Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
I'm starting a new thread to discuss Germany's Dukenfeld project and address some of the questions Independent posed:
"Let's look at a scenario of no mandatory reporting for treatment providers: You call up a treatment provider and say I'm abusing a child. You think that this treatment provider should not report that crime? How can they guarantee the child is safe? Do they take the offenders word that it won't happen again? Do they say you have to come in and stay with us for treatment for years until we deem you not a threat but we aren't going to tell the government? How would it work if someone was going through treatment that way and their crime was disclosed? Should they get a get out of jail free card?"
Do I think that treatment providers should report the crime? If we don't make them mandatory reporters, they can assess if a child is in continued risk of being harmed. But let's think about this for a minute. If someone goes to help help for their addiction, it's because they don't want to struggle with that addiction anymore. Therefore, I believe a child is at a lower risk of continually being abused. Maybe the family already knows about the abuse, and want to work together to prevent them from abusing again.
Do the treatment providers take their word for it? Maybe the treatment provider have the offender create a safety plan to prevent them from relapsing. I mean, how does a sex offender treatment provider know that the offender hasn't reoffended while in treatment? They can't always know, but they have rules and if those rules are broken, you are kicked out of treatment.
The length of time should vary from individual to individual. I wish I had all the info from Germany to know exactly what is common. But I also know that treaent providers use to help people before mandatory reporting laws. But once these laws kicked in, less people came into seek help.
The treatment providers don't have to disclose, but other mandatory reporters do, and nothing will give them a get out of free card. If the abuse is disclosed, the offender will still have to bear the consequences of their actions. However, I have seen judges be more lenient on someone who hasn't offended in years and sought out help (if arrested and on bond). Maybe we can implants the same - the penalty isn't as big if you sought out help and stopped offending.
These are just my thoughts and open for discussion. What do you all think?
"Let's look at a scenario of no mandatory reporting for treatment providers: You call up a treatment provider and say I'm abusing a child. You think that this treatment provider should not report that crime? How can they guarantee the child is safe? Do they take the offenders word that it won't happen again? Do they say you have to come in and stay with us for treatment for years until we deem you not a threat but we aren't going to tell the government? How would it work if someone was going through treatment that way and their crime was disclosed? Should they get a get out of jail free card?"
Do I think that treatment providers should report the crime? If we don't make them mandatory reporters, they can assess if a child is in continued risk of being harmed. But let's think about this for a minute. If someone goes to help help for their addiction, it's because they don't want to struggle with that addiction anymore. Therefore, I believe a child is at a lower risk of continually being abused. Maybe the family already knows about the abuse, and want to work together to prevent them from abusing again.
Do the treatment providers take their word for it? Maybe the treatment provider have the offender create a safety plan to prevent them from relapsing. I mean, how does a sex offender treatment provider know that the offender hasn't reoffended while in treatment? They can't always know, but they have rules and if those rules are broken, you are kicked out of treatment.
The length of time should vary from individual to individual. I wish I had all the info from Germany to know exactly what is common. But I also know that treaent providers use to help people before mandatory reporting laws. But once these laws kicked in, less people came into seek help.
The treatment providers don't have to disclose, but other mandatory reporters do, and nothing will give them a get out of free card. If the abuse is disclosed, the offender will still have to bear the consequences of their actions. However, I have seen judges be more lenient on someone who hasn't offended in years and sought out help (if arrested and on bond). Maybe we can implants the same - the penalty isn't as big if you sought out help and stopped offending.
These are just my thoughts and open for discussion. What do you all think?
http://survivorscotlandold.whitespacers.com/downloads/files/Weiss%20risk%20factors%20for%20depression%20psy.pdf
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/10.1176/ajp.155.12.1746
http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/Mobile/article.aspx?articleid=481660
Leaving the child to psychologically "fend for themselves" when you know there is a problem and can intervene is not an option. I don't believe that is at all the intent of this program. The Dunkelfeld program is about primary prevention ie education. I can't see how any psychologist or psychiatrist would ever be on board with leaving a vulnerable child in the lurch like this. It's unfathomable to me.