Lawrence, sorry, I obviously was not clear enough.
In New York State, and other places, persons who have been found to be
legally incompetent to make their own decisions can also be found to be
incompetent to make decisions regarding their own sexual behavior. Persons
are given an assessment and based on that assesment are deemed consenting,
partially consenting, or incompetent to consent. This is done (in theory)
with the intention of protection, not harm.
A person who is found consenting will not be interfered with in regards to
their sexual behavior. A person who is found to be partially consenting may
have specific areas of freedom or lack of. A person found to be incompetent
will have (on paper) no freedom to consent to any sexual behavior
what-so-ever.
My research does not focus on the the policy itself, but instead on the
accuracy and if accurate the source of tested incompetence.
I am working at present with six adults in their 40s who have been
determined to be sexually incompetent and yet have expressed an interest in
sexual behavior of some sort.
First I tested them. They all failed the test. But why did they fail? Is
it because of the testing instrument? Cognitive Incapacity? Or lack of
access to the information?
So far I have found the testing instrument to be woefully inadequate. For
example:
1. The use of line drawings to identify body parts is not adequate. The use
of photographs is only marginally better. Only touching/pointing to a body
part on the person seems to accurately access knowledge.
2. In a testing situation it is difficult to retrieve information that you
do not use on demand. When the portions of the test failed were given one
week later all persons were able to answer questions they had no answer to
before.
3. Very few wrong answers were given. The information was known or unknown.
I have found everyone eager to acquire sexual knowledge and capable of
doing so in a group dynamic, albeit, what was initially planned to be
taught in one session has taken three sessions.
Two of the six are being seen individually in addition to in the group. 1.
Because of communication issues - her touch talker needs weekly adjustments
so she can fully participate in the group. 2. One man is very shy and is
being given opportunity to explore some of the issues raised 1:1.
The most important result of this research for the people I am working with
would be if at the end they can be retested and found to be competent to
consent. I of course have hopes of accomplishing much more.
Susan Fitzmaurice
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|