|
|
Featured Issue: 5-24-05
Deny Sex Offenders Viagra?
Deny Drug Offenders Hallucinogenic Drugs?
Where is the line?
|
|
5-24-2005 New York:
Sex offenders get Viagra paid for by Medicaid |
.New York's comptroller urged the nation's top health official Sunday to ban high-risk sex offenders and convicted rapists from receiving Viagra paid for by Medicaid.
"Federal, state and local reimbursement for the cost of erectile dysfunction drugs for sex offenders raises serious policy considerations and has the potential to place the public at risk," Comptroller Alan Hevesi wrote Michael Leavitt, secretary of Health and Human Services.
"I am asking that you take immediate action to ensure that sex offenders do not receive erectile dysfunction medication paid for by the taxpayers. I urge you to take administrative action to remedy the situation or draft an amendment to the underlying statute as appropriate," Hevesi wrote.
Hevesi said his office found that from January 1, 2000, through March 31, 2005, 198 Level 3 sex offenders received Medicaid-reimbursed Viagra after being convicted of a sex offense. Sex offenders are those convicted of crimes such as rape, sexual abuse, and sexual conduct against a child.
: by CNN News
..more..
|
.If anyone thinks this is a black and white issue they need to have their head examined. Are there circumstances when certain drugs are appropriate for those convicted of crimes?
While politicians want the public to believe this is a slam dunk decision, I for one am not ready to make the blanket statement to deny a person convicted of a crime any medication simply because there may be a hypothetical application where it may SOUND inappropriate.
Knee-jerk legislation has been the norm where sex offenders are concerned, if it SOUNDS GOOD then it should be a law. It is high time we demand vision from our legislators.
We must first remember that, it is a medical decision between the patient and the doctor. I am quite sure that a qualified Medicaid doctor, or other doctor, has reviewed the circumstances of the case before prescribing any drug including viagra which can be a very dangerous drug to some people.
The majority of all criminal offenders return to society following their sentence, and many go on to reestablish themselves including reuniting with family or starting new families. Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a medically recognized condition that anyone could be afflicted with. Appropriate uses?
Accordingly, if sex offenders are denied viagra, why not deny women in labor, previously convicted of a drug offense, hallucinogenic drugs? The exception is, the appropriate circumstances! Also, why not deny convicted substance abusers access to a Methodone program? Where is that line?
I would hate to be the doctor that has to tell someone on their death bed, that they cannot have drugs to reduce their pain, simply because the were once in a Romeo & Juliet or similar consensual situation when they were young, or because they urinated in the park or something similar, making them sex offenders.
There is another side to this issue, often drugs are found to have multiple uses, initially they solve one condition and later are found to solve another. Viagra is one of those drugs.
A 2002 study, "Sildenafil (Viagra) May Help Improve Control of Pulmonary Hypertension," shows another use for viagra. Should a sex offender qualify for such use why should s/he be denied? Are there other uses still unknown?
Will denying sex offenders, viagra, be a slippery slope to denying all person previously convicted of crimes, medically appropriate medicine, treatment and care when they need it and cannot afford it, especially since most are aging today?
A closing note, I think we all know that when a person is addicted, and does not have a appropriate way of meeting that need, further crime is often a result.
The New York Audit did not examine whether the need for viagra was medically appropriate! Time to wake up and stop the knee-jerk legislation.
eAdvocate
|
| |
Featured Issue: 5-6-05
Florida and New York: Have Cities Out of Control!
Can cities go beyond what state law prescribes?
|
|
5-6-2005 Florida:
Sex offender pleads with city council |
.BROOKSVILLE - Chris Coleman is married, with a child on the way. He works. He is trying hard to be a good citizen, he said. But there is one exception. Coleman, 31, is a registered sexual offender listed with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Monday night, he pleaded with the Brooksville City Council, asking them not to put signs in the front yards of sexual offenders.
"I don't want to be tagged," he said, his voice choking. "I don't want to be put out like a predator." The city council discussed several stances the city could take at its meeting Monday but made no decision. Brooksville Police Chief Ed Tincher said he would support posting signs in front of the homes of sexual offenders and predators. Currently, there are six sexual offenders living within city limits and no sexual predators, according to FDLE.
Councilman Ernie Wever said Monday night he would also support posting signs in front of offenders' homes. "The situation is worse enough that something drastic might need to be done," he said. Other options discussed included placing a link to the FDLE Web site on the city's Web site, placing notices at shopping centers and other public locations or establishing an ordinance that would prevent sexual offenders or predators from moving a certain distance to a school.
That, however, could become illegal under state laws if limits were set in such a way offenders would not be able to move into the city, said City Attorney David Lacroix. City councilman David Pugh said some sex offenders might not be considered threatening and perhaps should not have signs placed near their homes. "What if we limit it to those who are a threat?" Pugh asked. "That would be hard to do." "Put a sign in front of every one of them," Wever immediately responded.
: by CLIFF HIGHTOWER
..more..
|
5-6-2005 New York:
Binghamton council votes to restrict sex offenders |
.(Binghamton, NY - AP) — The City Council has passed legislation to restrict where sex offenders can go within the city limits. The law could go into effect as early as today if approved by Mayor Richard Bucci. It would prohibit Level 2 and Level 3 registered sex offenders from coming within a quarter-mile of a public or private school, day-care center, playground or park.
The legislation passed with an 8-0 vote yesterday, although some council members disagreed on its wording and effectiveness. But Brian Seachrist, first assistant corporation counsel, said the council's action could very well end up in the hands of the courts. He doubted whether the city has the authority.
: by CBS6 Albany
..more..
|
| |
Featured Issue: 5-3-05
|
Are Megans' Laws Self-Defeating?
|
|
5-3-2005 Florida:
Many cities want laws to rout sex offenders:
Spurred by a proposal in Miami Beach, dozens of cities across the state now want wider buffer zones for sex offenders -- though experts question their constitutionality and their effectiveness. |
.Miami Beach's push to limit the places sex offenders can live within the city limits has set off a flurry of similar legislative action in Florida and other states but may face constitutional challenges and may not have much effect, child advocates say.
The ordinance, proposed by Miami Beach Mayor David Dermer, would require sexual offenders to live at least 2,500 feet from schools, playgrounds, bus stops or any place children gather. It would virtually push those offenders outside city limits since Miami Beach is just 7 ½ miles wide and has 37 parks and more than a dozen schools. The change would more than double the 1,000-foot buffer zone established by the state.
Since then, the city of North Miami has given preliminary approval to a similar ordinance. Officials in the city of Sweetwater were to vote late Monday on legislation. Dozens of other cities have made inquiries, said John Heffernan, special advisor to Dermer. In Broward County, officials in Pembroke Pines, Hallandale Beach, Miramar and Fort Lauderdale are all considering similar proposals -- which have drawn some criticism from constitutional experts.
Experts worry that if several cities pass the same 2,500-foot buffer zone, large swaths of the state could be rendered off-limits to offenders who have already served time. ''I think there is a plausible constitutional argument about infringing on somebody's basic civil liberties,'' said Mark Tushnet, a professor who specializes in First Amendment law at Georgetown University Law School. ''I would expect someone to challenge it if an entire part of the state is effectively carved out,'' Tushnet said.
But Dermer and other city leaders argue that the rights of children supersede those of sexual offenders, who may repeat their behavior. ''Those who focus on the protection of predators and not the children are in the business of twisting the truth to make a trap for fools,'' Dermer said. North Miami's Joe Celestin, who insists that he first suggested the increased distance, said he simply wants offenders out of his city. ''I don't really care where they live. At this point I don't care if they live out of civilization,'' Celestin said.
``I think the law is sending a very clear message.'' While the proposed law isn't retroactive, it could affect the remaining 31 sexual offenders if they choose to renew a lease or rent a different apartment on the Beach. Despite the groundswell of support, Dermer may face some resistance as the law comes up May 18 for a public hearing and final vote.
For example, landlords may object to an amendment that was attached to the ordinance by a city committee: It would place some of the responsibility for verifying the sexual offender status of a potential renter on landlords. Landfords who fail to do so could be fined. In an April 26 letter to commissioners, David Kelsey, president of the South Beach Hotel and Restaurant Association, argued that the law would penalize just about any property owner. ''It would seem to follow that a prohibition that applied to the residency of a tenant must also apply to the residency of a property owner,'' Kelsey wrote.
Advocates say it's better to have realistic rules offenders can follow so they will register. To reduce the chance of recidivism, offenders need to be able to find jobs and housing, child advocates and legal experts say. ''A law like 2,000 feet could very well make it impossible for sex offenders to live anywhere in a community,'' said Teresa Jacobs, program manager for the Minnesota-based Jacob Wetterling Foundation, which aims to protect children from sexual exploitation and abduction. ``The more difficult it becomes [to find a place to live] the more you are going to see lack of registration and more transient lifestyles that is actually putting your children more at risk.''
: by NICOLE WHITE AND AMY SHERMAN
..more..
|
5-3-2005 New Jersey:
Hamilton readies pedophile ban law |
.Registered sex offenders living in the township may soon be looking for an out-of-town address if a proposed ordinance prohibiting them from living in certain neighborhoods is approved. The ordinance, which is expected to be introduced by the township council tonight, would create a "pedophile free zone," prohibiting convicted sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a township school, playground or park.
With 24 public schools and six private schools in the township, along with more than 30 parks, the ordinance would make it difficult for sex offenders to find a place to live in Hamilton, Mayor Glen Gilmore conceded. "Given the fact that what we are trying to accomplish here is to lessen the risks our children are exposed to, if it creates a hardship on someone who has a history of attacking children, it is a consequence they are responsible for and I don't think it's unreasonable or unfair," Gilmore said yesterday. [snip]
But according to experts on sex offenders and registry laws, the Hamilton and Miami Beach ordinances would not solve the problem and would likely be challenged in court. "A good case can be made that they make it more difficult for sex offenders to become law-abiding citizens," said John La Fond, a law professor at the University of Missouri at Kansas City school of law, who has written a book on sex offender registry laws called "Preventing Sexual Violence. How Society Should Cope with Sex Offenders."
La Fond said a great deal of evidence exists to show that, in general, most sex offenders are not a risk to the community once released and notification and registry laws are a waste of resources and manpower. "I would be very surprised if laws such as this have any impact on sexual recidivism or community safety. They obviously make people feel better but there is no evidence establishing that they work."
Moorestown attorney William Buckman, who sits on the board of directors of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, called the law a bad idea and said it most likely would be overturned by the court for a number of reasons, including the fact that it imposes a penalty that is unconstitutional. "It's unconstitutional to limit people's ability to find a home once they have served their sentences," Buckman said. "If every town did that, there are few places in New Jersey that are not within 1,000 feet, let alone 2,500 feet, of a school. This sounds like an attempt by Hamilton Township to prohibit registered sex offenders from living in the town."
: by DARRYL R. ISHERWOOD, Staff Writer
..more..
|
| |
Featured Issue: 5-8-05
|
Residency laws cause clustering of offenders!
|
|
5-8-2005 Florida:
Plan to Purge Predators Bad News for Rural America, Says Activist |
.An activist in Florida says a plan put forth recently by the mayor of Miami Beach to rid that city of sexual predators may appear to be a good idea -- unless you live in rural America. Under Florida law, registered sexual offenders cannot live within 1,000 feet of areas where children congregate. But Mayor David Dermer wants to more than double the limits of that buffer zone so that convicted offenders whose victims were under the age of 16 cannot live within 2,500 feet -- almost half a mile -- of any school, school bus stop, day care center, park, or playground.
Dermer's proposal has already been approved by the city commissioners, who will consider it again on May 18. If passed, it would take effect ten days later, effectively eliminating sexual offenders from the 7.5-mile long city that has 15 schools and 38 parks -- at least, that is the mayor's objective. "The intention of the law is to deal with very serious offenders, to not have them living within close proximity of potential victims," he tells CBS affiliate WFOR in Miami. According to a report in the Miami Herald, the Miami Beach mayor's proposal has spurred "dozens of cities" across Florida to begin clamoring for wider buffer zones in their communities as well.
"On the surface, this sounds like a great plan -- until you consider that predators would be forced from large cities to the smaller communities of our nation," Pardee says. "Millions of Americans have chosen the small town lifestyle to raise their families [and] violence is one of the main reasons for moving from large metropolitan areas."
: by Jody Brown
..more..
|
City after city is considering or actually passing ordinances to exclude registered offenders (some registries include more than just sex offenders) from living within xx feet of schools, day cares, playground, etc..
What these cities haven't considered, or perhaps they do not care, is that such laws will cause "Clustering" of offenders in rural towns of America.
Small town USA simply does not have the resources to handle an influx of offenders who Megans' laws require be monitored. Many of these towns do not even have a police force, some may only have a neighboring officer visit them once or twice a week.
Quite often these smaller towns simply do not have the tax base to afford handling problems that belong to the bigger cities. Certainly when offenders start moving in many of the local residents will be moving out.
In Binghampton New York their ordinance will not even permit such offenders to be present in the proscribed cities.
How these offenders will be able to access the public services they need is a quandry? I guess the cities will have to setup additional offices in the areas where these offenders live, using state funds.
I do see one possible positive outcome of these laws, as the clusters get bigger and bigger (there are approximately 500,000 registered offenders today without counting any family members), they will be able to elect their own state representatives and senators. Then they will be able to effect legislation statewide and nationwide.
Too far fetched? Think about it.
eAdvocate (Copyright 2005 - All Rights Reserved)
READERS' COMMENTS on residency laws:
Tell me if i'm missing something. During the day, while schools are open, an offender can travel into the banned zones for work or to visit someone. But at night, when the schools are closed and nobody is there, offenders cannot sleep in the zones, even if they are staying at a family member's home where the family member might be a worthwhile person to monitor the offender. Where is the danger, especially if the schools are closed and empty?
|
| |
Legal Issues & Court Cases Affectine Sex Offenders ©
News & Noteworthy: Articles Concerning Sex offender Issues ©
Beyond the Abuse: A Personal Recovery Program ©
Copyright ©2003-2005 L. Arthur M.Parrish. All rights reserved.Privacy policy
|
|
