A week ago, Matt Lauer, of Today Show fame, interviewed Debra LaFave, the 24-year-old high school teacher who made headlines for sleeping with a student 9 years her junior, for NBC’s Dateline program. Interestingly, Dateline producers made the decision to run Mr. Lauer’s interview with one sex offender along side their on-going Dateline exclusive, “To Catch a Predator.” This choice underscored the immense gender bias within the prosecution, punishment and handling of sex offenders in this country. Beyond that however, this episode of Dateline, like many other media outlets and programs, highlights just how far we’ll go to exploit these disturbed mentally ill criminals for the purpose of entertainment. To avoid any confusion on this controversial subject, I’d like to state my intention up front. I would never imply that those who commit sex offenses: rapists, pedophiles, molesters, abductors and statutory rapists, were not deserving of punishment. If the law has been broken, then this is a judicial matter and psychiatry should not be allowed to cause any mitigation of a criminal act. In my opinion, Psychiatry should stay out of the criminal court room. The problem for our society arises with the way that these individuals are treated once a conviction has been handed down. Treatment, when and if it is used, is uneven in its application. Prisons are woefully incapable of dealing with the “insane but guilty” prisoner. Sexual offenders when they are incarcerated fear identification because of the potential for retaliation by other inmates. Prison officials are loathe to identify these individuals to treating mental health professionals for the same reason and concern over their potential liability if this identification should lead to such prisoner retaliation. Further complicating the problem is the spot light of media attention, whether on a local or national level, that leads to a “throw away the key” mentality. It is common that serious sex offenders receive no mental health treatment while incarcerated and when their sentence is completed undergo a psychological screening which occurs over 1-2 weeks and a decision is made as to whether a civil commitment for treatment is warranted. This all important decision for commitment comes at the end of years of incarceration that have provided no specific mental health treatment for the sex offense. Can you imagine being the mental health professional that assesses that a sex offender can be released and that individual commits another sex crime? That mental health professional will become an instant reviled media star. Offenders and suspected offenders are also punished not just once, by the state, but a second time, in the court of public opinion that is fueled by commercial publications and television. Each offense and offender is unique. Mr. Lauer’s interview with Ms. LaFave provides a perfect example of that fact. There are many different indicators that we use to decide what is the best course of treatment and who is likely to be a recidivist, none are perfect science or perfectly predictive. Was this a first offense or a habitual crime? What was the nature of the violence involved? What is the age of the offender? The victim? Are any other existing mental or behavioral disorders present? These are just a few of the questions that we must consider when confronted with a new case. These, and others, will help determine to what extent an offender will respond to treatment. Punishment alone addresses what the offender did. It doesn’t look to the future of the offender as they eventually reenter society. Despite the fact that treatment has been proven effective in cutting recidivism rates, shows like Dateline and Oprah as well as tabloids and publications like People magazine dehumanize these criminals in a way that reduces their lives to nothing. They present an image of sex offenders that leads the public to believe that they are beyond treatment and unworthy of it anyway. There is a need, certainly, to educate the public about potential dangers, but more often then not these shows cross the line, if not stomp all over it, all in the name of driving up ratings. Last Wednesday’s Dateline provided a stark look at the contrast between two approaches to sex offenders. During Matt Lauer’s interview of Ms. LaFave, producers shared with viewers a complete, although at times sensationalistic, view of the convicted and registered sex offender. Meanwhile, in their segment “To Catch a Predator,” Dateline unleashes their attack dog, Chris Hansen. He confronts men fooled as part of a sting with cameras rolling, and bears his claws in “service” of a society at constant risk from these “monsters.” In looking at the transcripts of each of the segments (linked above in this paragraph), we can get a sense of not only the gender biases between men and women who commit sex offenses, but also the ruthless, dehumanizing tactics that are all too often employed in dealing with those who do offend. The media has turned the issue of sexual offences into a game of “Gotcha” with little emphasis on what treatment should be for sex offenders and what successful efforts can be made to combat the sex offenders behaviors. In setting the scene for Mr. Lauer’s interview Dateline writers refer to Ms. LaFave as “a beautiful blonde 23-year-old” who “seduced a 14-year-old boy.” Mr. Lauer, with only his second or third question, asks why LaFave thinks she got so much attention, was it “because you’re pretty?” Later she is described as having a “pretty face and the hourglass figure.” Dateline minces no words in establishing Ms. LaFave’s sexuality and desirability. Another phrase, however, points to how this admitted sex offender will be treated differently from the parade of men featured in the same program. “Behind the lurid details of the case, [LaFave] says there was a deeply troubled young woman with a lifetime of problems that finally led to a terrible crack-up—and a crime tailor made for the tabloids.” The implications here are numerous, and the brevity of this quote betrays the depth to which it informs our engagement with sex offenders. Ms. LaFave, this statement would have us believe, committed a crime filled with “lurid details.” This isn’t uncommon. Whether we are prepared to admit it or not, it is these same lurid details that draw public interest into sex crimes. The lurid details are at the center of shows like Dateline or Oprah and her own “Child Predator Watch List,” but they also fuel shows like Law and Order: Special Victims Unit, Without a Trace or CSI. Each of these shows traffic in details, often lurid ones, the very corporeality of which hits viewers like a gut punch. We may be disgusted or repulsed, but we can’t look away. But LaFave, and with her Mr. Lauer and Dateline, says that underneath these details was a “deeply troubled young woman with a lifetime of problems that finally led to a terrible crack-up.” After informing us of the lurid details we love so much (“accused of having sex with him at her apartment, in her car, in her classroom”), we are asked to consider, for the sake of this beautiful blonde, the fact that maybe her past held some desperate troubles that fueled her criminal behavior. Indeed, Ms. LaFave did have a troubled history—a rape victim herself at age 13, she was “drinking heavily” at 15 and developed an eating disorder. LaFave got into some modeling, lower-end cars-with-women type stuff. But moved on, cleaning up her act in college. She would continue to battle mental illness though, taking medication for depression. It would be revealed after her arrest, that Ms. LaFave’s original diagnosis was incorrect, and instead of depressed she was bipolar. Mr. Lauer and Dateline present these details, not to excuse Ms. LaFave’s criminal behavior. She herself states many times that she doesn’t want to pass the blame or have anyone confuse her behavior with what bipolar disorder can do, but she does state, and doctors supported her during trial, that BPD and her personal history contributed to her mindset. In either case, Dateline’s presentation of Ms. LaFave, and Mr. Lauer’s interview of her, seems geared, if not to illicit sympathy, then at least to illicit understanding. She is shown as she is: a complex, troubled, convicted felon. She is allowed to speak, in her own voice, and present her perspective like a human being. They also note on several occasions that Ms. LaFave received zero out of a possible 30 years of jail time for her crime. She has been allowed to serve her sentence on house arrest and then on probation. She also has had the opportunity to enter intensive therapy that is helping her face her bipolar disorder but also deals with her crime, its motives and implications. On the other end of the spectrum is Dateline’s seemingly monthly feature To Catch a Predator. Started nearly two years ago with a sting in the Long Island, NY area, To Catch a Predator has become a staple of Dateline’s schedule. The show grew out of a partnership with a group called Perverted Justice—a web based organization that aggressively hunts online sexual “predators.” Posing as 13 to 15-year-old boys and girls and hanging out in Internet chat rooms, Perverted Justice operatives engage in explicit sexual chat sessions with those they are targeting with the hope of setting up a meet. These men (they have all been men to this point) show up at the agreed upon location. The house, they learn, has been rented by Dateline, who films the men upon arrival and confronts them about their behavior. For the sake of this post, we’ll put aside discussion of Perverted Justice’s methods and Dateline’s journalistic integrity, instead focusing on how these suspected felons are treated once the trap has been sprung. Chris Hansen, the Dateline correspondent for To Catch a Predator, has made a niche for himself by utilizing a confrontational and shaming tone when he reveals himself to the largely unsuspecting men. In last Wednesday’s episode, he treated these men with a mixture of scorn and disdain bordering on derision. Like other news shows that deal with sexual offenders, Mr. Hansen uses details as a weapon as he easily makes his argument in the court of public opinion. In this case he need not even rely on witness testimony or memory, he has actual chat logs (all of which can be found on Perverted Justice’s website). The compassion showed for Debra LaFave by the very same program has evaporated rather quickly. Here, Mr. Hansen uses his hidden cameras, his undercover Perverted Justice agents and his chat logs to publicly and impudently chastise these potential predators until they can take no more and flee into the waiting arms of police. Gone is any discussion of past experiences, past abuses or even mental illnesses that may have driven these men to these houses. The question, “Why?” is asked, but only ever as a rhetorical one. Mr. Hansen, and presumably the audience, already knows the answer: because these men are depraved monsters, below even basic human decency. We don’t dispute that these men broke the law and must answer for their actions. While the irony of Dateline’s two-faced presentation on sex offenders exposes the different ways that these men and women are treated in modern media and society, on her program Oprah Winfrey takes the rhetoric to an even higher level. Using words like evil, sickness and darkness, Oprah portrays a world where our children are “being stolen, raped, tortured and killed by sexual predators who are walking right into your homes.” In Oprah’s world, stopping the sexual predation of children involves society taking to the streets to shout “enough!” In these “good vs. evil” terms, arguing on the side of these people can be difficult. When we try to defend the very humanity of sex offenders, many will probably write us off as soft, overly sympathetic or even fostering an environment that breeds further sex offenders. That is how shows like Dateline and Oprah have conditioned us to think. Sensationalistic TV productions like these can and do boost ratings (and in Oprah’s case sell magazines). But they have eroded our sense of compassion and understanding of human trauma and the cycle of abuse that this trauma can recapitulate. These men (again in Oprah’s case all convicted and suspected felons are male) have been accused or convicted of committing crimes. That point has never been put up for debate. Those who would say that the men captured by Dateline would have ONLY committed statutory rape, a law contingent solely on state sanctioned age-of-consent laws, have already lost the argument. These men have broken the laws of their state and those laws do not make distinctions. The fact is that these potential criminals, especially in the case of Dateline and Perverted Justice, are still just that—potential. These men have been dehumanized by the likes of Chris Hansen and Oprah Winfrey. They have been painted in broad strokes as “evil” or “dark” monsters. While we saw Dateline treat one sex offender with compassion and respect, we need only wait ten minutes to get back down to good old fashioned hatred. Debra LaFave was injured; she was a broken person who did a bad thing. These other men were nothing more than names and faces put to a nebulous “bad guy” who’s constantly stalking our children and peeping through windows. These men, as well as the many men whose chats have been posted at Perverted Justice’s website, have also been denied their due innocence. We like to talk in this country about “innocent until proven guilty.” But for those “exposed” using these types of aggressive tactics, this is not usually considered. The most recent To Catch a Predator boasted about exposing 129 men as potential predators. Meanwhile, Perverted Justice only lists 81 convictions—that’s a conversion rate of nearly 63%. It also means that some 48 men have been EXPOSED but were not convicted. This exposure is not a treatment. It’s not going to CURE any of these potential offenders. It may drive them further underground or teach them to be more careful; it won’t stop their compulsions to have sex with minors. Law enforcement and society in general needs to take a second look at the entire area of sexual offenders and realize that we are dealing with mentally ill adults and teenagers who require a unified approach to their offences that incorporates compassion, understanding and expert treatments. We all live in glass houses and throwing stones at sex offenders only breeds more sex offenders. The cycle of abuse can only be stopped by a rational approach to “understanding” what psycho traumatic events lead to the development of sex offenders. Sex offenders are not born; they are created and nurtured by toxic and traumatic environments that need to be addressed through behavioral health treatment and sometimes incarceration with treatment. There are many myths that have been perpetrated by the media regarding sex offenders and they should be clarified to better understand this problem. The kangaroo courts run by the likes of Oprah Winfrey, Matt Lauer and Chris Hansen serve to stigmatize and dehumanize groups of people who are in desperate need of mental help.