he not be allowed to see his children until a reputable sexual offender treatment therapist recommends such contact recommence. Y. Did the Juvenile Court’s Order that the Father Obtain the Recommendation of a Reputable Sexual Offender Treatment Therapist as a Condition of Contact with His Children Violate the Father’s Fifth Amendment Right Against Self-Incrimination? In the dispositional order from which this appeal was taken, the juvenile court stated it would “require sexual offender treatment before [Earl II] could re-enter the family home.” The court made the following order concerning Earl II’s contact with his children: [Earl II] shall have no contact whatsoever with any of his children from the date of this order until further court order. The Court will reconsider 16 (1996) (<HOLDING>). We think the case before us is quite similar
holding that courtordered examinations of those defendants who plead insanity and the admission of this examination is not an infringement of the defendants fifth amendment rights holding state had violated the defendants fifth amendment rights and consequently was prohibited from using any of the information revealed during courtordered treatment program in later separate criminal prosecution holding that rights in a government benefits program were not vested property for purposes of the takings clause of the fifth amendment holding defendants fifth amendment rights had been violated when his probation was revoked based on his failure to complete a sexual treatment program that required incriminating admissions holding that a defendants fifth amendment rights were violated when an interpreter was withdrawn by the court