Thought Crime, Part 1

Part 1: prosecution and persecution

I am guilty of downloading child pornography.  I have never tried to deny that fact. I realize that this is reprehensible, and that the models of this industry undoubtedly have undergone horrible physical and mental trauma and abuse.  I contributed to this industry, and to this abuse.  I cannot take that back, but can move forward to understand and mend my karma, my mind, and my soul.

The consequences of this crime; 7 1/2 years in prison, lifetime probation, and lifelong registry as a sex offender, with restrictions on where I can live, where I can go, and what I can do, are predicated on the assumption that I am " incurable" and will or would undoubtedly act out on the fantasies that might have led to downloading such despicable material.  (Disclosure: these images were not of abuse, rape, or any sexual acts.)

Prosecuting and sentencing a person for potential and assumptive behavior is indeed a dangerous path.  One that I wish to explore in this essay.

I realize that many (perhaps most) people "buy into" the prevailing sentiment and media portrayal that a person with child porn (CP) is a sex crazed, evil, and perverted child molester.  That this is not necessarily the case seems to matter little.  Most people have little or no actual connection to these issues and would rather not think about them.  Few are willing to really question or understand the rationality of this assumption.  Even my fiancée --  who observed me interact with my own kids and students, and who claimed to want to marry me -  was unable or unwilling to explore these untrue assumptions.

I know the reality.  I know that might porn addiction led me to some dark places.  As is common with addiction, I needed more and more of my "drug" and explored more extreme content.  The child porn was one example of these extremes.  I am also fully cognizant of the line between imagination and reality.  This line was never in question and one that I would never cross.  I acknowledge that this is not the case for everyone, but those with a lack of awareness between fantasy and reality are, fortunately, the extreme minority.

This is by no means limited to sexual abuse issues.  This minority exists in all of the darker spheres of humanity.  There are serial killers, people who shoot up schools, who kill their own children, who stalk, kidnapped, and torture.  They are truly sick, and truly dangerous to society.  But to make assumptions of one's potential behavior is an extremely slippery slope.  We really don't know who is capable of these atrocities, so where do we draw that line?

I acknowledge that viewing CP is a likely risk factor toward sexual abuse.  The extent of this connection is really not known due to insufficient research.  An interesting article by Rachel Aviv called The Science of Sexual Abuse appeared in the January 14, 2013 issue of The New Yorker.

In this issue, she addresses the " Butner study redux" a 2009 study published in the Journal of Family Violence that is commonly cited by the courts to validate the extreme sentences and restrictions on CP felons.  In the study, 85% of the subjects convicted of child pornography crimes confessed to committing other sex crimes as well, an average of 13 per prisoner.  This study was cited on the Senate floor and five times in the Department of Justice 2010 National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction.

Further investigation of the validity of this study by the author led to some startling facts.  The program "required" the patients to "accept responsibility for a life of deviant behavior and thoughts." If they did not admit to such activities, they were accused of being in denial, and would be expelled from the program.  This meant returning to the general population of the prison, where sex offenders are routinely subjected to violence and abuse.

These study subjects later admitted that they just made things up to stay in the program and receive praise from the group.  They made " cheat sheets" in groups with fake names and details to "remember" in therapy.

Michael Setu, a psychiatry professor at the university of Toronto, reviewed the only six studies he could find on this subject and found that the Butner study was a " statistical outlier." The research is inconclusive.

"According to the largest study of released prisoners, conducted by the Bureau of Justice, the re-arrest rate for sex offenders is lower than that for perpetrators of any violent crime except murder." (Aviv) Yet this is the only class of felons with such draconian restrictions.

Now, if we are indeed going to pursue this line of thought, this "strategy of justice" to protect society and especially children from potential abuse, we should be thorough. There is ample research that people abused in their youth are statistically significantly more likely to be abusive themselves.  Should they be placed under restrictions?

I'm sure there is research that shows a correlation between drug use and alcohol abuse with a number of heinous crimes, including those of sexual abuse, so should drug users and alcoholics be on the sex offender registry, for life?

But let's not stop there.  To truly and accurately "predict" one's likelihood for sexual abuse, we must consider other factors as well: How many sexual partners, the age of losing one's virginity, sexual "games" played even prior to puberty would certainly contribute to potential sexual abuses.  We must consider the nature of one's sexual history.  Did they ever experiment with a pet?  Did they have sexual activity with a relative or a step-sibling, at any age?  Have they ever been with multiple partners?  Or used sex as a means of control or for getting what they wanted?

But even this is insufficient, we must also consider the sexual thoughts, fantasies, and imaginings going on in their minds.  Have they ever had "impure", "immoral," or "illegal" thoughts and fantasies?  And what about going to strip clubs?  Are these patrons not more likely to rape or abuse others?  And what of "legal" pornographic habits?  Is looking at legal models dressed up as young schoolgirls less likely to lead to acting out on one's fantasy?  Is this not a similar mental game?  And is looking at porn in general a predictor of potential rape?  If fantasy leads to reality, that's not a ludicrous assumption.

What about the attitudes and environment of one's childhood, particularly toward social expression?  Was it repressive and restrictive or was it permissive and open?  I'm sure both extremes lead to potential sexual inadequacy, and potential sexual abuse.

All of this and more shape our minds and the potential for inappropriate actions.  Ultimately, it's the ability to separate imagination from the reality of acting out.  Ultimately, it's one's conscience, one's knowledge of right and wrong.  How do we measure that?

In my case, the psychosexual history evaluation was an attempt to do just that.  Many of the questions  - well, most of the questions -- I've just addressed were posed to me.  I answered honestly and openly, even when not proud of the answers.  It revealed an extremely low risk (0.05%) of likelihood of inappropriate behavior.  Yet I was sentenced to 2 1/2 years above the five year minimum sentence for a single image of child pornography.  I got life probation on count number two.  I have lifelong registration, unsure of where I can live, what employment I'll be able to get, and even the nature of the relationship with my own children.

I want to be crystal clear that I do not think that collecting child porn is OK, or should be legal, but the consequences should be proportionate to the crime and should be solution, or treatment-based.  Probation, with mandatory counseling is most obvious to me.  I would advocate involvement in a program for understanding the pain and suffering of victims of the sex trade, particularly of child pornography.  A sliding scale restitution fee that contributes  directly to the treatment of both victims and offenders, based on income, seems appropriate and effective.  Imagine the millions of dollars this would save from taxes that go to state prison facilities for these offenders.

The court hurdles and restrictions placed on sex-offender create a lifelong struggle where true rehabilitation and treatment become secondary to pure survival.  Years in prison, exposed to others with questionable decision-making skills, and without any real treatment is certainly not going to help their cause.

I am suggesting that these crimes should not be prosecuted as if there had been actual physical abuse and more importantly without the assumption that there will be.  This way of thinking leads to the "thought crime" mentality I referred to above, and if it were to be expanded to other classes of criminal activity would result in a society that makes Big Brother seem like Ronald McDonald!

Yet at present, this assumption of CP viewing necessarily leading to abusive behavior exists; with the public, with the media, with the courts (and apparently with my ex fiancée).  We need more research, more treatment, less fear, and much more compassion to make things better.