Thread: Wtf

Sorry guys, I have to disagree with some of the well meant and noble statements in the last few posts. If only we lived in a perfect world.

I work as a psychiatric nurse in the public mental health system. I have a Masters Degree in Mental Health Nursing so feel somewhat qualified to comment, not only on a professional level, but also from personal experience which I alluded to in an earlier post..

I see daily the devastation and complete loss of worth that a member or members of families of victims suffer. It is not so cut and dried. Families of victims become victims themselves and often suffer horrendously. The mind is a complex organism and some people simply cannot cope with a life changing event in their lives. Unfortunately, making a decision to "feel better and move on" is not an option that some people, through no fault of their own, are able to undertake.

Time does ease pain, however the pain will always be there. Just depends on how well an individual can cope with it.

Most people need closure. Justice needs to be not only seen and heard, but also delivered commensurate to the crime. If the families of victims cannot comprehend the decision then their grief will only be compounded. It's a difficult area, one of which I don't have an answer to.

What I do believe though is that if a person wilfully and callously takes the life of another person then they should forfeit their life. An eye for an eye in my ideal just world.

Just saying....

... "commensurate" is the world you used... and apparently to the satisfaction of the person so affected... and you think that would be a perfect outcome?

What about the community of people around the offender who might not feel that the victims subjectivity about what is "commensurate" might not be equitable...?

Do you think that might create ongoing problems for society if we rely on a victims perception of what is commensurate, and expect the state to execute that? What about those innocent people around that offender...will you be working with them as a result of their perception of inequitable treatment as a result of relying on the subjectivity of victims?

Closure is not relevant to the length or type of sentence applied. It is relevant to the ability of the person to reconcile the situation for themselves and the support to do so. People will either achieve that or will never achieve that irrespective of the actual outcomes from the justice system..

Originally Posted by ExPoh75

Sorry guys, I have to disagree with some of the well meant and noble statements in the last few posts. If only we lived in a perfect world.

I work as a psychiatric nurse in the public mental health system. I have a Masters Degree in Mental Health Nursing so feel somewhat qualified to comment, not only on a professional level, but also from personal experience which I alluded to in an earlier post..

I see daily the devastation and complete loss of worth that a member or members of families of victims suffer. It is not so cut and dried. Families of victims become victims themselves and often suffer horrendously. The mind is a complex organism and some people simply cannot cope with a life changing event in their lives. Unfortunately, making a decision to "feel better and move on" is not an option that some people, through no fault of their own, are able to undertake.

Time does ease pain, however the pain will always be there. Just depends on how well an individual can cope with it.

Most people need closure. Justice needs to be not only seen and heard, but also delivered commensurate to the crime. If the families of victims cannot comprehend the decision then their grief will only be compounded. It's a difficult area, one of which I don't have an answer to.

What I do believe though is that if a person wilfully and callously takes the life of another person then they should forfeit their life. An eye for an eye in my ideal just world.

Just saying....

Your apparent objectivity was rather undermined by your last paragraph, and your first post. It seems that closure for you, in your particular circumstances, was dependent on the corporal punishment of the person who caused your father's death.

Your qualifications and professional opinion mean nothing if you can not remain objective.
I have a PhD in life, and a few certificates, which include "50 yards freestyle".

"commensurate" as prescribed by law. You took it the wrong way and assumed I was stating otherwise.

Good on ya ExPoh - things were getting way too lovey-dovey up in this thread.

The problem with "keeping an open mind" is that sometimes ya brain falls out

expoh-hmmmy es like yourself im a psych nurse(43yrs) and i agree with your POV.my only comment on this whole thing is why this bloke makes an unequivocal statement about not going near firearms ever again ,then oops i forgot to mention Im intending to reapply for my FAL????????HYPOCRISYand self entitlement. its a little like career crims whose lawyers tell the court about their letters of remorse etc etc .its blatantly obvious is a cover my own arse shorten my sentence tactic.I often hear em laughing about it on the shop floor.
anyone who like my colleague and I has worked in institutions(me Im in the forensic psychiatric field) sees the human psyche unadorned and often at it very worstand often there are no answers ,apart from DEATH(which if you actually think about it is the ultimate answer to all lifes problems)
Now sidney before you jump on me ,and seeing as you appear clued up ,google Dr Ceri Evans -hes very well written on the psyche of criminals,the function of psyche in realtion to crime ,and the functioning of the psyche in relation to the after effects of crime. Ceri is my boss.

Originally Posted by kotuku

expoh-hmmmy es like yourself im a psych nurse(43yrs) and i agree with your POV.my only comment on this whole thing is why this bloke makes an unequivocal statement about not going near firearms ever again ,then oops i forgot to mention Im intending to reapply for my FAL????????HYPOCRISYand self entitlement. its a little like career crims whose lawyers tell the court about their letters of remorse etc etc .its blatantly obvious is a cover my own arse shorten my sentence tactic.I often hear em laughing about it on the shop floor.
anyone who like my colleague and I has worked in institutions(me Im in the forensic psychiatric field) sees the human psyche unadorned and often at it very worstand often there are no answers ,apart from DEATH(which if you actually think about it is the ultimate answer to all lifes problems)
Now sidney before you jump on me ,and seeing as you appear clued up ,google Dr Ceri Evans -hes very well written on the psyche of criminals,the function of psyche in realtion to crime ,and the functioning of the psyche in relation to the after effects of crime. Ceri is my boss.

Firstly I am no expert in the area of mental health, nor do I have an in depth understanding of what is required for the individual to achieve reconciliation. But I have some concerns with the ideas expressed because they tend to confuse individual desires and expectations, with the big picture issues and how they will affect society as a whole.

I appreciate the point made about an victims journey, a feeling that the outcome is equitable may help with the process of personal reconciliation... but my concern is that a victims perception of equity is often not consistent with the laws interpretation, nor with the community societal view and expectation.

If our goal is an equitable society we cannot compromise the dispassionate application of the law, by a court system that is independent of political pressure and the understandable emotional response of victims.

That being said, there is definitely a place for the offender to be confronted by the trauma caused, and that may provide assistance to all parties to deal with the ongoing issues of coming to terms with what has happened.

Originally Posted by Sidney

but my concern is that a victims perception of equity is often not consistent with the laws interpretation, nor with the community societal view and expectation.

However there is a growing wave of feeling that the laws interpretation is way out of step with every other parties expectation, ... including offenders. Sure they plea for as low a sentence as possible as that is even how our economy runs; maximize profits and minimise losses (well the bit of the economy excluding governments that seem to go for the opposite). You could say that they feel the sentences are too low by the fact that they are not already dissuaded from their career path.

That being said, there is definitely a place for the offender to be confronted by the trauma caused, and that may provide assistance to all parties to deal with the ongoing issues of coming to terms with what has happened.

That really only works if they truly are remorseful. Many have shown utter disdain for their victims family, who are in themselves victims.

Gagetman

Again, we apparently have the lowest rate of serious offending for 15 years and the fullest prisons. I would suggest that public perception is most likely inaccurate.

Deterence is a very subjective area and is not well understood by anybody, let alone the average poorly trained & environmentally challenged, under 25 yr old offender, with low empathy, and non complete frontal lobe development..... it doesn't occur to them that they might get caught, let alone how serious the sentence might be.

Confrontation of the damage caused is part of accountability, but you are correct, further damage to the victims is not appropriate and strict criteria for both parties has to be evident before any benefit can result...

Originally Posted by Sidney

Deterence is a very subjective area and is not well understood by anybody, let alone the average poorly trained & environmentally challenged, under 25 yr old offender, with low empathy, and non complete frontal lobe development..... it doesn't occur to them that they might get caught, let alone how serious the sentence might be....

Yes! This exact thing! That's what I was trying to say...

There is absolutely no way that prison in Wellington anyway is a deterrence to offenders. Why do you think I can spell so many tricky names correctly? Repetition. This also has me believe that prison isn't a punishment either.

For police anyway, the Bail Oppositions I've seen are all about public and victim safety, not "lock him up because he's an asshole and he did bad stuff"



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thread is getting waaaay to sipholophical for this hillbilly hippie

Originally Posted by ebf

Thread is getting waaaay to sipholophical for this hillbilly hippie

I know what you mean, but it is good to know we have phyco nurses keeping an eye on us all.
I know of two killers of hunters who have gone back to hunting and one other that severely injured another hunter who has also gone hunting again...I guess it is a bit like automobile killers getting back behind the wheel.
At least when Dumber says he is going hunting everyone else will stay at home giving him a clear field.

first of all sidney lets face a coupla facts about your beloved law ok.
No1-the westminster system is an adverserial system ,and as has often been proven open to manipulation and abuse.
no2 -the arean of judicial process is an artificial one for gods sakes.with the absolute plethora of legislation ocvering every minute factor about the process ,what actually goes into proving a case is in all probablitiy a fraction of what in essence is the ungarnished truth ;what exactly went on at that very point in time of the act being committed ,what is relevant to the setting of the actions.
Part of our forensic rehab process is getting those placed in psych hosptial to do violence prevention groupwork and individually offence chain work.this is often very painful andat least uncomfortable.In the words of one of my residents recently-"why the fuuck has it taken me so long to realise what I put people through."his actions -Obviously i cannot say due to privacy but hes well and truly up there in shagnasty rankings.
yeah the victims suffer from the moment of the offence ,but the offender ,dependent on circumstances and moreso attitude ,may well go through like with "so what " or the mispent adulation of dysfunctional peer groups commonly referred to as "staunch"
the work done by the offender ipsofacto is often never communicated to the victims due to legal process imposed barriers,mostly to do with the protective factor ,or usually the victims whanau wishing to forget the trauma., let alone the malfunctioning DNA sample who caused it.

We aren't talking cross purposes here, and I don't pretend that the application of the law is rehabilitive very often. Nor do I pretend that any system is perfect, but in my considered opinion, this one ain't as bad as I was expecting it to be.. everything is artificial if humans create it.....

Of course I see value in the sort of work you are doing. The issues I have and was referring to are around an emotive response to sentencing, driven by victim perceptions. That is a can of worms with potentially very negative outcomes...

The lock em up and throw away the key approach is simple, satisfying at a rudimentary level and actually doesn't solve the problem... we have a ways to go to get to the american level of failure in that regard, but we are in second place....

Originally Posted by Sidney

The issues I have and was referring to are around an emotive response to sentencing, driven by victim perceptions. That is a can of worms with potentially very negative outcomes...

If this requirement is not addressed then there are very major negative outcomes. At the moment it is skewed far too far towards the favour of the perpetrator with little regard to the victims. As you said earlier that all things must be weighed up, that means all things including the victims expectations.