Senators Introduce a Bill to Fix How We Compensate Victims of Child Pornography. It’s a Good Start.

What Women Really Think
May 7 2014 12:07 PM

Senators Introduce a Bill to Fix How We Compensate Victims of Child Pornography. It’s a Good Start.

482349547-sen-orrin-hatch-talks-with-reporters-on-his-way-to-the
Orrin Hatch, one of three senators who introduced legislation that would determine how victims of child pornography are compensated.

Photo by T.J. Kirkpatrick/Getty Images

How much should people who download child pornography pay the victims who were abused to make the images? Those who collect child pornography drive the market for it, and their lurking presence can make victims fear that someone they meet at a party or on the job may have seen them being raped or molested. It’s a fear that makes the harm from the initial abuse ongoing, and that can be traumatic and excruciating, as two women who were victims, at the ages of 8 and 9, described to me.

But apportioning responsibility for this kind of collective harm is tricky. If hundreds of thousands of people have downloaded an image and one defendant is caught with it, how much of the victim’s damages should he be held responsible for? Last month, the Supreme Court struggled with that question in trying to interpret part of the Violence Against Women Act, which provides for restitution for victims of sex crimes but didn’t really anticipate the problem of collective harm that child pornography causes. The court’s ruling effectively sent Congress back to the drawing board.

Advertisement

And, hey, in less than a month Congress is responding. Sens. Orrin Hatch, Charles Schumer, and Rob Portman are introducing a bill that would explicitly adopt an “aggregate causation standard to address the unique crime of child pornography and the unique harms caused by child pornography.” Here’s what that means: Victims can receive restitution to cover therapy and other medical expenses, lost income and child care, and attorneys’ fees. Once a judge has determined the full amount of the damages—which can easily run into the millions, calculated over a lifetime—the judge can order one defendant (a person who has viewed the victim in child pornography) to pay either the whole thing or at least an amount between $25,000 and $250,000, depending on the severity of the offense. No victim gets to recover more than the maximum amount of her damages. Every defendant who pays can sue other defendants convicted for crimes involving the same victim, so that they too will have to chip in.

“Amy,” the name used by the victim whose case went to the Supreme Court, supports this bill. It also looks good to me. I would like to see the bill paired with a victim’s compensation fund, so that each victim doesn’t have to seek restitution individually. (Prosecutors would ask for restitution after a conviction, and the money would go into the fund instead of to an individual victim.) Also, importantly, it’s time for Congress to take on a far less popular issue: sentencing reform for child pornography defendants. They often face such severe sentences that judges and the federal Sentencing Commission think the sentencing guidelines for these crimes are deeply flawed. Money can make a real difference for women like Amy as they rebuild their lives. But if we are going to ask the people who contributed to exploiting them to pay up, let’s also recognize that sending them to prison for many years is too harsh and a waste of a different source of money—our taxes.

Emily Bazelon was a Slate senior editor from 2005 to 2014. She is the author of Sticks and Stones.

TODAY IN SLATE

Foreigners

More Than Scottish Pride

Scotland’s referendum isn’t about nationalism. It’s about a system that failed, and a new generation looking to take a chance on itself. 

What Charles Barkley Gets Wrong About Corporal Punishment and Black Culture

Why Greenland’s “Dark Snow” Should Worry You

Three Talented Actresses in Three Terrible New Shows

Why Do Some People See the Virgin Mary in Grilled Cheese?

The science that explains the human need to find meaning in coincidences.

Jurisprudence

Happy Constitution Day!

Too bad it’s almost certainly unconstitutional.

Is It Worth Paying Full Price for the iPhone 6 to Keep Your Unlimited Data Plan? We Crunch the Numbers.

What to Do if You Literally Get a Bug in Your Ear

  News & Politics
Weigel
Sept. 16 2014 7:03 PM Kansas Secretary of State Loses Battle to Protect Senator From Tough Race
  Business
Moneybox
Sept. 16 2014 4:16 PM The iPhone 6 Marks a Fresh Chance for Wireless Carriers to Kill Your Unlimited Data
  Life
The Eye
Sept. 16 2014 12:20 PM These Outdoor Cat Shelters Have More Style Than the Average Home
  Double X
The XX Factor
Sept. 15 2014 3:31 PM My Year As an Abortion Doula
  Slate Plus
Slate Plus Video
Sept. 16 2014 2:06 PM A Farewell From Emily Bazelon The former senior editor talks about her very first Slate pitch and says goodbye to the magazine.
  Arts
Brow Beat
Sept. 16 2014 8:43 PM This 17-Minute Tribute to David Fincher Is the Perfect Preparation for Gone Girl
  Technology
Future Tense
Sept. 16 2014 6:40 PM This iPhone 6 Feature Will Change Weather Forecasting
  Health & Science
Medical Examiner
Sept. 16 2014 11:46 PM The Scariest Campfire Story More horrifying than bears, snakes, or hook-handed killers.
  Sports
Sports Nut
Sept. 15 2014 9:05 PM Giving Up on Goodell How the NFL lost the trust of its most loyal reporters.