Pailryder,

Sorry pal, but you miss the whole point.  

This is not about liking or disliking the people/types you mention or even the Texas Department of Corrections, but it is about trust...what sort of a moron would trust his well being to someone who has devoted his professional life to quackery or to another who uses second-hand quackery to make decisions about the examinee's compliance and treatment?  Certainly no rational person that I know comes to mind...

Thank goodness there is a glimmer of hope regarding this matter and hope for better things yet to come...

https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2016/05/15/federal-appeals-court-rules-certain-ma...

Edited to fix hyperlinking. -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator

George W. Maschke wrote on Jul 17^th, 2016 at 8:06am:


Maybe I'm wrong George, but the fact that his treatment provider uses polygraphy appears to impede your consideration of the notion that, despite this failing, he may none-the-less be able give waldenrefugee some effective psychotherapy and thus reducing the chances of him spending the rest of his life in prison.

I was more focused on this one instance rather than the greater good. Suggesting that this fellow develop the skills to ensure he can beat the polygraph and get over on his "quack therapist" may alleviate his immediate legal worries, but may not serve him well in the long run. The faulty thinking that makes it okay to have sex with minors is something that is hard for some to auto-correct.

Previously, when I stated that admitting to viewing Jurassic World could be taken as a sign of progress in the treatment, I was referring to bringing it up directly to the therapist long before the polygraph appointment is made; not under post test interrogation.

As Pailryder noted, his violations could be more egregious than watching Jurassic World, and if this is the case, he should be directed to consult with his attorney. Having him stuff these things into a secret box and successfully fooling his therapist and polygrapher, IMHO would just keep him in a dark bad place which would eventually consume him.

Ark,

I still have to completely disagree.  Although there clearly are some good examples of past error in judgment (perhaps unrelated to or perhaps peripheral to and which can be isolated from future performance) not preventing successful future and overall performance (e.g., Michael Phelps continuing to win Olympic gold medals, set world records, and become the greatest swimmer of all time after Cannabis use, DUI occurrences, etc), I don't believe that is the case with the psychotherapist using polygraph results as a basis for diagnosis and subsequent treatment.

In the scenario we have been discussing, the polygraph results and conclusions that are offered by the polygrapher and accepted by the psychotherapist are foundational to and determine everything (diagnosis/treatment) that follows.  Error accepted which is foundational to all that follows presents a fatal flaw in this flow of events.  If one is serious about obtaining a reliably successful outcome, this introduction of early error has to be eliminated or the process should be discontinued.

As George has also suggested, I offer no judgment on the value of psychotherapy for intended purposes in the absence of lie detection-introduced error, but I am steadfast in maintaining the worthlessness (and perhaps worse than worthless depending on what actions follow the introduction of error) of such a procedure in the presence of this foundational error.

Ark,

I believe the foundation is indeed badly flawed, and I agree with your assessment of some of the negative consequences stemming from these flaws.

Quote:


waldenrefugee, 

I'm sorry for your situation and I can somewhat empathize.  Our justice system, particularly in the southern U.S., needs some revamping.  The laws are outdated and we (the U.S.) send more non-violent offenders to jail than anywhere else in the country.  In high school and college, many teenage males who are 18 and 19 have girlfriends who are a few years younger.  It is natural.  Most women like older men, and most men like younger women.  How can someone be jailed for something like this?  These relationships are generally consensual between two adolescents, no matter who is legal age and who is not.  Women mature faster than men anyway, so the boy and girl are usually on the same level of maturity.

I personally am now in a very tough situation.  I have a good education, good job, high level security clearance, and until recently had no arrests and no criminal history.  However, a certain southern state decided that me trashing a motel room constituted felony vandalism, and I was booked and charged.  Instead of just receiving a bill from the motel, like every other hotel/motel does when you have incidental expenses, they called the cops and a warrant was issued for my arrest.  Now I'm in jeopardy of losing my clearance, thus my job, being unable to get any other job with a criminal record, all my professional credentials, right to vote, freedom, and the list goes on.  All for something that could have been settled in civil court or with a bill to me.  I've lawyered up and am fighting this tooth and nail, hoping to settle this pre-trial and get an expungement.   

This is not the first hit on my security clearance.  I also have a previous clearance denial from a failed polygraph based on false accusations, a security violation, a foreign contacts from very unfriendly countries which I reported, all this within the past 6 years.  This felony charge is probably the final straw and I can soon kiss my clearance goodbye.   

I lost all faith in our justice system years ago.  And the recent incidents of police shootings only perpetuates my distrust in our system. Anyway, these laws need to change.  The taxpayer dollars do not need to be spent on jailing people for silly victimless crimes, or crimes that can be settled with a bill without any permanent damage to the accuser.

Where I live (WI) there is a charge known as "criminal damage to property".  It can be a misdemeanor or felony depending upon the amount of damage.

I suppose that the line between what is considered a civil matter and a criminal charge can be very fuzzy indeed, and the decision is probably based heavily on the responding officer's judgement call.
I don't know what effect a felony of this type would have on your TS clearance.  In the IC, I suspect that it could be problematic.

Ex Member wrote on Jul 15^th, 2016 at 5:52am:


Who usually considers sex with a 17 year old a form of paraphilia?  That statement alone is pure quackery.  No respectable therapist, psychologist or psychiatrist would ever consider that a paraphilia, especially when he is only four years older.  There is nothing abdnormal or pathalogical about it.  To delve further into such a statement, no respectable mental heath provider would even consider hebephilia or ephebephilia treatable, unless it was leading to other more severe mental health concerns.  All of the above are considered normal and aren't listed as disorders in major diagnostics manuals.  The problem we are facing with so called "sex offense therapy" is that it isn't providing treatment for disorder, but simply for undesirable actions or behaviors.  In some states it's so ideological and non-scientific that it would best be compared to praying the gay away.