Sex Offender As Therapist?!

[joeylittle]

But he could easily pose a threat to the clients, and they are a much more vulnerable population than a dorm full of supposedly healthy adults.

It's a question of law, not a question of possible harm. I agree, it would of course make sense for a program to use some discretion, here. And as @EveHarrington said, sex offenders aren't a protected class. But if the course work wasn't going to require him to violate the terms of the registry, then there's no reason he shouldn't be able to take classes and pursue a degree.

Licensure is where things change, because that is also practice hours, but now it's the real world, not an academic institution. Again, though, the terms of the registry have to be considered, I think. @coco9 is better at this legal stuff, I'm just sharing my thoughts.

 

[sedna]

@joeylittle


It depends on the company if they want to have checks run, its usually routine in healthcare, childcare and security or law jobs. I wasnt aware that it was more common than that. It's probably good that it is.

This guy is not unemployable with the degree that he has. It depends on many variables, some depending on the ethics of who hires him. The liability of someone knowing beforehand is an issue for the employers, but if they asked him to fill in the usual application and he ticked the never convicted of a felony box, then the liability is his own fraud.

From there the employer has to weigh of having him is worth the risk, the odds of him becoming a problem, bad publicity, and if offering him a lower salary than someone without his problem might be worth it.

I generally believe most people, companies and colleges dont bother and wouldnt find the risk worth it.

Whats disturbing about Buckaroos tainted sibling, is that he got his degree in that subject in the first place. It would have been to his great advantage to pick something else. So his desire to be in that position with people allowed him to put much effort into a game plan he was likely to lose in the end.

After the original OP posts I looked at the Psychology Today disclaimers for the public as well as therapists using its site.

I find the whole thing really disturbing on both ends of it actually, I suppose I shouldnt be surprised.

There is no checking of credentials or criminal back round and it basically peddles instant credibility in bold type to those wanting to join. Any member of the public is warned they have no liability and its the public members responsibility to verify its list of therapists, in the expected small print.

In reality if someone came to serious harm from someone that had been on that list, PT would be liable anyway, if the harmed person had the right legal representation. Disclaimers like that are never iron clad.

One of these days I'm going to glance at a post like this and not respond! I've got ice cream melting in my car !! Its all good .I'm just trying to figure out who I am. I feel like Robert Downey Jr. 's character in Tropic Thunder :unsure:

 

[BuckarooBanzai]

Licensure is where things change, because that is also practice hours, but now it's the real world, not an academic institution.

His practicum hours weren't done at the university but rather at an outside clinic. In other words, there really was no difference, practically speaking, between his practicum hours under supervision and his post-degree hours under supervision.

No matter how I look at it, unless there were restrictions placed on him by the clinics, he was sitting in a private office in a one-on-one therapy situation with a vulnerable individual. So wrong.

Ben

 

[BuckarooBanzai]

This guy is not unemployable with the degree that he has.

Maybe, just MAYBE, he is employable as a researcher or a professor.

If he goes into research, which he claims to enjoy, the liability for the employer - assuming he checked the 'felon' box on his application - would be liability if he were to ever hurt someone on the insitution premises. Given that he is listed as 'non-violent' on his registry page and hasn't had any legal issues since coming off parole, maybe someone would be willing to take the risk.

Now, what he wants to do is come on as a professor. This is much more problematic:

1. If they bring him on as a professor and he gains tenure, then they essentially won't be able to get rid of him unless he commits a crime. Now, many individuals going into psychology have abuse histories, and some are hyper-vigilent. A CSA survivor going into a psych program might just google up all her psych professors to make sure they were 'safe'; I've certainly known people to do this. If even just one student or colleague were to find out about his history, this person could make such a fuss that he would be a serious liability. And yet, with tenure, they wouldn't be able to get rid of him, assuming no criminal action on his part. Massive loss of money for the university, serious liability.

2. If they bring him on as just an associate at first but never move him into a tenure track (perhaps in order to decrease their liability as per above) he might claim foul and sue them for discrimination.

Given this, paired with his inability to gain a license, I do believe he is relatively unemployable in this field, unless as a researcher.

He claims his current university thinks he is the best thing since sliced bread. If so, just why aren't they offering him a position and/or endorsing him for positions elsewhere? I do believe him when he says he is liked and respected there but, if these people who know him so well are unwilling to a chance with him, why would anyone else?

On top of all of this, I feel guilty. I was the one who reported him to the licensing board. I finked on him. Now he is homeless and entering into unemployment. I understand that he must take responsiblity for his poor choices and criminal background, but I still feel guilty.

Ben

 

[scout86]

YOU feel guilty? Well don't.

I know it's not quite that simple. But he's a grown up with a college education. He can find a job doing something. It's a good thing he hasn't gotten a license and it will be a good thing if he never finds a job in his chosen field. Absolve yourself of feelings of guilt. You're acting like one of the good guys & that's cool.

 

[lostforgottensoul]

On top of all of this, I feel guilty. I was the one who reported him to the licensing board. I finked on him. Now he is homeless and entering into unemployment. I understand that he must take responsiblity for his poor choices and criminal background, but I still feel guilty.

You shouldnt! Stop that! He chose this by both doing the predo crime and then later choosing to enter this field. Why this field and not the millons of others? There are many ways to be intrested in psycology but not become a therapist. If he had intrest in psycology, he would get this delimma.

 

[BuckarooBanzai]

YOU feel guilty? Well don't.

You shouldnt! Stop that!

Thanks!

Intellectually, I agree with both of you. I think the guilt comes primarily via my mother, who holds me responsible for his failure to be a success in this field.

She used me when my father was deathly ill, relied on me alone, but then, after Dad passed, she transferred her trust over to my brother. Now that he has earned a doctorate in counseling, she listens to and believes everything he says. And, he says all sorts of horrible things about me because I used to have PTSD and DID. My mother has chosen my registered sex offender brother over me. He is deemed the responsible one. She has put his name as co-owner on all of her bank accounts and investments, he is listed as her medical emergency contact ... and who knows what else. He owns her mind.

I know, it's crazy-making, but that's the way dysfunctional families often behave.

Ben

 

[lostforgottensoul]

I know, it's crazy-making, but that's the way dysfunctional families often behave.

Yes they do! Mine does, whom believed a psyco child torturer over the victim and her word meant fact. She said it so its fact.

 

[BuckarooBanzai]

Mine does, whom believed a psyco child torturer over the victim

I am so sorry you are experiencing the same familial abuse.

I do not know why families so often choose to protect the perpetrator over the victim. In my experience, this betrayal is just as bad, if not worse, than the original abuse.

Ben

 

[BuckarooBanzai]

I am also involved in another thread, a thread in which a wife is denying that her abusive husband is abusive.

This is all crazy-making. Not only do I have to deal with my dysfunctional family, I have a female member right here is who starting the pattern in her child's life.

Ben

 

[lostforgottensoul]

In my experience, this betrayal is just as bad, if not worse, than the original abuse.

Oh god, its brutal. Not as bad as the orginal but man, to watch each one of my family turn their backs on me over a large period of time, its brutal!

 

[BuckarooBanzai]

Do you know, researchers have found that it is the familial response that determines whether a CSA survivor will grow up traumatized or not?

If the child tells Mom (for instance), is BELIEVED and comforted, and then Mom takes care of the issue (leaves the perpetrator husband, files charges - whatever is appropriate), the child feels SAFE again and, generally, does not grow up to be a traumatized adult. However, if the child tells and Mom says, for instance, "How DARE you say something like that about (fill in the blank)!" - in other words, if the child is not believed, comforted, and safety is not restored, THIS is the child who grows up to be the trauatized adult.

Ben