 |
| FAQ/Help |
| Calendar |
| Search |
|
Legendary
Member Since Jun 2007
Location: Washington DC metro area
Posts: 15,865
(SuperPoster!)
17 2,857 hugs
given 
|
May 27, 2010 at 06:41 PM
#1
In connection with a heated discussion that has been going on in Psychotherapy, I posted (probably not a good idea) some questions that might help clarify some guidelines about who is allowed to be on Psych Central and who is not:
http://forums.psychcentral.com/showp...6&postcount=11 __________________ Now if thou would'st When all have given him o'er From death to life Thou might'st him yet recover -- Michael Drayton 1562 - 1631 |
|
|
Legendary
Member Since Jun 2007
Location: Washington DC metro area
Posts: 15,865
(SuperPoster!)
17 2,857 hugs
given
|
May 27, 2010 at 07:53 PM
#2
The guidelines say, in this connection:
Pedophiles, rapists, and others that have abused another individual physically, emotionally or sexually (whether imagined, real, acted-upon or not, and/or convicted), are not welcomed here because our focus is on support for victims of such abuse. I find part of this confusing at best, and I think the evidence is that some others have also. What does "imagined" mean? What does "acted-upon or not" imply? That anyone who has thoughts of harming is unwelcome? Anyone who has had impulses but NOT acted upon them is not welcome? It seems to me that some of these are pretty hard to define. You could define having been convicted, or being in a legal process concerning issues of abuse, though there could be some question about what being "in a legal process" would mean, I suppose. I can see how this site could reasonably ban people having been convicted of a crime or being in a legal process involving possible conviction, but as written the guidelines do not clearly distinguish (to me) between thoughts and actions, or degree of action reaching the level of possible law violation. 
__________________ Now if thou would'st When all have given him o'er From death to life Thou might'st him yet recover -- Michael Drayton 1562 - 1631 |
|
|
|
Founder & Your Host
Community Support Team Chat Leader
Member Since May 2001
Location: Greater Boston, MA
Posts: 13,645
23 182 hugs
given
|
May 27, 2010 at 09:04 PM
#3
This isn't law school and none of the guidelines are laws -- they are *guidelines* for a reason, not rules. Because of that, there should be no attempt to dissect and analyze each and every word in each guideline.
We're not going to clarify this guideline at present, save to say that abusers are not welcomed here in the community because abuser's issues are incompatible with issues that survivors of abuse are grappling with. DocJohn __________________ Don't throw away your shot. |
|
 Beachboxer, eskielover, globularrae, Wild Coyote
|
|
Legendary
Member Since Jun 2007
Location: Washington DC metro area
Posts: 15,865
(SuperPoster!)
17 2,857 hugs
given
|
May 28, 2010 at 04:01 AM
#4
Quote:
I think you could say that anyone convicted of an offense was barred, and anyone involved in criminal proceedings that could result in a conviction was also barred. You might add that anyone coming here to prey upon the vulnerabilities of people here, in the judgement of the administration, is not welcome. I have not found the judgement of authorities in general to be flawless, but maybe that could still form the basis of a working guideline. I hope you can define thoroughly what an "abuser" is. Is it in the mind of the viewer, or is it something that can be defined "objectively"? It seems to me that some here define anything that upsets them as being abuse. You have to do better. Is it "abuse" to not define things more clearly? Not happy. 
__________________ Now if thou would'st When all have given him o'er From death to life Thou might'st him yet recover -- Michael Drayton 1562 - 1631 |
|
|
|
|
Founder & Your Host
Community Support Team Chat Leader
Member Since May 2001
Location: Greater Boston, MA
Posts: 13,645
23 182 hugs
given
|
May 28, 2010 at 06:29 AM
#5
I said we weren't going to clarify it any further, but I see that's not going to sit well with you.
So here's a clarification for you... The community team defines abuse, not individual members. We do so through our regular process of discussion and collaboration as each case arises. If an individual identifies themselves as an abuser, that also counts. We are not here to judge others, nor to be part-time private investigators looking up each member's criminal or civil histories and/or police record and/or trying to verify their story. That's not our purpose here. And to think we could allow one kind of abuser -- the one who simply hasn't been caught yet -- while not allowing others is, I think, a double-standard that we would not and could not subscribe to. DocJohn __________________ Don't throw away your shot. |
|
|
|
(JD), Beachboxer, eskielover, sabby, Wild Coyote
|
| Closed Thread |
This is an old thread. You probably should not post your reply to it, as the original poster is unlikely to see it.|
|
My Support Forums is the online community that was originally begun as the Psych Central Forums in 2001. It now runs as an independent self-help support group community for mental health, personality, and psychological issues and is overseen by a group of dedicated, caring volunteers from around the world.
Linear Mode
