Guideline clarification? - Forums at Psych Central



advertisement
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-27-2010, 06:41 PM #1
pachyderm's Avatar
pachyderm pachyderm is offline
Legendary
 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: Washington DC metro area
Posts: 14,286
pachyderm pachyderm is offline
Legendary
pachyderm's Avatar
pachyderm without status for sure.
 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: Washington DC metro area
Posts: 14,286 (SuperPoster!)

10 yr Member
2,614 hugs
given
PC PoohBah!
Confused Guideline clarification?

In connection with a heated discussion that has been going on in Psychotherapy, I posted (probably not a good idea) some questions that might help clarify some guidelines about who is allowed to be on Psych Central and who is not:

http://forums.psychcentral.com/showp...6&postcount=11
__________________
Now if thou would'st
When all have given him o'er
From death to life
Thou might'st him yet recover
-- Michael Drayton 1562 - 1631
pachyderm is offline  

advertisement
Old 05-27-2010, 07:53 PM #2
pachyderm's Avatar
pachyderm pachyderm is offline
Legendary
 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: Washington DC metro area
Posts: 14,286
pachyderm pachyderm is offline
Legendary
pachyderm's Avatar
pachyderm without status for sure.
 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: Washington DC metro area
Posts: 14,286 (SuperPoster!)

10 yr Member
2,614 hugs
given
PC PoohBah!
Default Re: Guideline clarification?

The guidelines say, in this connection:

Pedophiles, rapists, and others that have abused another individual physically, emotionally or sexually (whether imagined, real, acted-upon or not, and/or convicted), are not welcomed here because our focus is on support for victims of such abuse.

I find part of this confusing at best, and I think the evidence is that some others have also. What does "imagined" mean? What does "acted-upon or not" imply? That anyone who has thoughts of harming is unwelcome? Anyone who has had impulses but NOT acted upon them is not welcome?

It seems to me that some of these are pretty hard to define. You could define having been convicted, or being in a legal process concerning issues of abuse, though there could be some question about what being "in a legal process" would mean, I suppose. I can see how this site could reasonably ban people having been convicted of a crime or being in a legal process involving possible conviction, but as written the guidelines do not clearly distinguish (to me) between thoughts and actions, or degree of action reaching the level of possible law violation.

__________________
Now if thou would'st
When all have given him o'er
From death to life
Thou might'st him yet recover
-- Michael Drayton 1562 - 1631
pachyderm is offline  
Old 05-27-2010, 09:04 PM #3
DocJohn's Avatar
DocJohn DocJohn is online now
Founder & Your Host
Chat Leader
 
Member Since: May 2001
Location: Greater Boston, MA
Posts: 12,260
DocJohn DocJohn is online now
Founder & Your Host
Chat Leader
DocJohn's Avatar
DocJohn is doing well.
 
Member Since: May 2001
Location: Greater Boston, MA
Posts: 12,260

15 yr Member
137 hugs
given
PC PoohBah!
Default Re: Guideline clarification?

This isn't law school and none of the guidelines are laws -- they are *guidelines* for a reason, not rules. Because of that, there should be no attempt to dissect and analyze each and every word in each guideline.

We're not going to clarify this guideline at present, save to say that abusers are not welcomed here in the community because abuser's issues are incompatible with issues that survivors of abuse are grappling with.

DocJohn
__________________
Don't throw away your shot.
DocJohn is online now  
"Thanks for this!" says:
Old 05-28-2010, 04:01 AM #4
pachyderm's Avatar
pachyderm pachyderm is offline
Legendary
 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: Washington DC metro area
Posts: 14,286
pachyderm pachyderm is offline
Legendary
pachyderm's Avatar
pachyderm without status for sure.
 
Member Since: Jun 2007
Location: Washington DC metro area
Posts: 14,286 (SuperPoster!)

10 yr Member
2,614 hugs
given
PC PoohBah!
Default Re: Guideline clarification?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocJohn View Post
This isn't law school and none of the guidelines are laws -- they are *guidelines* for a reason, not rules. Because of that, there should be no attempt to dissect and analyze each and every word in each guideline.

We're not going to clarify this guideline at present, save to say that abusers are not welcomed here in the community because abuser's issues are incompatible with issues that survivors of abuse are grappling with.

DocJohn
Guideline inadequacies have, in my opinion, already caused heartburn (to say the least) here in the forums.

I think you could say that anyone convicted of an offense was barred, and anyone involved in criminal proceedings that could result in a conviction was also barred. You might add that anyone coming here to prey upon the vulnerabilities of people here, in the judgement of the administration, is not welcome. I have not found the judgement of authorities in general to be flawless, but maybe that could still form the basis of a working guideline.

I hope you can define thoroughly what an "abuser" is. Is it in the mind of the viewer, or is it something that can be defined "objectively"? It seems to me that some here define anything that upsets them as being abuse. You have to do better. Is it "abuse" to not define things more clearly?

Not happy.
__________________
Now if thou would'st
When all have given him o'er
From death to life
Thou might'st him yet recover
-- Michael Drayton 1562 - 1631
pachyderm is offline  
Old 05-28-2010, 06:29 AM #5
DocJohn's Avatar
DocJohn DocJohn is online now
Founder & Your Host
Chat Leader
 
Member Since: May 2001
Location: Greater Boston, MA
Posts: 12,260
DocJohn DocJohn is online now
Founder & Your Host
Chat Leader
DocJohn's Avatar
DocJohn is doing well.
 
Member Since: May 2001
Location: Greater Boston, MA
Posts: 12,260

15 yr Member
137 hugs
given
PC PoohBah!
Default Re: Guideline clarification?

I said we weren't going to clarify it any further, but I see that's not going to sit well with you.

So here's a clarification for you... The community team defines abuse, not individual members. We do so through our regular process of discussion and collaboration as each case arises. If an individual identifies themselves as an abuser, that also counts.

We are not here to judge others, nor to be part-time private investigators looking up each member's criminal or civil histories and/or police record and/or trying to verify their story. That's not our purpose here. And to think we could allow one kind of abuser -- the one who simply hasn't been caught yet -- while not allowing others is, I think, a double-standard that we would not and could not subscribe to.

DocJohn
__________________
Don't throw away your shot.
DocJohn is online now  
"Thanks for this!" says:
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® — Copyright © 2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.



 

advertisement

Psych Central Forums

Psych Central is the leading mental health website, overseen by mental health professionals since 1995.

 

Helplines and Lifelines

The material on this site is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified health care provider. .

Always consult your doctor or mental health professional before trying anything you read here.
Please read the full disclaimer.