Almost two years ago, I read this article in the New York Times. The article discussed sex offenders in Suffolk County who were forced (because of restrictive conditions placed upon them after release from prison) to live in two trailers on the edge of town. About 40 men all told split between 2 trailers, only one of which had a shower. Men from unlucky trailer #2 would be bussed to shower every few days in trailer #1. The men reported conditions were exactly as one might imagine them to be when 20 frustrated, angry men are living in bunk beds in a tiny trailer. What struck me (and the reason that I remember the article vividly over a year after I initially reading it) was how very much it sounded like even though the men had served their time in prison, they were still prisoners of the system (yes, I’m talking about this again). Sex offenders, I would venture to say, are among the most hated members of our society. They are pariah, modern day lepers. Believe me, I get it. I’m sure there are many who believe that these deplorable living conditions are more than those who have committed sexual assault deserve, and I can’t fault them for thinking that.

The idea that I’ve most connected to as I become indoctrinated as a social worker is that in order to understand a person’s presenting issue, one must step back and take a look at the person in the context of their environment (past and present). I thought about this when I read this article published on CNN’s website as a part of their Change the List Project. The article was one in a series attempting to find an explanation for Alaska’s high rate of sexual assault and highlighting efforts to change that statistic in the state. The author, John D. Sutter, was able to sit in on a group session held at a treatment program for sex offenders that seemed to embody this doctrine of social work. In this particular treatment program, participants are assigned a “safety net” of 5 volunteers from the community to assist them with their rehabilitation. It keep the participants engaged in the community and near the support and counseling that they very much need. Its the antithesis of hulling the offenders up in a trailer outside of town. It holds the offenders accountable for their actions, their “safety net” is watching after all and places their struggles front and center. By doing this, the program addresses the underlying issues that may have lead to the assault in the first place. Many sex offenders were themselves victims of sexual abuse or violence at sometime in their life. Others struggle with feelings of unworthiness, helplessness, lack of control. Working at all these underlying issues seems to give the offenders hope and motivation for change. Being cast off from society and sent to the outer edges of town where your neighbor’s hate you and protest your presence probably doesn’t do that. I would guess it adds an additional dimension to an already uphill battle.

Sometimes I get it in my head to write about topic, like this one, and everything seems to align to promote my agenda. I came across this article by the grace of the universe earlier this week. The author, a survivor of incest, says it much more eloquently. She calls on us (among other professions) to promote the creation of programs, like the one in Alaska, aimed at addressing the issue of sexual assault in a family WITH the family. She rejects the shunning of offenders (even the perpetrator of her assault) and calls for more group work, more family therapy, saying “We know where to begin to heal our families and our country. We know what to do. And yet, we’re not doing it. We’re giving in to fear and looking for a quick fix.”

I agree. I don’t think trailers and isolation are the answer ….. what about you?