Here's the disconnect though. People with mental illnesses in any form generally don't consider themselves as needing help. It requires a greater degree of self awareness than most people possess to consider oneself "abnormal" and to then do something about it.
The article proposes "law" for "protection from discrimination".
Would a new law only effect those under treatment? If so, what "treatments" might be covered/legitimate? Then there's the judgment as to what degree any patient is likely to offend. Would/should interested parties/employer be notified of negative progress/changes? The whole of the matter is too nebulous to even consider.
The article breeches the idea that if one was seen to enter a "group session" then they are outed, and discrimination follows. The "worst case scenario" is always offered as excuse, but rarely applies. No one is required to meet in an "advertised group session" unless court ordered. The option of one on one counseling is more oft the case, and can be pursued by any "non-committed" patient, thus confidentiality.
How does anyone identify a pedophile under self restraint, other than themselves?.......................... If it is to be left to "observers" then most/all guardians/caretakers of small children/infants could/would be suspect, and open all forms of abuses/allegations, such already exist in divorce/custody cases now.
Here's the disconnect though. People with mental illnesses in any form generally don't consider themselves as needing help. It requires a greater degree of self awareness than most people possess to consider oneself "abnormal" and to then do something about it.
The article proposes "law" for "protection from discrimination".
Would a new law only effect those under treatment? If so, what "treatments" might be covered/legitimate? Then there's the judgment as to what degree any patient is likely to offend. Would/should interested parties/employer be notified of negative progress/changes? The whole of the matter is too nebulous to even consider.
The article breeches the idea that if one was seen to enter a "group session" then they are outed, and discrimination follows. The "worst case scenario" is always offered as excuse, but rarely applies. No one is required to meet in an "advertised group session" unless court ordered. The option of one on one counseling is more oft the case, and can be pursued by any "non-committed" patient, thus confidentiality.
How does anyone identify a pedophile under self restraint, other than themselves?.......................... If it is to be left to "observers" then most/all guardians/caretakers of small children/infants could/would be suspect, and open all forms of abuses/allegations, such already exist in divorce/custody cases now.