Cardinal: Paedophiles aren't criminals

Kamwah said:
These Catholics....

Paedos should not be treated like they're mentally ill, they should be banged up in prison for a good long time.

The vast majority of paedos know exactly what they're doing and think it's fine.

Maybe they should actually follow the Bible instead of listening to ol' popey.
Click to expand...

You read the daily mail / the sun much?

Perhaps if they were treated like they are mentally ill there would be less child abuse. Sadly proper treatment for mental illness in the UK is reserved for the "criminally insane" where vast somes of cash are spent keeping people locked up for the rest it's "care in the community" :(
 
Last edited:
estebanrey said:
One of the Cardinals that helped elect Pope Francis I has said that paedophiia shouldn't be a criminal offence....
Click to expand...

No he hasn't, he has said that the people that do it are wrong in the head.

/thread.

*edit*

How the hell did we get 7 pages just because the OP misunderstood what he was linking? O.o
 
Well sure the attraction alone is not a crime although arguably a psychological disorder. It is acting upon the desires where it becomes a criminal act. But what is a pedophile that does not act on his desires? Where pedophilia as a priest (or teacher) is particularly criminal is that they are in a position of trust and thus, if working with children, it could be argued that they are a premeditated rapists of the worst kind possible.
 
estebanrey said:
What part of....



..the bit in bold did you not uderstand?
Click to expand...

He is right though, Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder, if because of that psychiatric disorder a paedophiliac goes on to abuse a child then that is a criminal offence, but the disorder itself is a psychiatric condition, not a criminal one. He is only echoing what many medical professionals and researchers have been saying for some time.
 
Castiel said:
He is right though, Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder, if because of that psychiatric disorder a paedophiliac goes on to abuse a child then that is a criminal offence, but the disorder itself is a psychiatric condition, not a criminal one. He is only echoing what many medical professionals and researchers have been saying for some time.
Click to expand...

Why is it a psychiatric disorder? I fail to see how it cannot, in some cases, be classed as a fetish or different sexual preference.

Surely there are people born as paedophiles, like heterosexuals and homosexuals.

That is, unless you argue that you are not born with a sexuality and develop it in your youth, in which case it is true to say that paedophiles do not have a psychiatric disorder.
 
Last edited:
Castiel said:
He is right though, Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder, if because of that psychiatric disorder a paedophiliac goes on to abuse a child then that is a criminal offence, but the disorder itself is a psychiatric condition, not a criminal one. He is only echoing what many medical professionals and researchers have been saying for some time.
Click to expand...

While he might be correct it's something that can all too easily be misinterpreted so it's somewhat of an unwise thing to say unless you can be absolutely certain that all context will be included to qualify the statement as necessary.

I haven't heard the interview in full or read all the transcript but if he's suggesting that there should be no punishment for paedophilia then he's likely to find himself out on a particularly slim bough. I'd agree that treatment should be available and that a damaged childhood increases the risk of someone being an abuser later in life but to say that it means there can/should be no punishment alongside that is a rather dubious premise.

I'd also note the context that historically the Catholic Church has been quite spectacularly bad in dealing with allegations (or proven instances) of paedophilia - while they should not be castigated for that indefinitely it would certainly help for them to acknowledge fault and they absolutely should not be seen to try to brush instances under the carpet again. It's not ideal where situations arise that the perception is almost as important as the reality but here they find themselves in a quandry that owes much to their previous actions.
 
dirtychinchilla said:
Why is it a criminal disorder? I fail to see how it cannot, in some cases, be classed as a fetish or different sexual preference.

Surely there are people born as paedophiles, like heterosexuals and homosexuals.

That is, unless you argue that you are not born with a sexuality and develop it in your youth, in which case it is true to say that paedophiles do not have a psychiatric disorder.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was a criminal disorder. I said the contrary.
 
semi-pro waster said:
While he might be correct it's something that can all too easily be misinterpreted so it's somewhat of an unwise thing to say unless you can be absolutely certain that all context will be included to qualify the statement as necessary.

I haven't heard the interview in full or read all the transcript but if he's suggesting that there should be no punishment for paedophilia then he's likely to find himself out on a particularly slim bough. I'd agree that treatment should be available and that a damaged childhood increases the risk of someone being an abuser later in life.

I'd also note the context that historically the Catholic Church has been quite spectacularly bad in dealing with allegations (or proven instances) of paedophilia - while they should not be castigated for that indefinitely it would certainly help for them to acknowledge fault and they absolutely should not be seen to try to brush instances under the carpet again. It's not ideal where situations arise that the perception is almost as important as the reality but here they find themselves in a quandry that owes much to their previous actions.
Click to expand...

Indeed, however we are relying on the report second-hand so it is difficult to get the context in which it was made to the interviewer...however the point is being made that Paedophilia is not the same as Child abuse and it is a common misconception that they are one and the same, (being a Paedophiliac can lead that individual to abuse Children, but not all paedophiliacs abuse Children and not all Child abusers are paedophiliacs.) This hampers people getting treatment and being treated as the stigma creates barriers that shouldn't exist.

I think he is quite brave to bring it up, given the points you raised such as he is a Catholic Bishop, the Catholic Church is in the middle of a huge child abuse scandal and it is obvious that he would be criticised for it.

I think the sooner we realise that if we treated Paedophilia as a psychiatric disorder and differentiated that from the criminal acts that can be perpetrated in part because of that disorder, we might just get to a position whereby people will go to their GP or Health centre and ask for help rather than struggling on their own and eventually succumbing to their condition and save Children from being abused and worse in the meantime.
 
dirtychinchilla said:
I disagree with their definition. I think in most cases that they're absolutely correct, and I'm obviously no authority, but are you sure that this isn't just cultural?
Click to expand...

It isn't really something we can disagree with without qualification, and I am not a psychiatrist, least of all one renowned enough to stand up and dispute a medical diagnosis as specific as this one, and no it isn't a cultural definition, it is a classified and quantified medical definition. Paedophilia is a medical diagnosis, Child Molestation is a criminal offence. There is a distinct demarcation between the two.
 
Last edited:
The Cardinal has both clarified and apologised for any offence he caused:

"I apologise sincerely and unreservedly to all who were offended by the botched interview, and especially to those who have been abused and need every help and support that the Church can give," Napier said in a statement...[..]...He also told the BBC he knew of at least two priests who became paedophiles after they were abused as children and therefore required treatment, not punishment.... "That's when the wheels came off. I now stand accused of saying that paedophilia is a mental condition or disorder and not a crime," Napier said in his statement.

"Child sexual abuse is a heinous crime among other things because of the damage it does to the child. In that concern I include the abused who has become an abuser."
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...g-paedophilia-was-an-illness-not-a-crime.html


Another report that appears to have more information on what he said:

And today, in a series if tweets, he hit back at coverage of his comments, writing: "It's the supreme irony. Because I raised the issue of the abused abuser, I stand accused of insensitivity to the sufferings of the abused.

"My concern: How can society deal justly, fairly & equitably with the abused, who has suffered incalculable damage, then goes on to abuse?

"Do the Church & society not have to consider the damage he suffered when deciding what to do? Or does the abused abuser lose all his rights?

"My response: Such abuser should receive treatment to make good the damage done to him? In prison or out of it, that's for experts to decide.

"I believe as every dictionary consulted confirms Paedophilia is a medical condition. What is a crime is the sexual abuse of children.

"Therefore Paedophilia must be treated. What must be punished is the Crime of Sexual Abuse of Children.

"I apologise to Victims of Child Abuse offended by misstatement of what was & still is my concern about all abused including abused abuser."
Click to expand...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...condition-apologises-for-offence-8539345.html
 
Last edited:
Castiel said:
The Cardinal has both clarified and apologised for any offence he caused:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...g-paedophilia-was-an-illness-not-a-crime.html


Another report that appears to have more information on what he said:



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...condition-apologises-for-offence-8539345.html
Click to expand...

I would say that the statement "Do the Church & society not have to consider the damage he suffered when deciding what to do?" a little problematic, especially when the guidance to bishops still doesn't obligate them to contact the authorities. Regardless of the circumstances, the Church shouldn't be deciding what to do, the Church should be contacting the authorities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom