Day two of NARSOL’s 2021 conference features Dubbeling, Horowitz, Molnar

image_pdfimage_print

The second day of NARSOL’s 2021 Houston conference opened with attorney Paul Dubbeling. Mr. Dubbeling addressed the audience on the topic of affecting change using an integrated approach. The initial step, he stressed was education. This lays the groundwork and therefore can be considered the most important. Education, explained Paul, consists of three forms, and all must be utilized. Education about sexual offense issues must be factual, it must be logical, and it must also have an emotional component. The next step in the integrated system is litigation, and Paul emphasized that there is no such thing as a small win. Every win, he said, is significant; others are built on it, which in turn lays the groundwork for more. The third and final component is legislation which, he says, will follow when the first two have been optimized. Paul made clear that his presentation and the steps outlined were in response to so the question asked by so many advocates: What can I do today; what can I do right now? Paul’s presentation gives us some answers.

The afternoon session began with a presentation by researcher and scholar Emily Horowitz, and she spoke about how to challenge sexual offense laws and policies during a prolonged period of panic. Dr. Horowitz believes that the false claims of a Satanic influence resulting in sexual abuse of children in day care in the 1980s ushered in a prolonged period of sexual panic and hysteria that has grown into what we have today. It is the nature of prolonged panics that they build over time. The results are seen today in the MeToo movement, in public, shaming sexual offense registries, and in the myriad restrictions and laws negatively affecting persons required to register. Some of the most harmful are policies that prohibit registrants from being on a college campus and exclusions on ban-the-box initiatives for those with a sexual conviction.

What many consider the highlight of the conference, the awards banquet, was graced by Mary Sue Molnar as the speaker. She took us on a journey, back to the beginning of RSOL, back to the first conference, and brought us forward through each year, each conference. This was not just the journey of NARSOL; it was also Mary Sue’s own journey, that of a woman who had no resources, no knowledge of laws or sexual offense issues, and no clear idea of how to get what she needed to what she is today: A seasoned advocate, executive director of Texas Voices, and a knowledgeable, effective, tireless soldier in our fight against unjust, ineffective sexual offense laws. At the end of her presentation, conference MC Robin Vander Wall presented Mary Sue with NARSOL’s prestigious Paul Shannon Lifetime Achievement Award. This award represents many years of work and dedication in furtherance of NARSOL’s vision, mission, and goals; this is the third year it has been awarded.

 

image_pdfimage_print
Help us reach more people by Sharing or Liking this post.

2 Thoughts to “Day two of NARSOL’s 2021 conference features Dubbeling, Horowitz, Molnar”

Leave a Comment

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone and language of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Refrain from comments containing references to religion unless it clearly relates to the post being commented on.
  • Do not post in all caps.
  • We will generally not allow links; the moderator may consider the value of a link.
  • We will not post lengthy comments.
  • Please don not go into details about your story; post these on our Tales from the Registry.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites.
  • Please do not solicit funds.
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them. It will not be displayed on the site.

  1. Jayson Jones

    I’m hoping that something is being done to differentiate and separate those of us who are labeled “Sex Offenders” for viewing/downloading pictures and/or video only (no contact, no sharing) from those who actively sought or achieved contact with minors.

    I served 7 out of a 9 year sentence in Federal Prison, and have a 15 year “Supervised Release” addition to it. In Ohio I am considered a Tier 2 and must report every 6 months. Tier 1 (reporting once per year) is for those convicted of Indecent Exposure and Public Urination. Since people in my position did not contact or interact with anyone at all I feel this whole situation is unfair and unconstitutional.

    Considering movies such as “Hunger Games” depicting people under 18 brutally killing each other, episodes of “Weeds” depicting people under 18 having sex, and numerous other films and books depicting/describing sex and/or violence involving someone under 18, I have to wonder why the same things on the internet bring such draconian punishment.

    I have heard that there are peer reviewed studies in existence that show the rarity of anyone who only views pictures and/or videos ever progressing to contact or hands on crime. Is someone working on this?

    1. Yepp... I did it, just not what you think lol.

      Comparing oneself, and ones conviction to that of other convictions does nothing to benefit anyone.

      It’s unhealthy behavior and, to some extent fuels the fire for those that see the registry as a positive thing.

      Remember, there is a large difference between a crime as charged and a situation as occurred.

      Many would argue that the active search for images of someone younger than oneself is equally as vile, as this creates a market for those that would abuse for distribution.

      I for one think it is wise to reflect on the fact that my own case is no where near as bad as the legal document makes it seem.

      In understanding this, I apply this line of thought… If there is one, there are four. If there are four, then there are more.

      Think not, “I am better than he.” Instead think, “is it right to judge him myself?”