"Sometimes people attend therapy because they are mandated to attend, not because they want to. Bill* was one of these clients. He sat before me, avoiding eye contact, arms crossed. I didn't hurt anyone, not like those other blokes did, he said. Bill had been placed in a sex offenders group treatment program but was terminated for non-attendance. He said that he had found it too hard to hear how the others had offended so he stopped going."
"I knew Bill had been convicted of possessing and distributing child exploitation material (CEM) and had been found with hard drives containing thousands of folders of it. He had been distributing it for years in return for other CEM images. He was identified as being at higher risk than the average CEM offender and treatment was mandated. Before starting treatment, we spoke about the limits of confidentiality in detail."
"As a registered psychologist, I am mandated to report any child sexual or physical abuse, including the use of CEM, and it was important that Bill understood what this meant for our therapy. He insisted that he was not aroused by children. This is a common occurrence among CEM offenders and is a reflection of the instinctive human need to shy away from admitting something shameful."
Bill attended therapy because attendance was mandated but disengaged and avoided admitting culpability. He had been convicted for possessing and distributing thousands of child exploitation material files and was identified as higher risk. The clinician reviewed case files before sessions, explained mandatory reporting and confidentiality limits, and used clinical measures to assess sexual interest. Bill denied arousal by children, a common defensive response, but clinical judgment suggested paedophilic interests that amplified reoffending risk. Treatment for CEM offenders remains under-evaluated, so interventions are individualized and tailored to assessed risk and needs.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]