They also forgot to file paperwork making him a sex offender. This is disgusting. WTH is going on in Vermont, I remember there was another case last year. If you have a young child, avoid Vermont and Florida at all costs. http://sadlynormal.wordpress.com/tag/us-news/vermont/
Actually, Vermont's a unique case in terms of how they deal with child sex offenders. They've been big advocates of counseling and rehabilitation programs for child sex offenders in comparison to standard jail time. The argument has been that recidivism rates are absurdly high for child sex offenders after being released and each time they get put in jail again, their odds of abusing a child actually grow. (There's pretty strong evidence to support this claim) Vermont's program has claimed to have reduced recidivism rates fairly dramatically. Basically, for child sex offenders, jail time is worthless and rehabilitation programs are the only thing that have shown any progress. I did research on this several years ago, so I'm not sure how it is now. But back in the day, you were seeing something like 80% recidivism rates for child sex offenders compared to around 30% for those who went through Vermont's program.
I'm sure that's very comforting to the abused children and their parents. Why doesn't Vermont use the same rehab program for murderers also? What about rapists? They tend to be repeat offenders too from what I know.
Murderers generally get life in prison or death, so that's irrelevant. They're functionally removed from society. Rapists on the other hand don't have nearly the recidivism rates of child sex offenders. Also, research is specific to child sex offenders and how their recidivism rates are astronomically high. It's gotten to the point, that if they get out of jail, they WILL abuse a child again in the future. I'll admit that I'm not a huge fan of the idea of just giving therapy and letting them go. Some sort of combo with jail time and counseling would be optimal. But I do know that just jailing does nothing but waste taxpayer money on scum that will re-offend. At the very least, the Vermont programs shed light on the fact that just jailing these child sex offenders does nothing and that a broader approach is needed.
Like I said, I'm sure that's very comforting to the victims to know that while they will be subject to a lifelong struggle with the crime, that the perp will essentially goto a Club Med. Wouldn't it be smarter to give them treatment first THEN releasing them? And if you break a law, you should get punished for it. When I was akid and broke something in the house, my parents would punish me first then afterwards tell me why I shouldn't have done it. They broke a law, it doesn't make sense to NOT punish them. It's absolutely stupid.
A broader approach is needed -- but putting them back on the streets without treatment should not be part of that approach. Even if the repeat rate is only 30% -- that means 3 out of 10 people released have molested another child. Even that is way to high -- at least when they are in jail they aren't molesting anyone else -- I think if you rape a child you should never see the streets again unless you agree to castration (I'm not kidding, I really believe this)
Like I said, treatment and jail time in combination. I agree with you that just treatment alone is silly. But understand that child sex offenders have some serious mental issues that can't be addressed with jail time alone. Also, on the castration point, I believe they tried chemical castration in Kansas. The State Supreme Court ruled it illegal.
No I think it would be stupid to just throw them in jail and think thingswill change. The logic used by the Vermont judges in these rulings are the complete opposite end of the spectrum, they think that treatment without jail or minimal jailtime will work as well, which regardless of whether or not it actually works (and unless it's 100% they should not be even thinking of adopting this approach), still bypasses the fundamental basics of a functional society in that lawbreakers are properly punished and that society feels safe. Isn't this in the Social Contract or some book like that? You'd think these judges read that kind of stuff. I think some states use chemical castration. I saw it on law and Order a few months ago where they had a child molester who was chemically castrated. Don't know if it was factual or not, but L&O is usually pretty accurate.
LOL at getting your law information from Law and Order. I'm not sure how effective chemical castration would be since most times the reason rapists perform those acts is to be in a position of power, not a sex thing.
He's actually right, they do it in other states. But chemical castration has a lot of problems. First, there's no standard dosing quantity. There are different dosages needed for different people. And if you use too much, you could kill the person in the process. Second, as you said, child sex offenses can't be reduced to simple sexual desire. There are other mental issues and complexes that go into this. Third, and what's scary is that sometimes the drugs destroy the man's ability to have an erection but doesn't cut off their sexual desire. So they start doing even weirder ****. There's a reason why some states ruled it illegal. It just doesn't work that well.
Maybe they'll take away his cinnamon tea privileges during bang drum, recite poetry therapy sessions.
