TN Sexual Offender Treatment: A Conflict of Interest

The opinions expressed within posts and comments are solely those of each author, and are not necessarily those of Women Against Registry.

When TN registrants are court-mandated to attend therapy, you would assume that therapy is being delivered by a professional, unbiased counselor or therapist.

But, no, if you read the “Philosophy of Treatment” put out by the TN Treatment Board, this isn’t the case at all.

The “Philosophy” of the TN Treatment Board clearly states  “we are victim advocates, not offender advocates”.

Isn’t that a tad bit biased when you are treating “paying” registrants? Isn’t that a conflict of interest?

Reading through the whole philosophy was an unbelievable head-trip thru antiquated and draconian thinking and I can’t help but wonder when was the last time these folks read any current literature on the subject of registered citizens.

I kid you not, here are a few of their philosophy highlights:

“Sexual offending cannot be cured, only controlled at best. There is no known treatment that is 100% effective for stopping sexual offending.  Offenders do recidivate….they do it again.” 

“We are victim advocates, not offender advocates.”

“Nothing “just happens” as in the “impulse rape”, there is a process to the offending that is marked by a “deviant” cycle.”

“Offenders are master manipulators.”

“Lessened risk is not necessarily inferred by progress in treatment. We must recognize that offenders are dishonest in many respects with themselves and you no matter how open they are with admitting their offense. Denial, justification, intellectualizing and minimization are the hallmark qualities of the offender.”

“Many offenders who offended within the family also offend outside the family and visa versa. (Most offenders have multiple paraphilias/a person’s sexual arousals and gratification are dependent on fantasizing about and engaging in atypical and extreme sexual behaviors.) Having offended is a clear sign that one may do it again.”

“We place a high value on the rights and needs of others before the rights and needs of the offender.  We are victim and community safety advocates.”

“We believe offenders initially oppose treatment, have an initial poor recognition of problems with limited and distorted insight, that they act out in ways to harm others. That offenders are initially dishonest to us and themselves, they hold and hide secrets, blame others for their problems and will do anything to avoid the counselor’s scrutiny or involvement in their lives.”

And yet…under the board’s tenets for offender treatment providers, it states “we need to know our own vulnerabilities, we need to know our biases in working with this population”.

How can this treatment board be government-sanctioned when its entire philosophy is biased against registered citizens?

To put it in a nutshell, by the TN Treatment Board’s own admission, registrants are viewed as incurable, bound to re-offend, impulsive and deviant, and master manipulators.  They are all in denial with paraphilias, poor recognition of their problems, and having distorted insight. They are dishonest and secretive and blame everyone else for their problems.

And these are just the highlights!

This is the board that is responsible for providing therapists who provide the court-mandated treatment for registrants. Registrants that are court-mandated to pay for this treatment!

Would you seek treatment from a physician that didn’t have your best interest in mind? Would you take your dog to a vet that was an advocate for cats but not dogs? Would you hire a contractor that could care less about the work he does on your home?

Of course, you wouldn’t.

So why would any registrant want to receive or participate in treatment provided by providers who openly state they put the needs of everyone else BEFORE the needs of the very people they are supposed to be treating, registered human beings? This seems to be a highly “unethical” treatment conflict of interest and maybe worth pursuing in the courts.



The opinions expressed within posts and comments are solely those of each author, and are not necessarily those of Women Against Registry.

6 comments for “TN Sexual Offender Treatment: A Conflict of Interest

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *