The civil commitment of sexually violent predators (SVPs) is designed to protect society’s vulnerable from a group of perverts and monsters. What could be wrong with this? Only everything. Full Article
Related posts
-
Civil Commitment and the Criminalization of Homelessness
Source: petrieflom.law.harvard.edu 10/24/25 In July, President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order titled “Ending Crime and... -
Iowa Ignores Civil Commitment Concerns
Source: yahoo.com 7/27/25 Two years have passed since families and advocates of incarcerated individuals demanded to... -
They Served Their Time. But They May Still Die in State Custody.
Source: theappeal.org 4/21/25 In half the country, sex offense civil commitment incarcerates people after they complete...

The into is harsh but its irony is later summed up nicely:
“The SVP idea sets up the view that sexual violence, and that people who engage in it, are extreme outliers who need unusual treatment. Ironically, the law’s focus on “predators,” rather than on the pervasiveness of sexual violence and its causes, winds up both excessively stigmatizing and criminalizing some people – as featured in Galen Baughman’s essay – and allowing us to avoid some important but uncomfortable issues about why sexual violence is so common.”
It is refreshing and welcome to know there are objective contributors that will help mitigate some of the unfettered damage done by typical alarmist articles.
Good points! Legislators should stop hiding behind namby-pamby, comfortable words. It’s not civil commitment; it is Preventative Detention.