fran
Former Member
For anyone who thinks RG is probably not a serial child molester because it's reported he just had sex with AR once, I disagree. Although this article is about screening for sexual predators, it has interesting information.
When you read this, think about all the gifts RG lavished on the children even after he and Cassandra were divorced. All the times he visited and did they visit him?
If these organizations with trained personnel to detect these perverts has these guys still sneak in, how does the average citizen stand a chance? I guess it's just up to each individual to use their own gut instinct AND common sense when it comes to protecting their children from this type of situation. Better to err on the side of caution than to have something like this case happening to your own.
JMHO
fran
http://www.merrillassociates.net/topic/2005/01/screening-sexual-predators
This article is designed to increase awareness of the sexual predators who infiltrate youth-serving organizations. Since 97% of these predators have no criminal history, and virtually all of them maintain "trophy testimonials" to offer as references, ordinary screening methods are grossly ineffective. Worse, the customary reference-checking methods are mistaken for "screening" and further fail to elicit red flag information, which would suggest risks. Readers who screen volunteers will find a low-cost way to plug some of these screening loopholes if they are willing to devote extra time themselves to the incredibly important task of increasing the protection of the children. Policy-makers will find an opportunity to appreciate the enormous difference between risk-of-loss and risk-of-harm; to consider means of reducing both risks instead of just one; and to explore the effectiveness of current screening practices, such as criminal history, reference checks, and interviews.
WHO INFILTRATES AND WHY ARE THEY HARD TO DETECT?
Of specific focus in this article are the prolific serial, preferential predators described by Kenneth Lanning so well in his free book from the National Center on Missing & Exploited Children, www.missingkids.org. The Able & Harlow studies (1987) and others reveal that this type of predator averages from dozens to hundreds of victims, operating undetected for whole lifetimes because they are expert at deception, expert at terrorizing children into lifetimes of silence, expert at impersonating "the perfect volunteer" and because 97% of them will never have a criminal history or fingerprints-on-file. While they comprise a minority of predator types, they are responsible for the majority of sexually abused children outside the home. They can only generate such high victim-counts by infiltrating youth-serving organizations. Youth programs are prime targets for these predators as grounds for selecting and grooming the victims, not as venues for performing the sexual acts themselves. Thus it can sometimes be technically true that "It cannot happen here" because those cherishing that myth define "it" as the sexual abuse itself. In this sense it does not "happen here" because the abuse occurs elsewhere, in private, once sufficient trust and authority have been built up via the predator's grooming activity. What program administrators tragically misunderstand is that their youth serving organization provides the relationship and the opportunity for the abuse to occur by placing such predators in positions of trust in the first place. That the abuse may not actually take place on site does not in any way reduce the organization�s responsibility for the safety of the relationship it creates.
Facing these dismal facts allows us to critique the typical insurance-inspired policy or volunteer screening criteria, which center on the criminal history background check, the reference-check, and the interview. To understand the weakness in these traditional cornerstones of screening processes, it helps to divide child sexual predators into two groups: the Caught-Befores and the Never-Caughts. The Caught-Befores have criminal histories available to non-police inquiries, and the Never-Caughts don't.
When you read this, think about all the gifts RG lavished on the children even after he and Cassandra were divorced. All the times he visited and did they visit him?
If these organizations with trained personnel to detect these perverts has these guys still sneak in, how does the average citizen stand a chance? I guess it's just up to each individual to use their own gut instinct AND common sense when it comes to protecting their children from this type of situation. Better to err on the side of caution than to have something like this case happening to your own.
JMHO
fran
http://www.merrillassociates.net/topic/2005/01/screening-sexual-predators
This article is designed to increase awareness of the sexual predators who infiltrate youth-serving organizations. Since 97% of these predators have no criminal history, and virtually all of them maintain "trophy testimonials" to offer as references, ordinary screening methods are grossly ineffective. Worse, the customary reference-checking methods are mistaken for "screening" and further fail to elicit red flag information, which would suggest risks. Readers who screen volunteers will find a low-cost way to plug some of these screening loopholes if they are willing to devote extra time themselves to the incredibly important task of increasing the protection of the children. Policy-makers will find an opportunity to appreciate the enormous difference between risk-of-loss and risk-of-harm; to consider means of reducing both risks instead of just one; and to explore the effectiveness of current screening practices, such as criminal history, reference checks, and interviews.
WHO INFILTRATES AND WHY ARE THEY HARD TO DETECT?
Of specific focus in this article are the prolific serial, preferential predators described by Kenneth Lanning so well in his free book from the National Center on Missing & Exploited Children, www.missingkids.org. The Able & Harlow studies (1987) and others reveal that this type of predator averages from dozens to hundreds of victims, operating undetected for whole lifetimes because they are expert at deception, expert at terrorizing children into lifetimes of silence, expert at impersonating "the perfect volunteer" and because 97% of them will never have a criminal history or fingerprints-on-file. While they comprise a minority of predator types, they are responsible for the majority of sexually abused children outside the home. They can only generate such high victim-counts by infiltrating youth-serving organizations. Youth programs are prime targets for these predators as grounds for selecting and grooming the victims, not as venues for performing the sexual acts themselves. Thus it can sometimes be technically true that "It cannot happen here" because those cherishing that myth define "it" as the sexual abuse itself. In this sense it does not "happen here" because the abuse occurs elsewhere, in private, once sufficient trust and authority have been built up via the predator's grooming activity. What program administrators tragically misunderstand is that their youth serving organization provides the relationship and the opportunity for the abuse to occur by placing such predators in positions of trust in the first place. That the abuse may not actually take place on site does not in any way reduce the organization�s responsibility for the safety of the relationship it creates.
Facing these dismal facts allows us to critique the typical insurance-inspired policy or volunteer screening criteria, which center on the criminal history background check, the reference-check, and the interview. To understand the weakness in these traditional cornerstones of screening processes, it helps to divide child sexual predators into two groups: the Caught-Befores and the Never-Caughts. The Caught-Befores have criminal histories available to non-police inquiries, and the Never-Caughts don't.