Should a 14 year old be labeled a 'sexual predator'?

[B2G]

I am in no way defending the Duggars or what their son did.

But it does make me wonder about the appropriateness of labeling a 14 year old boy as a sexual predator. That seems awfully young to attach such a horrible label to a child.

If you take Josh Duggar out of the conversation, why or why not is such labeling justified?

[tridim]

1. He is 27. nt

[B2G]

11. Yes, but he was 14-15 when this occurred.

[MineralMan]

55. Uh, when I was 14, I knew that feeling up my sister was badly wrong.

So, I was never tempted to do any such thing. A couple of years later, of course, I had girlfriends who were as curious as I was. But that's a different matter altogether.

If a 14-year old acts as a sexual predator and sexually molests his sister, then the label applies. At that age, he knew that was he was doing was wrong, but he did it anyhow. That's the label I'd apply to that, because that was how he behaved.

[In_The_Wind]

2. A 14 year old is old enough to know right from wrong.

[11 Bravo]

38. Should 14 year old criminals be tried as adults?

[In_The_Wind]

48. I think that depends on the crime and the state in which it happened.

[11 Bravo]

67. How does the state in which it occurred have any bearing on ...

what "should" happen? I understand that laws vary from state-to-state, but my question was how should a 14 year old be treated by the criminal justice system.

[In_The_Wind]

68. My feelings, yes, a 14 year old should be treated as an adult in criminal hearings.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/juvenile-tried-as-an-adult.html

[Kali]

77. seriously?

a 14 year old?

[11 Bravo]

92. Well then, we simply disagree.

[In_The_Wind]

94. That's alright. I promise not to hold a grudge against you over our disagreement.

Perhaps this is the place for me to explain my reaction to the OP. As an adult who was sexually abused by a member of my extended family when I was a nine year old child I don't have any sympathy for child abusers.

At 14, I knew the difference between right and wrong. I believed if I broke the law I would have been held accountable for my actions.

As a former investigator of child abuse, I am appalled by this case.

[HereSince1628]

74. That's about the age that run-ins with the law give evidence to anti-social personalty dx's

I'm not commenting on knowledge of right or wrong at that age...

Rather, I'm putting in a second question...should run ins with the law at age 14 be used as evidence in constructing a dx of anti-social personality disorder?

Because it seems to me there are at least 2 narratives that could be told that include these same events.

[In_The_Wind]

84. To answer your question: perhaps.

Antisocial behavior should be addressed when it presents itself without regard to the age of the child. If counseling and treatment is started at the onset perhaps problems can be stopped before they happen.

Your question brings to mind the two 12 girls who will be tried in the Slender Man stabbings:
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/slender-man-stabbing/slender-man-stabbing-suspects-n323101
Could this have been prevented?

[HereSince1628]

86. The defense argument is one of those girls was schizophrenic

a disorder even more serious than anti-social personality.

IIRC anti-social personality diagnosis is prohibited for persons under age 15.

So your position wouldn't supported by the APA or any diagnostician licensed under its authority

[In_The_Wind]

87. I'm not a doctor so that was just the way I see things.

[mainer]

99. It depends on the offense. Shoplifting? maybe not.

Or joyriding or toilet papering a house. Property crimes may not be evidence of future antisocial personalities.

But anything involving personal or sexual assault against a victim is a whole different category.

[HereSince1628]

100. Yes, serious of a criminal behavior weighs... but the issue is evidence of conduct disorder

in early teen years which demonstrates a pattern of behavior with characteristics that show a lack of concern/empathy for others and so may include such things as dishonesty, lack of obedience/compliance to authority, confrontational demeanor, cruelty/exploitation, property destruction etc.

My comment wasn't so much about what behaviors are involved, but rather the issue of age, because the reply I responded to didn't seem to understand that age is actually a consideration in making the diagnosis that was suggested.

[el_bryanto]

3. Justice is about a number of things

One vector is protecting the innocent; if a 14 year old acted as a sexual predator, than there are certain steps that need to be taken to protect other innocents from his actions. On those grounds there is a clear rationale for labeling him a sexual predator.

Another vector though is punishing/rehabilitating the guilty. If the goal is to rehabilitate a 14 year old accused of this crime, than that label may hamper your ability to pursue that goal. If the goal is to punish, than labeling him a sexual predator could be part of that punishment.

I don't know what the right answer is, I have to admit; not with certainty (I know that acknowledging a lack of certainty isn't what you are supposed to do on the internet. I do think that rehabilitation should be the goal (vs. punishment); but I think that protecting the innocent should take precedence over that.

Bryant

[Hell Hath No Fury]

4. If the circumstances warrant it --

yes, absolutely. Repeated molestations with multiple victims, often while they slept -- then yes, I think that is predatory sexual behavior. Do I also think there is a very good possibility that a person who did such actions was themselves molested and acting out? Yes. Being a victim doesn't make him any less a predator, though.

[B2G]

8. I agree that the repeated incidents is a big factor.

I don't know the answer but yours is pretty darn good.

[CBGLuthier]

5. Yes.

More than old enough to know what he did was wrong. People make too many fucking excuses for young adults.

[Orsino]

6. And should we apply labels based on anything a Duggar claims? n/t

EDIT: the police report makes the incident look like more than a single claim. Hm.

[cherokeeprogressive]

10. Are all "Duggars" inherently evil? Or just unbelievable? n/t

[Orsino]

98. "Decency" crusades of all stripes are always, without exception, distractions. No exceptions.

The Duggars' secrets may be a more odious than your typical right-wing panderers', but we should keep in mind that what they are selling is obedience to selective re-re-reinterpretations of dead gods' fanfic.

[cherokeeprogressive]

102. All of them? Even the youngest?

So you're saying the same thing as the poster I replied to I guess. That, if it's name is Duggar, it's a pos who's getting what they deserve.

K.

[Hepburn]

104. Both. n/t

[KitSileya]

7. He was 14-15 and then he re-offended later.

The re-offence is what prompted his parents to take him to the police officer in 2006, when Josh was 18. In any case the boy needed psychological help which he didn't get, and there's no research that encourages belief that he managed to 'cure' himself. Sexual predatory behavior has one of the highest recidivism rates in crime.

More horrible is the fact that the victims most likely got no help and were probably told that either they encouraged it, or that there was something innate in them that made it so Josh couldn't help himself. The 5+ girls, now women, are the ones I shed tears for.

[B2G]

9. Agree. nt

[SoCalDem]

40. and if I were his wife, I would be watching him like a hawk

with their 3 + kids..

[Xyzse]

44. This is where I am at.

At age of 14 if he didn't re-commit an offense, I might be a bit more forgiving.
At the age of majority, he committed that offense once more, then that shows lack of rehabilitation, and you have pretty much written it in a succinct and neat manner that I can not really add much more.

[polly7]

46. I agree.

Had they gotten him real help and/or at least some punishment when he first did it, he might not have re-offended. I don't believe he really realizes how serious what he did was, whether it was to his own sisters or anyone else. Maybe this backlash now, having to quit his job and possibly losing their reality tv series will be what it takes for that - who knows. I just hope his wife and children are always safe.

[Kali]

78. agree

[xmas74]

75. The only reason why they took him in was to stem the flow of information.

In 2006 the Duggar clan was scheduled to appear on Oprah. Someone sent an anonymous email to Harpo Studios telling them about multiple instances with Josh. Executives at Harpo (I'd say Oprah was involved) cancelled the appearance and told the family the reason, then contacted Family Services in Arkansas. They willingly spoke about it after already learning that the statute of limitations had expired.

[alarimer]

12. No, but it probably depends on the extent and nature of the crimes.

Certainly a blanket labeling of people as such does no one any good. I think we have other and better options and that what those options should be depends on the nature and extent of the offense. It should be reserved only for the worst of the worst. And I'm not sure Josh is one of those.

Usually the term I've seen used the most is "Sexual offender" which is so broad as to be useless, because it includes people who pee outside and that sort of thing.

I have reservations about the way our criminal justice works (or, rather, doesn't) and I think treatment and rehabilitation should be a much more important goal than labeling people in such a way to deny them employment or housing for the rest of their lives.

[kcr]

13. Yes, it is.

I do not believe in treating child offenders the same as adults legally, however. But denying what he did is wrong.

[B2G]

15. I don't think anyone is denying it.

That wasn't the question.

[kcr]

16. I think trying to soft pedal it is a form of denial n/t

[B2G]

18. I am not soft pedaling anything. nt

[kcr]

21. So you're not wondering whether he should be called a sexual predator? n/t

[B2G]

22. I am wondering if ANY 14 year old should be called that.

It's obvious you do, so thanks for sharing your viewpoint with me.

[kcr]

29. Yes. I'm sharing my viewpoint that sexual predation shouldn't be soft pedaled. You're right.

Now, if you're saying that no 14 year olds should be treated like adults in this manner, I'd agree with you. But I don't think the act itself magically becomes something different just because of the ages involved. What you're advocating is extremely dangerous and a big part of the reason it was covered up in the first place. Oh, they're just children. Innocent and harmless! The victims are left to suffer in silence, and the child who perpetrated either gets no help at all or the wrong kind of help, like Josh Duggar did.

[B2G]

32. Again, I'm not advocating anything

I'm actually conflicted on this and trying to sort it out. Even though you don't seem to get my viewpoint, your responses are appreciated and are very valid.

Thanks for that.

[kcr]

33. Advocate might be the wrong word, but you do seem to suggest they shouldn't be called predators

Maybe then it's just semantics, but words do have meaning and it's dangerous to soft pedal this. That is my point. If I came off as harsh I didn't mean to and I don't think you ever defended what he did.

[B2G]

34. I have pretty thick skin

[Thinkingabout]

14. If he believed it was okay then he would have not waited until the dark of the night and sneak into

their room while they were sleeping to have fondled them. If he believed it was okay he would have fondled them in front of his parents. Old enough to hide his deed and old enough to do his deed.

[B2G]

17. I'm not saying 14 isn't old enough to know right from wrong.

I'm asking if things done when you're 14 warrant a lifetime label being applied.

[Thinkingabout]

31. IF it was a one time occurrance, I may listen, it was not and it was not with one person and outside

the home. He was a repeat offender.

[FLPanhandle]

19. Absolutely

becasue that's what Josh Duggar is.

Calling a spade a spade is fine.

[seabeyond]

20. i would like to see this handle rationally. i do not want to handle it like, men telling girls to

carry a gun and shoot their rapist.

the frat boy, the football player, the next door neighbor. the brother, father, uncle.

they tell us to shoot them. they havent thought this thru.

we need to handle this 14 yr old appropriately. and address how it was handled, per rape culture we create all of us to live in.

that is what i want

not a black and white for me.

[SoCalNative]

23. When one of his victims is a 5-year old

yes

[B2G]

25. 5? I didn't realize the victims ages had been identified.

I hear they were all under 13 at the time, but didn't see specific ages. Wow.

[LWolf]

24. Unfortunately,

a couple of years ago I spent a year working with a potential sexual predator.

He was 11. That's why I said "potential."

Worse than "unfortunately," he came by his issues too honestly. He was raised by a single predator pedophile, who not only abused him, but used him to bring other prey closer, and it took WAY TOO MANY YEARS for the system to discover the problem and remove him. By that time, he was thoroughly broken.

I'm not saying the breaks are beyond some sort of repair. I hope with all of my heart that they are.

But I saw it, every day, for a year. His psychopathy included a complete and total lack of empathy or remorse; he was charming and charismatic, and knew exactly how to manipulate all around him, kids and adults included. He had to be kept within visual and auditory range of an adult at all times when other kids were present, which was all day at school, and he needed a personal guard at his side to make sure he did not prey on the students around him. All it took was a glance away, even from an arm length's away, for him to get started. Leaning over and whispering violent sexual suggestions...passing notes or sketches...

And he was 11.

Yes, a 14 yo can be a sexual predator. I don't know whether Josh Duggar fits that profile. I'll leave that up to those dealing first hand with him.

[B2G]

27. That is just heartbreaking.

[SoCalDem]

41. Most 14 yr old boys are fantacizing about girls a bit older than they are or ones near their own age

NOT kids significantly pre-pubescent much younger kids.. That is NOT normal

[LWolf]

70. No, it's not normal.

It's not healthy, it's not okay. But it happens.

[polly7]

43. Sad story :(

I think lack of empathy is the main factor - and who knows if Josh was influenced to do what he did by other things going on or not - but the lack of punishment and counseling probably didn't force him at all to consider how harmful his actions were to his sisters and the other child - his apology seemed mostly about knowing he had to change to improve his life. You can tell who has empathy for others or not by their deeds and words, I don't see that he has much.

[LWolf]

72. That is the biggest key. nt

[Butterbean]

80. Yes. My mom works with these types of kids professionally.

You bet they can be predators. Big time.

[hobbit709]

26. If the circumstances warrant, hell yes!

[Iggo]

28. If he's a sexual predator, then Yes.

[cali]

30. I'm not comfortable with it being applied in every case.

I think each young offender should be carefully evaluated.

[geek tragedy]

35. immature/juvenile animals are predators if they prey on others.

A juvenile lion is a predator if it kills an antelope.

So yes.

[Arkana]

36. Whatever age he did it at is irrelevant.

He still abused his sisters. That is sick by any metric. 14 isn't legal age, but it's damn sure old enough to know better.

[polly7]

37. In this case, yes.

They did nothing to get him professional counseling or have him serve any kind of punishment. Had they done that and not continued on to play to the world that their joyful, moral and fine family was a-ok, despite the assault of those little girls, and then bringing him right back into the home to be with them I might feel differently. He in no way realizes just what he's sentenced those girls to and imo, will re-offend, in one way or the other.

[Sunlei]

39. no, but this does show a problem with way, way to many kids to raise.

I don't know why Josh D. did his apology now at his age. Maybe he's getting sued or didn't stop his behavior at 13/14 yrs.

[StevieM]

61. He had no choice. The story was exposed by the media. They wanted it to stay hidden. (eom)

[bigwillq]

42. Yes (nt)

[GoCubsGo]

45. If the shoe fits...

Most 14-year-olds know that man-handling 5-year-old girls is highly unacceptable behavior. And, did I hear right that some of these girls were his sisters?

[aikoaiko]

47. Im inclined to say yes, but open to special cases where it might not be appropriate.

[brooklynite]

49. You MIGHT argue that a 14 year with a single instance doesn't deserve to be tagged...

...but FIVE cases is far more significant.

[Bluenorthwest]

50. What is the appropriateness of allowing a person with his background to attack LGBT people as being

that which he in fact actually is? His family knew his truth and assisted him in affecting the role of moral authority and judge of others, they and his community bestowed upon him absolution and forgetfulness and sent that monster out to berate others. When I say his community, that includes all of those Republicans who played up to him because of his 'family values' and anti gay views.
Do you think it was appropriate for his family and for himself to take the position and occupation he took? Do you think that if he had taken a more appropriate path in life that this revelation might not be so very damning to him and his entire cohort? I do.

[cbayer]

51. It's seems awfully young to molest even younger children while they are sleeping, too.

What would you call it?

[polly7]

52. We had a boy in our town, it started when he was about 14,

who would watch and follow us, pleasuring himself openly with that crazy smile. I couldn't go to school, my job at the swimming pool, even for a horse ride without hearing him come up on his motorbike to stop and watch me when I got there, and doing it. Freaky. He never got help, or was charged with anything, and went on to become a lawyer, only to be disbarred years later and in big legal trouble for fondling a young girl - I don't know the exact circumstances, his sister didn't tell me everything. He married and had three daughters - I don't know either if anything happened at home, but for some reason his wife and girls were always a bit ostracized - that, in a small town, is something. They were very nice people (not him, he never comes out), but I've always felt sad for them at being left out. He definitely was/is a sexual predator.

That these parents never got, imo, 'real help' for any of their children is what I find the most awful. Christian counseling and prayer will not change a mind that's damaged, from whatever reason.

[justiceischeap]

53. My molestor started at the age of 11

and I was 5. He continued until I was 12 (we moved to another state so had no access to me).

He was later arrested and found guilty of molesting his step-daughters. You tell me, should he be labelled a predator?

We have no idea whether Duggar reoffended or not. If it were one child and one incident, I'd be likely to say it was just a kid being curious but it was 5 girls that we know of and we don't actually know if he started at 14--all we know is that he got caught.

[misterhighwasted]

54. At what age, then, is incest appropriate?

Some of his actions were felonies, which speaks to the very young age of his victim I believe.
If 14 is questionable then what age is it ok to commit incest ?
He admits & apologizes now because he has been outed, like all molesters do when found out.

I would be worried about his daughter & the baby girl about to be born. And his victim sisters.
Aside from all the completelt disgusting news of this,
I am most appalled by the way the parents handled the ordeal.
That they hid it & yet pushed legislation & preached the faults of others in the name of their God & Bible.

TLC is indeed a sick disgusting Corporation.

[Tom Ripley]

56. Why not? 14 year olds can accurately be labeled as "murderers"

Whether they should be tried as adult murderers is another matter, though.

[get the red out]

57. Take "Duggar" out of the conversation

And charges would have been pressed, at least in juvenile court and it would have probably come out long before now. Make this a minority 14 year old and ................................

[B2G]

62. Even if it was within a family or

close social circle?

Not necessarily.

[bettyellen]

66. The police knew and let him off because of who they are- same police is actually

In trouble for abusing a kid. The system failed those little girls- and so did you for not bothering to read anything about the case before posting this.

Also/ pretty disgusting it takes a 5-6 year old victim to raise your hackles. It's horrible for an 11-12 year old too.

[Reter]

58. Depends what the crime is

At 12, I dropped my pen and peeked under the girls skirts in class. That's awful, but I didn't touch. I would never do something that stupid now.

[dbackjon]

60. That is normal curiousity

[fadedrose]

59. No

[displacedtexan]

63. IMHO, that's the wrong question.

This clarifies the situation for me: should the post-puberty, long-term sexual assaulter of at least five defenseless children, including his siblings, be considered a sexual predator?

My answer: Duh.

[Solly Mack]

64. His victims are no less victims because of his age.

[Rex]

65. I doubt there is an age where it is appropriate to rape your siblings and/or others.

We can take Josh out of this and still there is no appropriate age to think it is normal to molest another person. Young or old.

[TexasBushwhacker]

69. I can't help but wonder

if Josh had been abused himself. I wonder if CPS ever investigated the whole situation.

[uppityperson]

71. Only 14 yr olds who act as a sexual predator, then yes. Of course.

Not any 14 year old, but if he/she acts as a sexual predator, or course they should be called that.

I agree, it is awfully young to attach such a horrible label to a child. If they are one though, then call them what they are. The label is not as awful as the actions.

[xmas74]

73. Read the police reports.

This wasn't two kids necking. This was a disturbed young man who took advantage of five girls younger than him, four of them his sisters. He groped them, rubbing their breasts and their genitals.

What he did was predatory.

[Pisces]

76. No, but the parents should be held responsible for creating a sick and twisted environment where a

14 yr. old boy has no outlet for sexual urges due to homeschooling and no access to friends and other girls outside his family.
They should be charged. Homeschooling should be banned. These uber religious nut bags should be held responsible.

[Kali]

79. if they indeed are or behave as one, the label could be appropriate

I think it is certainly possible to have established the behavior by that age in some cases.

I would be very leery of throwing such a label around willy-nilly every time some kid got caught in one questionable situation.

as for handling the situation legally and treating a 14 year-old as an adult, that really bothers me. that should be reserved for very rare and extreme cases. and I presume such things were results of severe mental illness, not needing of "justice and punishment"

[libdem4life]

81. Just send him to Juvenile Hall until he can process what happened to him...that's the real

question I see about Josh Duggar. This didn't come out of nowhere. Ask his sisters what they would call him...were they not brainwashed.

The screws should be put to his parents...either they did or should have known. They are legally responsible for him and all of his acts until 18. A 14 year old can drive and plow a car into someone and kill them. I guarantee you the parents will be held responsible. But children? sisters available 24/7? We must be very careful.

They should be in jail and the rest of the kids put in foster homes so they'll have a chance at some kind of a normal life...TLC notwithstanding. Need to unfill their quiver.

[Dont call me Shirley]

82. How about the

kids who knew it was wrong when they were 7 when their brothers molested them, B2G?

If they're sexually aggressive at 14, they're gong to be sexually aggressive their entire lives.

[Lizzie Poppet]

83. In some cases,yes.

Some (probably most) cases of sexual contact between teenagers are consensual. It's still illegal, but those sorts of shenanigans have been occurring with teenagers since there have been teenagers (I'm no exception...).

But in cases where the contact wasn't consensual, I don't think it's any different from any other case of sexual assault. Damn few 14-yr-olds would be unaware that they were doing wrong...and a very serious, harmful sort of wrong at that.

[bravenak]

85. Yes.

http://www.wistv.com/story/13687757/two-teens-arrested-for-raping-80-year-old

[Skittles]

88. I believe child sex offenders can be rehabilitated

but NOT through "religious counseling" - that is just sham bullshit

[spinbaby]

89. By product of the way he was raised

No real sex education plus a culture that treats females as chattel made this almost a predictable result.

[MoonRiver]

90. I am a psychologist in a youth prison.

And yes they can become registered sexual predators at 14. Have seen it happen over and over.

[Jefferson23]

91. The problem is we don't know much from the victims what he did, how often and when did it stop. We

do know he never received treatment by a trained professional. That should give everyone pause.
The family appears to remedy everything through God, whatever the hell that means.

Whatever urged him to cross boundaries with family and others is serious and a lot of time
has gone by, his parents should have been advocating for all of their children. How they
buried this mess is likely to come back to haunt them, and I don't mean losing the tv show
and their fame..they're seriously dysfunctional.

[WestCoastLib]

93. Yes

I think the question you might want to be asking is "can a 14 year old sexual predator be rehabilitated?" Or "should a 14 year old sexual predator carry that stigma for life?"

Those questions can be debated, but yes, there is no question that a 14 year old sexual predator should be identified as such.

[LeftyMom]

95. The youngest victim was FIVE.

How old does somebody need to be before you consider fingering a kindergartner predatory?

[Marrah_G]

96. Depends on the circumstances

[jwirr]

97. By 14 his parents should have already talked to him about sex. That talk should have included

the fact that you do not have sex with children younger than you and definitely with you sisters.

So yes he should have some very serious consequences.

[NaturalHigh]

101. I know next to nothing about the Duggar situation.

Some 14-year-olds, though, should definitely be labeled sexual predators. I had one as a student, and he's been in and out of prison his entire life. In fact, he's back inside right now.

[sammythecat]

103. 14 is not 18 or 22 or 11

Everyone committing a crime needs to be punished and corrected. But each and every case is unique and should be judged accordingly. Not all 14 year olds are the same, obviously. Some are more culpable than others, obviously. But they all have one thing in common and that is that they are 14 years old. Still a child by any standard one would want to use. Juveniles should never be tried as adults because they are not adults...no matter how pissed off we may be.

[leeroysphitz]

105. This probably just the tip of ice iceberg. It stands to reason that most if not all of those girls

have repeatedly molested and/or assaulted by multiple males in that household. Where there is smoke there is fire.Like the Dolphin Square case in England I predict this gets much worse.

[Nevernose]

106. I've worked with juvenile sex offenders

Being a sex offender, for a 14 year old, should not be a lifetime sentence. Their recidivism rate is much lower than for other crimes and lower than for adult offenders.

http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNAFactFiction_JJ.pdf

While 14 is certainly enough to know better, it is also young enough to change, which is why the juvenile justice system is focused on (or at is at least ostensibly focused on) rehabilitation rather than simple punishment.

If this is about that Duggar man specifically, and if he really did reoffend as an adult, then that's a whole different ballgame and a whole different discussion. One in which the parents need to answer the question of why they didn't feel the need to protect their daughters after their son had already confessed once to molesting them.