Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Oh, No, S.O.

No, not significant other.

I check the sex offender registry (SOR) every once in a while. I'm very conflicted about this. I don't feel good about the shaming that the SOR involves, but on the other hand, I want to be savvy and protect my kids from real or imagined harm- a natural response for a mom.

Well, the inevitable ethical dilemma has presented itself. I found someone on there that was convicted of distribution of child pornography not that long ago, and that person is registered as a student here. Moreover, from their major, I know I will have them in class next semester. The class is not that big, so I will have a lot of contact with them. No, there's no mix-up. I am certain that this student is the same person on the SOR.

Now, this isn't a question of protecting my kids any more, although we live very close to campus (!). This is a question of how I treat this person. I have every intention of acting in a professional manner. But then, how do I *think* about this person?
1. Forget about what I saw on the internet. This is a person who deserves a fresh start, has paid their dues, and I must simply expunge their past from my mind in order to treat them fairly.
2. Though this person does deserve a fresh start, I must keep in mind that recidivism is non-zero. I should treat them as fairly as possible, but always keep a bit of vigilance about them.
3. This person has clearly made a turn around- to go to college and better their life. They probably have a fascinating story and may even speak about their past. I should treat them fairly, but try to get to know them a little so that I can learn about them and especially encourage this person. 

What is your opinion? How would you handle the situation?

        

5 comments:

  1. Whatever you choose, remember that the SOR doesn't list all sex offenders, just the ones who have been caught. There could be a person in your class right now who is guilty of something worse, but they haven't been caught.

    And keep in mind that distribution of pornography is a very broad accusation and might mean something horrible, or something thoughtless but not horrible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Insightful. There was a lot of press about it when this person was arrested, and it didn't sound like something mild- sexting or such. It was CHILD pornography. But I DON'T know the whole story and will keep that in mind, thank you.

      Delete
  2. Obviously you have more data than I do. But a single picture of someone a day under the age of 18 will get a 'distributing child porn' conviction. Maybe this person is a total creep who was exploiting young children, and maybe he or she made a mistake or was stupid with someone juuuust under the legal age.

    I also know someone from high school who is forever on a SO registry for having *completely* consensual intercourse with someone who was just within the parameters for statutory rape. Her parents prosecuted. So sometimes, people do dumb things and get punished forever.

    That said, I think I would maintain a certain professional distance from this person. Sucks to be them, but...

    ReplyDelete
  3. It could be something like 'sexting' with an underage person or forwarding such a 'sext'.

    Not great, not excusable, not entirely innocent, but also not really predatory if the student was young and stupid.

    http://articles.cnn.com/2009-04-07/justice/sexting.busts_1_phillip-alpert-offender-list-offender-registry

    ReplyDelete
  4. This person came to my office to introduce themselves. They are completely in the open about their history which resembles something like Jenny's first para. I called the Dean for advice, who told the whole story. Now all I have to do is make sure they are not put in a class group with anyone underaged, and moreover, not to have my kids in the building on days when this person might be in the building, too.

    ReplyDelete