Although CWN blogs on the matter for different reasons, the key question remains: can "therapists" actually "cure" a sex predator of his affliction? Is their "opinion" worth anything?
This from an entry dealing with a priest/predator in Birmingham, Mass.:
...psycho-therapists were also culpably negligent. The [Bishops'-commissioned] National Review Board faulted therapy centers for giving mendaciously optimistic reports on the success of their treatment of abuser priests in order to keep business coming in (one of the lingering mysteries of the Crisis is the lack of outrage occasioned by this charge). Yet even discounting self-serving motives for optimism the cavalier incompetence of Birmingham's therapists (go here and here) is contemptible.
Almost every one of the worst abusers spent some time in therapy (at St. Luke's, the Servants of the Paraclete center, the House of Affirmation, e.g.) and was flagged out of the pits back onto the track by the credentialed, professional, state-of-the-art, etc., house staff. While we're on the topic of accountability, can anyone point to a single therapist who has lost his license as a consequence? Has a call been raised from within the profession for ridding itself of the quacks?
These questions are timely, given the upcoming trial-for-release of a known predator into the Milwaukee area (scroll to second item) and the "no surveillance" release of Billy Lee Morford.
IF there's a recurrence, WHICH of the shrinks will lose their license?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment