Related posts

Notify of
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Not sure I have taken the exact test described, but I have taken a visual reaction test. What the article does not mention is the clinician who sets up the test or maybe even the directions ask the test taker to imagine wanting to do something sexual with the people depicted.

First of all none of the people are doing anything suggestive (which is largely a subjective determination anyway), but whatever, try to imagine non sexual images as having sexual context. Second just because someone might be more interested in an one image over another doesn’t mean their interest is sexual. Yet because these tests are measured through a biased perspective of course the results will be skewed

I recently took the Abel Assessment during an evaluation for a Certificate of Rehabilitation. It wasn’t as bad as I thought it’d be. I think it took me all of ten minutes to complete the assessment. Don’t understand why it took the guy in the article almost two hours — maybe because there is an underlining problem. I was found to not have a sexual attraction to children, which I was surely confident about going in. The first round of pictures the Dr. actually sits in with you as you take the test. The Dr. will claim this is a “practice round”. The images that pop-up on screen are not sexual in the least bit; just random pictures of kids, middle-aged guys, and women along with some mid to late teens. Most are in bathing suits and a few of them are just pictures of inanimate objects like bras and panties lying on the floor. The Dr. will then ask you to imagine yourself in the room with the individual in the image and rate your sexual interest on a scale of 1 to 7. The number “1” being genuine disgust and “7” representing a high sexual interest. Conversely, the number “4” registers as a neutral number, meaning no disgust, no interest. Being that I’m filing my CoR in LA County, I’m fairly confident I won’t have to register come my birthday at the end of the year. From everywhere I’ve read judges in LA County have a higher rate of granting CoR’s than anywhere else. My attorney suggests I make the appointment anyway, and go in with a big smile on my face and politely hand them the paperwork that says I no longer have to register. He claims it’ll be therapeutic.

I think it’s absolutely ridiculous that anyone would think, let alone believe that you can tell the thoughts in the deepest recesses of an individuals mind by how long they look at a picture.

It’s highly disturbing that the courts rely on this unproven trash science instead of taking the time to review and base their judgments on scholarly opinions and empirical fact’s/evidence.

I’m glad I was never subjected to this witch doctor voodoo garbage, as I have an extremely low tolerance for things I instinctively know to be BS. I’m sure my attitude would have earned me some hard time. As things turned out I spent 5 days in jail, and that was enough BS for me for a very long time.

Unfortunately, I soon found that the mere fact that I was charged with a “sex” crime (even though there was no sex-no other human being involved) that BS would become a living, breathing part of the rest of my life because the courts believe in this kind witch doctor trash.

There is one good thing about the Able Assessment, and that is that it’s not physically intrusive and humiliating like the plethysmograph. And that is the only good thing I have to say about anyone or any test that claims to be able to tell what a person thinks; that’s impossible.

Gene Abel is the same quack that created the “117 victims” myth. See: Derek Logue’s ONCE FALLEN, Myth# 6, third one down. And thank you Derek for your website. Q, your comment is spot on !!

I should explain the Plythismograph in detail for anyone who hasn’t had one: Using my case: every 90 days for first year outpatient program. $75.00 each time. Then semi annually until graduation. Alone in a small room.The flexible ring, you put it on yourself. It’s just a circular pressure sensor. The therapist is outside the room, but he watches you through a small window.

Room darkened. Then slide projector. Only 6-7 slides. They come from confiscated CP provided to the program by local law enforcement. Leaves each slide on for about one minute. Therapist watches you to make sure you don’t close your eyes, and are looking at the picture. Slides get increasingly graphic. Then part one is done.

Second part: No more slides, on to the listening part. Still wearing the ring. Three fictitious plays, each one is about 5 minutes long. The last one is violent.

The ring picks up even the slightest change. It picks up arousal even before you realize it. Because the program is coming at you weekly there many tools employed, many factors. The Plythismograph is just one factor.

I’m not saying I’m for or against it. At that time I just wanted all the therapy I could get. I never wanted to ever molest again. That was 30 years ago. But I’ll never forget that god dammed room.

Psychology: The alchemy of the 20th century and beyond.

Man i would be go to hell if I would sit there and let them make me look at cp. Screw that I don’t want to see that disgusting crap there’s no way I would met them force me to veiw it either. Sorry to people who do get off on that cp crap but its disgusting to me and I wouldn’t tolorate it.

I wouldn’t mind seeing our entire state Senate and Assembly contingent required to take the Abel Assessment and P-graph prior to assuming office following each future election. The public might find the results very interesting to say the least. I’m guessing that more than one representative would decline or create a bill to cease the administration of those tests due to the potential for “false readings”.

I think the following statement describes our present scientific ability, or lack of, to predict what human beings will do: “…MIT Linguist Noam Chomsky once said: ‘If we can’t explain why a cockroach decides to turn left, how can we explain why a human being decides to do something.'” — Smithsonian Magazine, July-August 2015, p.114.
It is good article about the difficulty of understanding even a simple fish brain that has 6000 time less neurons than a human brain (Ibid, p. 112.)