registered sex offenders??? (Rome: credit, lawyers, gated)

[Pitts10yrs]

"Wife beating", or marital problems are something different. You are talking about adults who enter a relationship willing and to an extent stay their willingly. Yes, I understand the dynamics, but this is very different from adult who seeks out children for sexual gratification. Children use to be taught to trust adults, not fear them.

In some cases PTSD is treatable, only in the sense that you learn to live with it and the the memories. In some cases the memories, "flashbacks", can be so strong anti-psychotics are needed. In other cases, especially in small children, you can see some acting out, or the incident is just internalized, kinda "going undergroud". But, then often reemerges in adolescence. Similar to Oprah Winfrey, after being sexually abused at young age, became hyper-sexual.

[guylocke]

In some cases PTSD is treatable, only in the sense that you learn to live with it and the the memories. In some cases the memories, "flashbacks", can be so strong anti-psychotics are needed.

Anti-psychotics are NOT approved for the treatment of PTSD and are rarely used and should NEVER be considered first-line threrapy - EVER. There is no correlation whatsoever between the mechanism of action of the anti-psychotics and the recovery of PTSD. If someone is using an antipsychotic to treat this condition, it is more than likely being used for nothing other than to snowball them, or in other words, keep them sedated and calm, which some may consider successful therapy.

Anxielytics will do the same thing and ARE the treamtent of choice along with anti-depressants. Both have far fewer adverse effects (only about 25% of people who need anti-psychotics can tolerate them).

The main goal in treating PTSD (from a point of medicine and therapy) is to strengthen a person's ability to cope. We all have demon's that we deal with on a regular basis, but most people have natural coping mechanisms. Anxielytics will keep a person calm and hopefully won't allow a person's body to physically enter a state of extreme panic or anxiety over the post-traumatic event. Anti-depressants are used to improve a person's mood so they find themselves thinking less about the traumatic event. Psychotherapy is ESSENTIAL for helping individuals deal with PTSD (there is no cure). Anti-psychotics have no place in pharmacotherapy, and although I realize they are sometimes used, that would be a last ditch resort and personally I think a completely inappropriate choice.

[Pitts10yrs]

For those who suffer from very acute reactions, anti-psychotics offer a chance at psychotherapy, otherwise they continue to decompensate. Unless you have visited a inpatient treatment center, with those who can not fuction, literally can not function day to day, then you can not make such statements. Describe it as you may, I've seen them work.

Cure? Most illnesses are not cured, only treated. So as it is with most psychiatric disorders, they are just treated, even with psychotherapy. I think the only cures modern medicine has offered are anti-biotics, other than that we just treat.

[guylocke]

For those who suffer from very acute reactions, anti-psychotics offer a chance at psychotherapy, otherwise they continue to decompensate. Unless you have visited a inpatient treatment center, with those who can not fuction, literally can not function day to day, then you can not make such statements. Describe it as you may, I've seen them work.

I have seen it first hand. I do on a very regular basis, actually. LOL. Anti-psychotics are dopamine and sometimes dopamine/serotonin antagonists. The only reason they seem to work on an acute basis is that they snowball patients. They make you feel zonked out and sometimes described as "out-of-body." Anti-psychotics are an inappropriate choice unless anti-anxieties have no effect at all, and in that case, my entire point is proven that the anti-psychotics are only used to sedate them and make them more amicable to therapy.

Not to mention that anti-psychotics induce an entire sense of stigma by society to begin with that can sometimes be deconstructive in its own right. For example, a patient may be prescribed an anti-psychotic only to google it and see "ANTI-PSYCHOTIC" in association with "SCHIZOPHRENIA" "SOCIOPATHS" "BORDERLINE"

It can be very traumatic for someone already anxious and trigger a worsening of symptoms. The side-effects are WICKED, too, and they have many drug-interactions. Anti-psychotics are simply a very messy class of drugs, aren't tolerated in large populations, cause significant weight gain, and are less than stellar when it comes to metabolic elimination.

Does that mean they have no place in medicine? Certainly not, they give a lot of people with major personality disorders a great deal of relief. However, people who suffer from PTSD aren't crazy (sorry for not being PC). They rarely have positive and negative symptoms or psychosis associated with severe personality disorders.

A patient suffering from PTSD has a primary complaint of anxiety and depression, not psychosis. The traumatic event often cripples their ability to function due to severe anxiety when remembering the past. Anti-psychotics have no anti-anxiety property, they have "snowballing" effects which sedate you as a byproduct. There's a big difference. They don't have any association with GABA and in my personal clinical experience, the benefits do not outweigh the risks in the overwhelming majority of patients.

[guylocke]

I can see why anti-pychotics could be beneficial for severe acute attacks, but I'd much rather see haldol being used or benzo's. They SHOULD do the same thing that anti-psychotics are doing.

What I'm trying to say is that people who suffer from PTSD don't have imbalanced dopamine/serotonin levels. It's an anxiety disorder.

[simetime]

I think that some of you are looking at the fact that some rapist come out jail "cured" but the truth of the matter is that many of them did not commit the crime in the first place. we all know that the judical system is a joke at most and leans away from minorities and the poor. Here is another senario: what about the 17 year old who had consenting sex with a 16year old girl. Can he be considered a rapist? In Georgia he was and convicted to 15years in an adult prison. do you think that he will "rape" another girl? how does this case fit into your stats?

[londonbarcelona]

Originally Posted by stevie1969

It's silly to disregard information about offenders. These lists are valuable. No reform and forgiveness for child molesters. sorry that's just crazy.

This reminds me of the book "The Lovely Bones." Very sad indeed.....

[steven54]

Originally Posted by pitt_transplant

40% of them repeat the crime within a year of release. Thats why.
And thats only the ones that get caught. I'm sure actual figures are higher.

( Bureau of Justice Statistics Criminal Offenders Statistics (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#sex - broken link) )

60% of those who offend against children abuse those under 13.

They had thier chance the day they choose to do that. The person they damage doesnt ask for it or get a second chance to just move on. They shouldnt either. They should live with thier choices the rest of thier life just like thier victim has to.

I Just love people that miss quote reports and then give them as reference. I Know we all hate sex offenders lets admit it. probably have some issues in this area and we can't find a way to deal so arrest them all. well the facts are the facts and we all understand that people that offend against children are not what we want around. However maybe its your Dad your Mom or your grandmother who knows but I bet there is at least one that you have forgiven in the past that never did time and its a well kept family secret. Its been estimated that 90% or more crimes go unreported. Ok so who is committing these unreported crimes its not the convicted sex offender I would put money on that. this is take from the very same report that someone on here said that 40% reoffend in the first year. and I quote "
Approximately 4,300 child molesters were released from prisons in 15 States in 1994. An estimated 3.3% of these 4,300 were rearrested for another sex crime against a child within 3 years of release from prison. " ok given that 96.7% didn't. Ok ask yourself who is committing these crimes. Don't be shy you know it's your neighbor and his daughter your brother maybe and his kids who knows but this is wide spread and hammering on the ones that did get help and are trying to do better makes no
sense. so if the estimate of 90% is true then what we need to find a way to deal with this and help the ones that need help. Did you know that you can't get help with this and not go to jail and destroy your family and there future? So then what it goes underground and no one knows and goes on and on. Let's change this law take away the registration make it so these people can get help and maybe we will have a chance. Or maybe we are afraid not so much about the sex offenders but that you might need help and can't get it so pretend to be above this and your fine. i would bet that if we changed the law and made it so a person could get help and not go to jail and be able to get a job and be productive after wards we would have a lot less to worry about. Would this not be a better way and how many less victims would there be in the future.

[klownz32]

I do not know if of any family secrets as far as offenders in my family. If I did find out that someone in my family was a sex offender against a child that relationship would be broken. I am Catholic--sad to say I am not proud of how the church has handled the scores of priests admitting to sexually molesting children. They have paid off the families and continued to let the priests preach in churches. That fact alone would stop me from ever letting my children go to a Catholic Church. I am not sure taking jail time away would help more people come out. Regardless of that--what would be the deterant if there isn't jail time? It is a serious crime to sexually molest someone or assault them. Is there a stat out there about crimes that have shown a decrease in jail time where people have come forward more? I just don't think our society would be that honest--especially those who have committed serious crimes. The honor system would be great. It just seems that things are getting worse as far as crime frequency and severity of crimes. I'd be interested to see what people think of the theory of lowering the punishment to bring forth the confession of people that have committed crimes.

[simetime]

Guy, I respect your views on what the law is verses on the emotions behind how it is enforced, but consider this: Laws are created based on the feelings of the originator and enforcement is handed down based on the emotions of many. It should make you think about why in a prison where the guilty live alongside the innocent all despise the rapist and the child molestor. Do convicts know more about them then we do?