Amos

Correct but Sabine had made a sugestion that time in jail will not be a corrective measure.

Sabine wrote He needs help of course to overcome his dysfunctional behavior as time in jail for his crime will not solve his issues.

Amen-Moses

So where did you get that he had 20 years of counselling?

Amen-Moses

Keith Russell

Greetings:

It is absoluteley the right thing to do, to tell the patients about this abuse. They cannot deal with the truth, if they don't know the truth.

The police don't think there was any sexual contact...do they know that for sure?

AIDS responds better when treated early.

These victims needs to know what happened, so that they can work now to minimize any possible damage of which they might not otherwise be aware.

Keith.

Amos

Well he must have been at least 25 years old and should know better by that time.

Amos

The question becomes who will they sue for trauma damages after the police becomes the informant that no physical or mental damge was done.

Keith you are paranoid.

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

Keith Russell

Amos:

I believe that truth is important. I believe that knowing the truth is always better than believing a comforting lie.

That's why I'm atheist, after all...

You can call that paranoid, if you wish.

(I prefer to call myself 'rational', though...)

Keith.

lunachick

I agree it's better for them to be told, as the Doctors trial will only cause tongues to wag, anyway. If they are not told, but hear about their doctors case and the circumstances of the case (which they inevitable will), they will put two and two together; so if they are not openly and honestly told they may feel even more angry at what they might consider deceit on all levels of who they deal with (police, family, etc), not just that of the doctor.
(Sorry, that's a rather convoluted way of putting it, but I hope you get what I mean).

Marz Blak

Good question. I personally, like you, would prefer it to be the case that the victims were never afforded publicity; but at least in American courts, the rules of law (i.e., freedom of press, 'sunshine laws' regarding official documentation wherein the victims' names would in all likelihood be listed, open hearings, right to face one's accuser, etc.,) would in all likelihood make the exposure of the victims' names in the press inevitable.

Of course, this being (as I recall) a UK case, all the above might not pertain. Being a resident of the UK, I certainly would imagine that you would know better than I.

[ September 26, 2002: Message edited by: Marz Blak ]</p>

Amen-Moses

That is just the sort of assumption that counselling may prove wrong!

Do you really think that counselling is worthless beyond a certain age?

Amen-Moses

Amen-Moses

They don't tell us what the rules are! And I'm not paying upwards of 200 UKP to ask a bloody lawyer.

Amen-Moses