So I've been staring at this for... awhile. And I keep trying to figure out two things:
1) Where I managed to inadvertently say that the LW shouldn't investigate -- I absolutely agree that the LW needs to know what's going on for the sake of the child.
2) How I can manage to prove that people into BDSM are no more likely to be sexual abusers, of children or anyone else, than anyone else is. It's an assumption that in my experience is widespread, untrue, and dangerous.
But, or maybe and, I agree that if the LW is smart, and wants an accurate answer, they will ask both the son and the sister without reference to the sister's BDSM past.
no subject
So I've been staring at this for... awhile. And I keep trying to figure out two things:
1) Where I managed to inadvertently say that the LW shouldn't investigate -- I absolutely agree that the LW needs to know what's going on for the sake of the child.
2) How I can manage to prove that people into BDSM are no more likely to be sexual abusers, of children or anyone else, than anyone else is. It's an assumption that in my experience is widespread, untrue, and dangerous.
But, or maybe and, I agree that if the LW is smart, and wants an accurate answer, they will ask both the son and the sister without reference to the sister's BDSM past.