Reoffending worries
Notifications OFFPost deleted by user
Post deleted by user
Please don't do this to yourself.
Statistics don't mean anything when looking at an individual.
Maybe talk to him about how he is feeling etc.
It sounds like you have started to feel normal and it has made your brain trigger the ptsd to protect you.
Statistics don't mean anything when looking at an individual.
Maybe talk to him about how he is feeling etc.
It sounds like you have started to feel normal and it has made your brain trigger the ptsd to protect you.
Post deleted by user
I'm a sucker for a good research article, so I couldn't resist reading your links.
My understanding from the first article is that indirect offending against children is more in line with illegal images of children than it is with direct contact. I would think this would be a good thing for many people in this group whose persons have been convicted of communicating with children online. My interpretation is that the risk of them moving to direct offending is much lower than currently estimated.
The second link, the PowerPoint, seemed biased to me. For example, the small sample only included persons with extreme pornography in their collection. But then they generalize it to all iioc offenders. I think I saw in the first link that extreme pornography was proposed as an indicator of risk.
Something I find interesting is that in my country there is a lot of weight put onto the gender of the victim. People who offend against boys are seen as a much higher risk than people who offend against girls. Neither of the above articles seem to mention that at all. I'm not sure why, or which is correct, i just find it interesting.
Thanks for sharing the articles. I'm sorry that you're struggling after all this time. I would continue to focus on the positive actions your person is taking . All you can do is keep communication open in case they struggle in the future so they know they can come to you for help.
I Hope you feel better soon. Take care.
My understanding from the first article is that indirect offending against children is more in line with illegal images of children than it is with direct contact. I would think this would be a good thing for many people in this group whose persons have been convicted of communicating with children online. My interpretation is that the risk of them moving to direct offending is much lower than currently estimated.
The second link, the PowerPoint, seemed biased to me. For example, the small sample only included persons with extreme pornography in their collection. But then they generalize it to all iioc offenders. I think I saw in the first link that extreme pornography was proposed as an indicator of risk.
Something I find interesting is that in my country there is a lot of weight put onto the gender of the victim. People who offend against boys are seen as a much higher risk than people who offend against girls. Neither of the above articles seem to mention that at all. I'm not sure why, or which is correct, i just find it interesting.
Thanks for sharing the articles. I'm sorry that you're struggling after all this time. I would continue to focus on the positive actions your person is taking . All you can do is keep communication open in case they struggle in the future so they know they can come to you for help.
I Hope you feel better soon. Take care.
Hi - just talk to him - don't bottle it up - bless you these blips certainly come out the blue.
Post deleted by user
Hi
I didn't actually see the original post but by the title I'm guessing it's about reoffending. This is my BIGGEST worry and this is always on my mind.
We often talk about my worry around this but it's always there,
take care x
I didn't actually see the original post but by the title I'm guessing it's about reoffending. This is my BIGGEST worry and this is always on my mind.
We often talk about my worry around this but it's always there,
take care x
This thing about those with male victims supposedly being more 'dangerous' is a hangover from the pre internet days. It really applies to contact offences only.
The way that porn works now, is that an addict will look at all sorts of extreme material, because it is so easy to find, but whether they would do anything offline is a completely different matter. The stats for reoffending among image offenders suggest hardly any progress to contact offending.
The way that porn works now, is that an addict will look at all sorts of extreme material, because it is so easy to find, but whether they would do anything offline is a completely different matter. The stats for reoffending among image offenders suggest hardly any progress to contact offending.
Hi Little Robin,
The tool I'm referring to is called the CPORT. Child pornography online risk tool. It's specifically for iioc offenders risk of re-offending. 2/7 risk indicators are about having more male than female contact. Re-offending includes viewing iioc again.
The tool I'm referring to is called the CPORT. Child pornography online risk tool. It's specifically for iioc offenders risk of re-offending. 2/7 risk indicators are about having more male than female contact. Re-offending includes viewing iioc again.
Post deleted by user
SoTired
This is a really good piece of research, looking at an area which is often overlooked. Although I can't help thinking that a lot of the criticism, e.g. about the impact of court delays, is just as applicable to adults as it is to children.
This is a really good piece of research, looking at an area which is often overlooked. Although I can't help thinking that a lot of the criticism, e.g. about the impact of court delays, is just as applicable to adults as it is to children.