all you want. I won't argue against that at all nor do I think anybody should but I do feel as if you're being a little disingenuine about some things.

First when this occurred Josh was still a child himself. Older than his victims yes but still a child and the statute of limitations ran out for his crimes just as he legally became an adult himself. You make it sound like the statue of limitations ran out last week and Josh has been hiding from authorities all this time. Yes his family did hide it from the authorities until after the statute of limitations had run out and I don't think anybody has said that was the right thing to do, just that it was understandable that they did so.

Second when you say only some of victims were his sisters you make it sound like there were several other non-family victims when in fact there was only one. It's misleading and far beneath your usual objective approach to things.

Third you also seem very angry because as an adult Josh Duggar holds political views very different from your own. There's nothing wrong with that but I can't shake the feeling that you would be much happier if Josh's life and the entire Duggar family had been destroyed by his actions as a child 13 or more years ago simply because of their political views. That's a stance I can't condone. Again Josh Duggar committed his offenses when he was a child himself and I seriously doubt an anti-LBGT political agenda played a part in his offending. I wouldn't wish a life as an RSO on anyone especially not because of a political viewpoint. That would be petty and demeaning to all involved including the victims.

Building, Marty & Aladdin, I agree with each of your statements. Regardless of Josh's political views, I wouldn't wish this life on anyone - not even Valigator.

Hey, Marty,

"Adult discussion about the topic of sexual abuse"? What a novel idea! (She says nodding in agreement that this is EXACTLY what should be done.)

But, alas, this seems to be too much to ask :,(