Indy Anna
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,010
- Reaction score
- 3,450
Redhead, I'm very sorry for the pain your children and Lalettab's children, too, plus both of you as parents, have experienced at the hands of child abusers.As a parent of survivors myself, my heart goes out to you. Only the civil portion of our case was protracted, thankfully, but even then it was incredibly frustrating, and heartbreaking, and tremendously challenging to deal with... Even now, years later, it still can cause issues. (On the last thread I shared why Jessica's case hit so literally close to home for myself, and my children as we lived in the same neighborhood, my oldest shares her name, and attended the same school when my children were abused by a neighbor over 10 years ago).
I totally hear you in regard to the 25 years, and the doubts about not mandating counseling during those first years of confinement. That seems extremely counter-intuitive to me. Like you said, what good is it to let someone with obvious issues stew for 20 years in that kind of environment without at least affording them some opportunity to come to grips with the seriousness of their crimes. That sounds like a recipe for disaster, imo - especially with the rates of recidivism being so high for sexual offenders already...
The more I think on that, the more alarming it becomes, really. Many criminals will state that the reason they got put into prison is because they weren't good enough at the crimes they committed, but many times in prison they learned more ways to commit those crimes effectively, and avoid discovery when they were eventually released. I don't know how that would be any different in the case of sexual offenders... except for the fact that I know the general prison population views these types of criminals as the lowest of the low... Even criminals have lines that they believe shouldn't be crossed - abusing a child is one of them...
I think the part of your post in bold holds the key to why these offenders won't be counseled until shortly before they're due to be released. The penal system likely doesn't want to pay for services that may not be needed in 25 years should the perpetrator not survive prison long enough to be released. If an offender has survived general population for 20 years, then the chance he will survive his entire sentence is increased. There's also the chance an offender may die a natural death in prison, especially one who would be over 60 years old at time of release. So, age at time of incarceration and length of sentence are probably considerations.
I'm not sure how psychologists and the rest of the rehabilitation team are paid in a prison (a yearly salary, per hour or per case). I did work at one time with a psychologist who also worked at a state prison, and know that in our facilities (group homes) he was paid only for services rendered during a pay period. I do know that he was under a contract, as were other professionals we used, so I imagine it works similarly in the penal system. Therefore, I do suspect that cost management is a top consideration and they are hesitant to pay for services that a prisoner may never need if chances are slim that he'll ever make it to the release date.
I know that doesn't sound very humane, and I've noted elsewhere on the forums that I'd like to see prisoners treated as though they've never had the opportunity to learn appropriate behaviors (habilitation vs. rehabilitation). However, most institutions/ agencies are run like businesses, where cost-cutting is top priority. Just :moo: