The high cost for the illusions of justice – the high cost of anger
All of us who are parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents, or professionals working with children would like to believe that we can protect all children from being taken advantage of or abused by someone in positions of authority. When someone in a position of authority does take advantage of the position of power with one of our children, it is understandable that we get angry. The anger may be directed at ourselves for not being able to protect the child and it may be directed at the person who was not able to honor that position of trust. Often it seems that this anger is the primary motivator in deciding how to deal with the person who violated that trust and/or our lack of ability to protect the child making a decision which we feel they are not mature enough to make. We get especially upset when the violation of trust includes sexual activity or putting the child in a life-threatening situation. We are quick to judge and act when it is obviously that a child’s life is in imminent danger or when sexual activity may be involved.
Increasingly, it seems, the legal system is involved with insuring that children are not mistreated. I recall reading about the case of a young child of a single parent who wandered out into the street. This parent had fallen asleep and the child did what most children do, it went off to explore without having any way of knowing the dangers such as traffic. Someone rescued the child and then called the police who called child protective services. The mother was accused of child neglect. There was no report in the newspapers about the fact that this single parent worked two jobs attempting to care for her children and could not afford child care both for the time she was at work and then time she needed to be sleeping.
Another time I had a client who had a child who kept finding ways to start fires and putting the life of the entire family in jeopardy. This man was a single father who made every effort to ensure that there were no matches or any other way for the child to start a fire and, yet, the child kept finding ways to start fires. He went to local service agencies asking for help and no one provided any child care, counseling or other help. Yet, when the man tied the child to a chair so he could safely take a shower he was charged with child abuse and the child was removed from his home.
Recently I heard about a former police officer who was a security guard at a private school. He and a 17-year-old student developed an attraction for each other and fell in love. The man was charged and convicted of being a sexual offender based on the fact that he abused his position of authority. He was sentenced to two years in prison which was suspended as long as he obeys the rules of probation and the rules of those on the sexual offenders list on which he will remain for ten years. He is not allowed to have any contact with the young woman, now 18 even though both he and the girl state that they are formally engaged and want to be married. As I recall, he is 43 and she is 18. The father of the young woman is convinced that justice has been served and that she will move on with her life although there has so far been no public evidence that she desires to do that.
As a father, I can certainly understand that the father/parents of this girl would like to see her have an opportunity to go to college or otherwise take time to prepare to be self-supporting to and explore her talents. She was, after all, attending a very pricey private school that prepares students to go on to college before taking their place as leaders of the community. Certainly, many of their graduates have followed this path. Yet, clearly this young woman and the former security guard are in love. It is, of course, easy to say that she is too young to make this sort of decision. After all, she might have been flattered that an adult showed interest in her – an adult in a position of authority. She may have been of legal age but the differences in positons did not allow her to make a rational judgment.
We adults cannot seem to make up our minds about when someone is an adult and allowed to make adult decisions. If a young person under 18 commits certain crimes such as murder which we consider are “adult crimes” we seem to have little hesitation in trying them as an adult. This can vary with the state, the prosecutor and other community members involved in the case.
We often send those who sell drugs or those who are caught with drugs to prison. We certainly send folks who steal to support their habit to prison. Sometimes attempts are made to distinguish those who have a drug addiction from those who have an addiction to power, money or somethings else. Yet, success is often achieved by being addicted to power or money no matter how many lives are adversely affected by that rise to power. We may laud the person who takes a multi-million-dollar salary while charging very high prices for a lifesaving drug.
We, as a community, get very angry when someone does not operate within the accepted norms that have been established for those who may be hurt by addiction to power. We just elected a president who brags about becoming rich by knowing how to use the system to declare bankruptcy and avoid taxes. A person who mistreats employees and then donates a lot of money to a charitable cause is lauded as a kind and generous person and may get a building or a wellness center named after him or her.
Much too often the question is not about what might be best for the individual or the community in the long term. The question is what will make us feel better for the moment or what will temporarily assuage our anger.
We have locked up people for homosexual acts, for marijuana use or growing, for exposing themselves or a myriad of other behaviors which we might find personally offensive but which are not dangerous or a threat to society.
There are millions of people on the sexual offender’s list who do not present a danger to anyone. The man (or woman) who unwittingly hires an underage prostitute, the 70-year-old physically disabled person who was attracted to sex with children as a younger person, the person who urinates in pubic, the person who is seduced by a teenager, or the person who sells sex as a way to pay for a drug habit may have engaged in behavior which we personally find offensive and which may have involved some sexual activity. Yet, the primary questions we must begin to ask ourselves are:
· Does the person present a future danger to others?
· Can the person be a responsible, tax paying member of the community without presenting a danger to others?
· Can mental health treatment or behavior modification treatment help the person safely be in the community?
· Is the primary purpose of “punishment” to make us feel as if we are doing something even if it does not deter future “crimes?”
· What is the cost of criminalizing someone or some behavior – financially and emotionally?
· Is the “criminal behavior” dangerous or just personally offensive?
· Is everyone treated equally or is “justice” dependent on how much money one has for an attorney(s)?
· Is society as a whole better off after spending billions of dollars to prosecute and keep an alarming number of people in jail and/or on probation or parole?
· What is the price for the illusion of control over our teenage children?
· How easy is it for individuals to get safe, affordable, quality help?
· Can a potential sexual offender get help without risking incarceration? Should they be able to?
An April 2016 White House Report entitled “Economic Perspectives on Incarceration and the Criminal Justice System” (whitehouse.gov) states that the current system may cost up 270 billion and is ineffective in a majority of cases. (There are those who get well in spite of the system and perhaps occasionally because of it.)
To be fair, there are communities which have made a very concerted effort to offer addicts alternatives to incarceration. I have talked to a number of people who have been able to reclaim a healthy life because of such programs. The programs are too few, too understaffed with highly trained staff, and may have waiting list. Also, too few individuals accept that addiction is a chronic illness which may require ongoing or repeated treatment. One expects relapses with chronic illness such as addiction, other mental illness and diseases such as diabetes.
In all our actions, as individuals or as a community, we would do well to examine our motive and the result we want or expect.
Written January 19, 2017
All of us who are parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents, or professionals working with children would like to believe that we can protect all children from being taken advantage of or abused by someone in positions of authority. When someone in a position of authority does take advantage of the position of power with one of our children, it is understandable that we get angry. The anger may be directed at ourselves for not being able to protect the child and it may be directed at the person who was not able to honor that position of trust. Often it seems that this anger is the primary motivator in deciding how to deal with the person who violated that trust and/or our lack of ability to protect the child making a decision which we feel they are not mature enough to make. We get especially upset when the violation of trust includes sexual activity or putting the child in a life-threatening situation. We are quick to judge and act when it is obviously that a child’s life is in imminent danger or when sexual activity may be involved.
Increasingly, it seems, the legal system is involved with insuring that children are not mistreated. I recall reading about the case of a young child of a single parent who wandered out into the street. This parent had fallen asleep and the child did what most children do, it went off to explore without having any way of knowing the dangers such as traffic. Someone rescued the child and then called the police who called child protective services. The mother was accused of child neglect. There was no report in the newspapers about the fact that this single parent worked two jobs attempting to care for her children and could not afford child care both for the time she was at work and then time she needed to be sleeping.
Another time I had a client who had a child who kept finding ways to start fires and putting the life of the entire family in jeopardy. This man was a single father who made every effort to ensure that there were no matches or any other way for the child to start a fire and, yet, the child kept finding ways to start fires. He went to local service agencies asking for help and no one provided any child care, counseling or other help. Yet, when the man tied the child to a chair so he could safely take a shower he was charged with child abuse and the child was removed from his home.
Recently I heard about a former police officer who was a security guard at a private school. He and a 17-year-old student developed an attraction for each other and fell in love. The man was charged and convicted of being a sexual offender based on the fact that he abused his position of authority. He was sentenced to two years in prison which was suspended as long as he obeys the rules of probation and the rules of those on the sexual offenders list on which he will remain for ten years. He is not allowed to have any contact with the young woman, now 18 even though both he and the girl state that they are formally engaged and want to be married. As I recall, he is 43 and she is 18. The father of the young woman is convinced that justice has been served and that she will move on with her life although there has so far been no public evidence that she desires to do that.
As a father, I can certainly understand that the father/parents of this girl would like to see her have an opportunity to go to college or otherwise take time to prepare to be self-supporting to and explore her talents. She was, after all, attending a very pricey private school that prepares students to go on to college before taking their place as leaders of the community. Certainly, many of their graduates have followed this path. Yet, clearly this young woman and the former security guard are in love. It is, of course, easy to say that she is too young to make this sort of decision. After all, she might have been flattered that an adult showed interest in her – an adult in a position of authority. She may have been of legal age but the differences in positons did not allow her to make a rational judgment.
We adults cannot seem to make up our minds about when someone is an adult and allowed to make adult decisions. If a young person under 18 commits certain crimes such as murder which we consider are “adult crimes” we seem to have little hesitation in trying them as an adult. This can vary with the state, the prosecutor and other community members involved in the case.
We often send those who sell drugs or those who are caught with drugs to prison. We certainly send folks who steal to support their habit to prison. Sometimes attempts are made to distinguish those who have a drug addiction from those who have an addiction to power, money or somethings else. Yet, success is often achieved by being addicted to power or money no matter how many lives are adversely affected by that rise to power. We may laud the person who takes a multi-million-dollar salary while charging very high prices for a lifesaving drug.
We, as a community, get very angry when someone does not operate within the accepted norms that have been established for those who may be hurt by addiction to power. We just elected a president who brags about becoming rich by knowing how to use the system to declare bankruptcy and avoid taxes. A person who mistreats employees and then donates a lot of money to a charitable cause is lauded as a kind and generous person and may get a building or a wellness center named after him or her.
Much too often the question is not about what might be best for the individual or the community in the long term. The question is what will make us feel better for the moment or what will temporarily assuage our anger.
We have locked up people for homosexual acts, for marijuana use or growing, for exposing themselves or a myriad of other behaviors which we might find personally offensive but which are not dangerous or a threat to society.
There are millions of people on the sexual offender’s list who do not present a danger to anyone. The man (or woman) who unwittingly hires an underage prostitute, the 70-year-old physically disabled person who was attracted to sex with children as a younger person, the person who urinates in pubic, the person who is seduced by a teenager, or the person who sells sex as a way to pay for a drug habit may have engaged in behavior which we personally find offensive and which may have involved some sexual activity. Yet, the primary questions we must begin to ask ourselves are:
· Does the person present a future danger to others?
· Can the person be a responsible, tax paying member of the community without presenting a danger to others?
· Can mental health treatment or behavior modification treatment help the person safely be in the community?
· Is the primary purpose of “punishment” to make us feel as if we are doing something even if it does not deter future “crimes?”
· What is the cost of criminalizing someone or some behavior – financially and emotionally?
· Is the “criminal behavior” dangerous or just personally offensive?
· Is everyone treated equally or is “justice” dependent on how much money one has for an attorney(s)?
· Is society as a whole better off after spending billions of dollars to prosecute and keep an alarming number of people in jail and/or on probation or parole?
· What is the price for the illusion of control over our teenage children?
· How easy is it for individuals to get safe, affordable, quality help?
· Can a potential sexual offender get help without risking incarceration? Should they be able to?
An April 2016 White House Report entitled “Economic Perspectives on Incarceration and the Criminal Justice System” (whitehouse.gov) states that the current system may cost up 270 billion and is ineffective in a majority of cases. (There are those who get well in spite of the system and perhaps occasionally because of it.)
To be fair, there are communities which have made a very concerted effort to offer addicts alternatives to incarceration. I have talked to a number of people who have been able to reclaim a healthy life because of such programs. The programs are too few, too understaffed with highly trained staff, and may have waiting list. Also, too few individuals accept that addiction is a chronic illness which may require ongoing or repeated treatment. One expects relapses with chronic illness such as addiction, other mental illness and diseases such as diabetes.
In all our actions, as individuals or as a community, we would do well to examine our motive and the result we want or expect.
Written January 19, 2017
RSS Feed