NY - Child *advertiser censored*'s forgotten victims--the families of the convicted

I definitely consider family members to be victims of their relatives, the child *advertiser censored* traders. I think it's a fabulous idea to have a support group. I also agree that each offender should have some sort of assessment concerning his/her danger to society. His/her mental capacity should certainly be taken into account. But that's where I take a left turn. It sounds to me that the members of this group are blaming our highly sexualized society far more than the offender. There's a lot of talk about slippery slopes. There's talk about the difference between viewing and actual sexual abuse. How was that child *advertiser censored* made again? Remind me. They liken the group to AA and yet you would never hear an AA or Al-Anon member bashing the liquor companies or restaurants which serve alcohol. In AA, it's all about taking personal responsibility for what you choose to imbibe. IMO, a support group for family members of those arrested for possession of child *advertiser censored* should be no different. Each human being should be held accountable for what they click on. Some interesting comments.

I wish this group would consider inviting a child *advertiser censored* survivor to be a guest speaker at one of their group meetings.

http://www.buffalonews.com/city/article610364.ece

Child *advertiser censored*'s often forgotten victims
October 28, 2011

"They are seen as social lepers but still loved by their spouses and parents. What these husbands and sons have done is considered criminal and reprehensible: collecting and viewing pornographic images of children. The illegal behavior is almost unfathomable for their relatives to comprehend. Offenders often end up in federal prison, while their loved ones are left to rebuild shattered families. It is a task, they say, that cannot be done alone.

And that is why Western New York has become home to one of the country's first support groups for relatives of individuals convicted of possessing child *advertiser censored*...."

more at link (plus comments)

"We tell our children, 'Don't text and drive,' or, 'Don't talk on your cellphone and drive,' but I never thought to tell them, 'Stay away from *advertiser censored* on the computer.' We didn't know child *advertiser censored* was any more illegal than adult *advertiser censored*," said Marty, a father whose 25-year-old learning-disabled son is in federal prison.

Click to expand...

They didn't know that child *advertiser censored* is illegal?!?

The way he is using plural bothers me. Is he implying that the family knew about the child *advertiser censored* habit but didn't know it was not OK?

I'm not one to bash a true victim, even when that victim is an adult family member of someone that has done something criminal. I can't hate someone for who they're related to, and lots of others feel the same.

But, in all honesty, this group sounds like they are more focused on repeating the party lines that they supplied for the defense attorneys, as opposed to actually finding support for themselves to come to terms with what their family members did.

(And if you don't know in this day and age that child *advertiser censored* is illegal, then you really should be charged with criminal stupidity. JMO.) Not blaming the learning disabled adult that actually viewed it for that one, so much as the family that probably decided to stick with the story that no one knew it was illegal.