The Criminal Justice Mindset as Co-offender
Treating private violence as a crime can contribute to the success of the illness. Mandatory sentencing or harsh censure do not change the fact of the presence of the viral program in people.
Such looming threats and punishments do, however, add substantial stress to an infected person. Stress is a key factor in causing what might be an otherwise inactive virus to become active and present destructive episodes.
In addition, actions to cause report silencing and reception blocking are greatly intensified in the course of threatening investigations and in anticipation of police action. In the event of courtroom drama, reception blocking takes on the stature of heroic defense.
The mis-integration of the fact of the child’s report as an assault on the parent solidifies, as the potential events of conviction and imprisonment. The very real danger that this presents to the parent weights upon the ambivalent or compassionate observer to down play the report.
And finally, the burden of proof that falls onto the reporting child fits into a dynamic where the report must convince another, not just express the self. The healing quality of self expression becomes mired in an inappropriate need to influence another party, because only then would future safety be allowed.
Putting a child who has reported abuse through the legal system will most likely compound the problem for the child. We can see this potential objectively, just by the structure of litigation and legal defense.
Consider the probable result of labeling carriers of any contagious disease criminal, and promising punishment to infected people. The criminal label and attending police attack clearly disallows objective inquiry. Assessment as to the status of the infection in the individual, and to the status of the epidemic in the culture becomes impossible. Blocking contagion is much more difficult if the contagious find it necessary to remain incognito. Under such conditions pandemic disease becomes more likely.
That we, as a people, are in a state of alarm sufficient to prompt horror (public disgrace) and serious, strong action
(mandatory sentencing) means that we have reached a higher level of consciousness. We see that the behavioral virus that is child maltreatment and especially incestuous assault is very serious, very damaging. This heightened awareness is part of a movement towards health.
The challenge at this time is to objectively discern which action is the strongest action, or most effective in actually creating health. Considering the reclassification of private violence as disease patterns does not mean that police action would have
no place in appropriate and effective behavior for healing. Humane confinement as quarantine in extreme cases is not
ruled out.
In the recognition of private violence as an illness, the goal of arresting and convicting the highest number of persons is exchanged for the goal of arresting the disease process itself.
It is not necessary to heal everybody in order to make positive impact on a state of epidemic. One need not accomplish
the long process of personal recovery from all patterns of unconsciousness before acting to improve the health /
circumstances of yourself, your family and its members. It is possible to block contagion and set up for general healing
by building strength in those who consciously choose healing right now.
Such looming threats and punishments do, however, add substantial stress to an infected person. Stress is a key factor in causing what might be an otherwise inactive virus to become active and present destructive episodes.
In addition, actions to cause report silencing and reception blocking are greatly intensified in the course of threatening investigations and in anticipation of police action. In the event of courtroom drama, reception blocking takes on the stature of heroic defense.
The mis-integration of the fact of the child’s report as an assault on the parent solidifies, as the potential events of conviction and imprisonment. The very real danger that this presents to the parent weights upon the ambivalent or compassionate observer to down play the report.
And finally, the burden of proof that falls onto the reporting child fits into a dynamic where the report must convince another, not just express the self. The healing quality of self expression becomes mired in an inappropriate need to influence another party, because only then would future safety be allowed.
Putting a child who has reported abuse through the legal system will most likely compound the problem for the child. We can see this potential objectively, just by the structure of litigation and legal defense.
Consider the probable result of labeling carriers of any contagious disease criminal, and promising punishment to infected people. The criminal label and attending police attack clearly disallows objective inquiry. Assessment as to the status of the infection in the individual, and to the status of the epidemic in the culture becomes impossible. Blocking contagion is much more difficult if the contagious find it necessary to remain incognito. Under such conditions pandemic disease becomes more likely.
That we, as a people, are in a state of alarm sufficient to prompt horror (public disgrace) and serious, strong action
(mandatory sentencing) means that we have reached a higher level of consciousness. We see that the behavioral virus that is child maltreatment and especially incestuous assault is very serious, very damaging. This heightened awareness is part of a movement towards health.
The challenge at this time is to objectively discern which action is the strongest action, or most effective in actually creating health. Considering the reclassification of private violence as disease patterns does not mean that police action would have
no place in appropriate and effective behavior for healing. Humane confinement as quarantine in extreme cases is not
ruled out.
In the recognition of private violence as an illness, the goal of arresting and convicting the highest number of persons is exchanged for the goal of arresting the disease process itself.
It is not necessary to heal everybody in order to make positive impact on a state of epidemic. One need not accomplish
the long process of personal recovery from all patterns of unconsciousness before acting to improve the health /
circumstances of yourself, your family and its members. It is possible to block contagion and set up for general healing
by building strength in those who consciously choose healing right now.
