NYT Op-Ed: Pedophilia A Disorder, Not a Crime

[Mister Nightowl]

By MARGO KAPLAN OCT. 5, 2014

CAMDEN, N.J. — THINK back to your first childhood crush. Maybe it was a classmate or a friend next door. Most likely, through school and into adulthood, your affections continued to focus on others in your approximate age group. But imagine if they did not.

By some estimates, 1 percent of the male population continues, long after puberty, to find themselves attracted to prepubescent children. These people are living with pedophilia, a sexual attraction to prepubescents that often constitutes a mental illness. Unfortunately, our laws are failing them and, consequently, ignoring opportunities to prevent child abuse.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders defines pedophilia as an intense and recurrent sexual interest in prepubescent children, and a disorder if it causes a person “marked distress or interpersonal difficulty” or if the person acts on his interests. Yet our laws ignore pedophilia until after the commission of a sexual offense, emphasizing punishment, not prevention.

Part of this failure stems from the misconception that pedophilia is the same as child molestation. One can live with pedophilia and not act on it. Sites like Virtuous Pedophiles provide support for pedophiles who do not molest children and believe that sex with children is wrong. It is not that these individuals are “inactive” or “nonpracticing” pedophiles, but rather that pedophilia is a status and not an act. In fact, research shows, about half of all child molesters are not sexually attracted to their victims.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/opinion/pedophilia-a-disorder-not-a-crime.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region®ion=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region

The article continues, but I must admit I am perplexed by many of the statements in it, especially the final, bolded sentence in the above excerpt. Any explanation(s) would be greatly appreciated, as I do try to understand those whom society ostracizes, but on issues like this, I definitely have a certain inherent revulsion.

[LuvNewcastle]

1. If half of all child-molesters aren't sexually attracted to their victims,

why do they have sex with children? I know that other forms of rape are more about asserting dominance than sexual attraction, but I don't buy that in the case of child molestation. Virtually anyone can dominate a child, so what it the point of having sex with children if not sexual gratification?

I agree that pedophiles who do not molest should be able to easily obtain treatment for their disease, but how many people are we talking about here? What percentage of pedophiles don't molest and don't intend on doing so? I'd bet that the number is very small.

From what I've read on the subject, it seems that pedophiles are pre-occupied with having sex with children and they don't stop until they're forced to stop. If they're released from prison, they have to be strictly monitored or they start looking at child porn and molesting again.

Should molesters be put in prison and/or mental hospitals for life? I'm not sure, but I certainly don't think they should go do their time and then get released to begin the cycle anew.

If non-molesting pedophiles seek treatment, that's great, but I do believe they should be put on watch lists. I think they're more dangerous than most of the people we have on terrorist watch lists today. Just because we don't punish people for thought crime doesn't mean law enforcement shouldn't be aware of pedophiles in the community. The fact is, they're dangerous people, and we can't just ignore people who have those proclivities.

[davidpdx]

3. This might be the part you missed.............

From the article:

Part of this failure stems from the misconception that pedophilia is the same as child molestation.

If non-molesting pedophiles seek treatment, that's great, but I do believe they should be put on watch lists. I think they're more dangerous than most of the people we have on terrorist watch lists today. Just because we don't punish people for thought crime doesn't mean law enforcement shouldn't be aware of pedophiles in the community. The fact is, they're dangerous people, and we can't just ignore people who have those proclivities.

So if non-molesting pedophiles decided they wanted treatment you would actually punish them for that. Remember this is under the assumption that they have not committed a crime (if they have, then they obviously should be arrested).

That really doesn't make sense. How about the right to be innocent until proven guilty in a court. If they are going to be put on a watch list (a.k.a a registration list) how much of a slippery slope is it toward either locking them up in a hospital or prison for the rest of their life prior to any offense?

The article and your comments made me think of this movie:





A little more 1984 I guess

(the movie wasn't even really that great either)

[KittyWampus]

19. Rape & molestation isn't always about sexual attraction- it's about power & control.

It's using the sex act as a means of punishment or venting, for instance.

[Gormy Cuss]

29. Rape is about dominance, therefore child molestation is about dominance.

It matters not how easy or hard it is to dominate the victim. Comatose adults have been raped. That sexual gratification may be part of it for the rapist is irrelevant.

[DonCoquixote]

2. This article is reckless and stupid, and here is why

This author is using the argument "treat it like a disease" that has been used against many other addictions. The GOP will probably quote this as an example of "slippery slope" "See, ya treated drugs like a disease, not the kiddie porn types are next" Slipper slope slippery slope, next are people marrying kids!"

However, it would not fit because drug addiction does not directly target someone other than the user. Yes, there is crime, but it could be argued that a lot of that crime is due to the policy around addiction. We make drugs a crime, and addicts become criminals which feeds the gangs and the prison companies. The act of using drugs in itself need not be a crime.

However, paedophiles are predatory. They need to prey on someone, who is unable to defend themselves. A sex addict may cause a lot of pain (be you Bill Clinton or Charlie Sheen), but it is possible for someone to be a sex addict and still be functional, even if they are never "cured" of it, provided they keep it to consenting adults. Kids cannot consent, and it does not matter much soft porn a teen popstar does in the rock videos, they cannot consent.

Now, that treatment in general can improve things, yes. However, since paedophiles target the truly vulnerable, we cannot treat it like just another disorder.

[davidpdx]

6. I agree that it is reckless and stupid, but for different reasons

I'm not sure I buy into the non-practicing paedophile idea. Most likely a person will act on those inklings. I also take issue with the claim that 1% of males are paedophiles. I honestly don't think it's that high. The article conveniently leaves out the issue of female offenders, which are not only treated differently, but also minimized.

I do think that mental health issues (rather deep ones) lead to people who touch children to act out. The mental health system in the US is a joke and even if someone who did not do anything tried to get help he (or she) would be made to prove beyond a benefit of a doubt that they didn't act on it (in other terms guilty until proven innocent).

Now we have people on DU advocating for putting those who would get help on sex offender registration lists even if they weren't convicted of a crime. I see a few 4th amendment issues there.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending those that do this type of thing. If they do, they must face the consequences and must seek treatment no if's and's or but's.

What I'm saying is I think both the author and the other person I replied to are seriously misguided about their views of sex offenders.

[AngryAmish]

22. There are a host of nonpracticing heterosexuals

They can't find a partner or won't find a partner. Think about the really ugly or religious vows. These people don't rape people by and large. So why won't a pedophile who has some insight into their condition think, wow, I don't want to go to jail and I realize I would hurt a child very badly if I acted on my impulses, so I will just jerk off to my Mini Blden catalogs and stay the heck away from my nieces and nephews.

[hifiguy]

26. True, and I am one of them.

I realized when I was in my late teens/early twenties that even attempting to have a relationship was a terrible idea. I was attracted to several young women in my teens and college years, but I knew I could not read people at all and desired nothing more than stability in my life, which any attempt at a relationship would have only undermined. Then came college, law school, and a lot of setbacks but I never regretted my decision. For me it was a question of both priorities and acknowledgement to myself of my inability to deal with any sort of subtle social interactions, so I just never went there as for me the game wasn't worth the candle.. Ten years ago my Asperger's DX explained things I had known but had no name during the previous thirty+ years and it was a huge relief.

Now I am old enough that I just don't give a shit about such things anymore. A cat or two for company and a few friends are more than enough to satisfy my social needs and wants these days.

It was a lot more complex than this indicates, but I am only gonna post the Cliff's Notes version on DU as I am sure no one is particularly interested in the boring details.

[HereSince1628]

4. The reality is pedophilia is considered both a crime and a disorder

The work of the opinion page headline writer not withstanding.

As a behavior, pedophilia is child molestation and abuse, it is a criminal act against innocent children which in the minds of most people make it especially heinous.

Across America the zeitgeist about the criminal behavior is that punishment brings no rehabilitaion and no treatment can ameliorate let alone cure pedophilia.

These themes are likely to be repeated or alluded to often in replies to this op. Because the above are such strongly held beliefs crossing them triggers hostility that derails addressing the argument being made.


And, IMO, the crux of the argument being made is that society's extreme prejudice against this behavior is a barrier to prevention of the disorder and consequently the criminal act. Does the author successfully make that case?

She suggests that prevention is a possibility (which is contrary to commonly held expectations of society). Does she successfully make that case?

She suggests that treatment would be more unlikely to be sought unless institutionalized social prejudice against pedophilia is lowered. Does she successfully make that case? Fear of stigma (and attendant prejudice and discrimination) is commonly argued as factor contributing to failure of care-seeking for mental disorders.

Is it possible that any argument about the thesis of the opinion piece can ever be made in the face of extreme prejudice our zeitgeist holds as reasonable and proper?

[A Little Weird]

5. There was a story earlier this year

There was a thread awhile back about a guy who recognized that he was attracted to children and tried to get help. It talked about how difficult it was even to find a psychologist - that there was really no help for someone who had the attraction but did not want to act on it. I think he went on to start a support group.

On the one hand, I feel sympathy for the young man in the story - I think it's admirable that he recognized that his attraction is wrong and tried to deal with it. Yet I feel revulsion also - I think if I knew him in the real world and knew of his desires, I would probably ostracize him too.

http://www.upworthy.com/this-19-year-old-pedophile-has-never-gone-near-a-child-and-he-needs-you-to-hear-his-story#show-transcript

[davidpdx]

7. If someone hasn't acted on it and has recognized that and is getting help for it

I honestly don't see how anyone could ostracize someone like that. Now if he was lying about any one of those things I think he'd deserve it. Someone who is an alcoholic and gets help before things get bad enough to where they drive drunk has in essence prevented a crime (and the victimization of a person). Would you go up to them and say "you fucking lush, you got help, but you're nothing but a piece of shit"? I'd hope not.

[A Little Weird]

10. I recognize that it would be unfair on my part

It's easier for me to feel sympathy for the alcoholic in your example. I feel such visceral revulsion for pedophilia that I would have a hard time dealing with someone that I knew struggled with attraction to prepubescent children. I think that is part of the reason the guy was having so much trouble finding help - no one wants to even talk about it. I do think it is important for there to be professional help available for someone like him.

[davidpdx]

11. I have a feeling that no professional would want to get involved for reasons of liabiity

and the assumption that the person was guilty of something.

[Whiskeytide]

13. But would you...

...let a confessed but non-acting pedophile babysit your 7 year old child or sibling? Would you risk that child's well being because no crime had been committed? If not, that's the "ostracized" they're talking about. This is one of those circumstances where the act is so grievous that society and the legal system cannot treat it like you would other disorders. The other side of the due process coin is the obligation to protect the helpless. So which one do you compromise?

[davidpdx]

8. I have mixed feelings about the artice

She makes good points about the lack of knowledge about treatment, but at the same time all of the statistic she uses focuses on males and completely ignore the fact sex offences have become more common with females. I kind of feel the author is just all over the place with her analysis.

[HereSince1628]

12. IMO, gender isn't really central to supporting her thesis.

Last edited Mon Oct 6, 2014, 08:54 AM - Edit history (1)

which in a few paragraphs must establish evidence of prejudice within the legal system and it's interference with care-seeking.

IMO she does a bit of the first but is sort of stuck arguing about seeing the potentiality of that prejudice to impact civil rights and as a barrier to treatment seeking.

[RedCappedBandit]

9. From an intellectual standpoint, that statement is true.

Being attracted to someone doesn't dictate that you must rape them.

People who aren't pedophiles are attracted to tons of people they'll never touch. I don't see why the basic assumption should be different here.

Basically pedophiles who realize they need help should be able to get help without being criminalized, assuming they haven't actually sexually assaulted anyone.

A problem is nobody is really going to risk their own reputation to defend this population.

[Whiskeytide]

14. But it's different when adults are the...

... object of the desire. The tons of people a non-pedophile might be attracted to are adults who can exercise their own judgement and try to defend themselves. Inherent in the pedophile equation is the utter helplessness of the potential victims. That changes how we have to handle it.

[RedCappedBandit]

15. How does that make it different?

The point stands that being attracted to someone doesn't mean you have no ability to prevent yourself from raping them. The adults a non-pedophile would be attracted to can consent, but that doesn't mean they do. Children of course can't consent, but there's nothing forcing a pedophile to actually act on his or her attraction.

Frankly that's actually the same argument the less empathetic side of me would use. I'm not even sure why pedophiles need "help" to prevent themselves from raping people. It's not difficult to control yourself. I mean how hard is it not to rape people ffs?

(Is it necessary to include a disclaimer that this is an interesting thought exercise, and I'm not defending pedophiles who would hurt children?)

[Whiskeytide]

16. Not necessary to offer the qualification. I understand...

... that its a discussion.

And I agree with the basic principles you're offering. I guess the question is how far would one go in depriving another individual of due process rights in the pursuit of protecting a helpless victim? Ordinarily, I would not go far at all. I believe in our system for the most part. But children might be the exception to that rule. It's simply a matter of the degree of harm that is risked.

[HereSince1628]

18. "It's not that hard..." doesn't that presume the experience for others is the same as yours?

We associate truth with what we know, and what we know best is our own experience.

But that experience can't be considered generalizable.

Impulsivity pretty clearly varies between persons. Some people have great discipline others have little, most have some.

Impulsivity is a symptom in multiple mental disorders, obviously in the impulse control disorders (gambling addictions, hair-picking etc), and in personality disorders with characteristic outbursts of dramatic deviant behaviors (borderline, histrionic and narcissistic), as well as bipolar mania, and drug abuse/addiction.

Impulsivity is commonly associated in conduct disorders because it frequently results in failure to control self resulting behavior socially or institutionally defined as unacceptable/unlawful. Clearly, society hsa an interest in expecting people to control their behavior (sexual and otherwise), but that doesn't equate with: it's equally easy for everyone to do so.

[RedCappedBandit]

21. Thanks for pointing that out; that is a very good point.

I did question myself after I said that. I was kind of playing devil's advocate, but you're absolutely right.

That does beget another question, though. If a pedophile is at the point where he or she feels the need to seek help to avoid raping children, it's worth considering that they are in fact too dangerous to walk around completely under the radar. But then, as another posted said up-thread, if people feel like they're risking their freedom by coming forward, they're less likely to actually seek that help, and will remain dangerous and concealed.

Seems the only real solution is to make sure these people are able to get the help they need when they seek it. I don't see how we can get around the fact that pedophiles will be ostracized because it's such a sensitive subject.

[MineralMan]

17. Pretty much the only pedophiles we know about are the ones who

act on their attractions. Those who don't we don't even know about. So, we have no idea how many people have such attractions, really. This article really doesn't address that at all, so I don't find it particularly useful.

None of us knows much about the random people we encounter, but we can't live our lives in fear of everyone but ourselves. That's why we teach children how to avoid situations where they might be endangered.

[HereSince1628]

20. The article raises questions about insitutionalization of barriers to treatment

Important questions, imo.

Perhaps those questions are made even more urgent because we act with legal authority about things even you admit "we don't even know about".

[MineralMan]

24. People should be able to get treatment for anything if they want treatment.

There should be no barriers.

[HereSince1628]

28. Yes, they should. But seeking treatment can have costly consequences n/t

[get the red out]

32. This I agree with

I would think it better that someone get help in NOT abusing a child before they have ever done it.

[KittyWampus]

23. I find it interesting how universal the proclamations of revulsion at pedophilia are>>>

and yet it is insidious in our cultural milieu. Like advertising.

Here's a link to one blogger drawing attention to a heinous ad:

http://copyranter.blogspot.com/2011/06/and-finally-most-disturbing-cannes-2011.html

A friend just told me she passed a grand opening of a new shop in Manhattan that caters to "Lolitas". As she was walking by the line of young women dressed up like children she locked eyes with a fellow Latino and they both exchanged perplexed comments in Spanish. LOL.

Google "Lolita Halloween Costumes" and you'll find plenty to choose from.

Of course, young adults who like to dress up like school girls ARE adults and legal, yet somehow it seems to me just another example of normalizing pedophilia and child molestation.

[MineralMan]

25. There is an awful lot of exposure of young adolescent

girls in advertising and elsewhere, I agree. Our extreme focus on youth as sexually desirable is ugly. Last week, while visiting my parents, we spent some time looking though old family photos. My parents are trying to separate what is wanted from what isn't. The one thing I noticed was that my sister and her friends were not trying to look like attractive adults in their early teens. They looked like kids in the photos. When I contrast that with photos of my parents' great-grandchildren on Facebook, some of whom are now teenagers, the difference is remarkable. Those teen great-grandchildren are dressing as though they were years older.

[B2G]

27. It's both

To say it isn't crime is a slap in the face to its victims.

[HereSince1628]

30. Yes, it's both, imo the subject line is an OP-Ed editors headline

Editors of OP-Ed pages assign those headlines...often to maximize sizzle.

The author of the piece is arguing that thinking of pedophilia only in terms of a crime, contributes to construction of barriers, some even written into law, that interfere with seeking treatment--treatment that might both help the pedophile and prevent crime.

[WinkyDink]

31. The disorder, as with others, can LEAD to the commission of crimes.

[kestrel91316]

33. The mental condition is, well, a mental condition. When you lay a hand on another due to the

mental condition, that's a crime.

[RobAlister]

34. People don't seem to get the point

Pedophile = attracted to young children

Child molester = Someone who molest(s)/(ed) children and may be attracted to them

If someone confides in you that they're a pedophile and they haven't acted upon it, don't run and scream or call the authorities. Mainly because there has been no crime committed and also because they want to get help.