 
Sexual Abuse Legislation: A Proposed Strategy For Reform
|
By David Mandel
Published on Thursday, April 30, 2009 -
COMMENTS (9)
|
|
There is legislation pending to extend the statute of limitations on reporting and prosecuting child molesters. There is general agreement this change in the law would be good. Victims of child molestation, even older adolescents, are often not ready to disclose or confront their offenders until years later.
A second piece of legislation to open a “window” of one year permitting victims, even those molested decades ago, to file civil lawsuits against molesters or the institutions that employed them has drawn both strong support and strong opposition. As is often the case, victims’ advocates will favor the proposed legislation while institutional systems may oppose it.
Victims’ advocates are favoring the Markey bill, which includes this window. The Catholic church and some groups representing yeshiva institutions favor the Lopez bill, which extends the statute but has no window.
It is noted that Assemblyman Dov Hikind would like to work on a compromise position.
Several victims who have spoken publicly of their ordeals, along with a victim advocacy group, have been prominent in pushing for the passage of the window. This advocacy is important and well intentioned. But to express it in a way that if you’re not in support of the window you’re not supporting victims of sexual abuse is misguided, as it undermines our communities’ ability to have an open, honest discussion about child abuse.
The passage of such a window provision in California is often cited as a case in point by both sides, those in favor and opposed. In that instance, the legislation led to the disclosure and reporting of several hundred pedophiles in California. This was important and no doubt led to untold hundreds (and thousands) of potential victims not being molested. It also led to hundreds of lawsuits, most notably against the Catholic church, which eventually cost them hundreds of millions in settlements.
It is this issue of potential lawsuits that is pitting institutions against victims’ advocates. On all other issues, there is general agreement.
In a now infamous phrase, former President George W. Bush said to the world, concerning Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, that “you’re either with us or against us.” But even he came to appreciate it was more complicated than drawing a line in the sand. People can at times be supportive of a position, but when asked to give their “all or nothing,” many defer. It is not a good way to negotiate.
For this reason, Assemblyman Dov Hikind is correct in seeking a compromise.
I offer the following suggestions that may be incorporated and serve the best interests of all:
1) Victims of child molestation have consistently stated they want the perpetrator to be accountable, to take responsibility and acknowledge his actions. Victims want the world to know it was the perpetrators’ fault, not their own. Victims have expressed this as an important aspect of enabling them to move on with their lives. They generally don’t speak of revenge, but of goodness and responsibility.
Open a one-year window for perpetrators to disclose their acts that were committed and that exceed the criminal statute of limitations. Provide them amnesty from future civil suits.
The gain here is to identify as yet unknown perpetrators and place them under a watchful eye, with required risk assessment, treatment, and some form of probation and monitoring.
Those perpetrators who do not come forward would be subject to (potential) future civil claims—stated another way, a window.
2) Institutions (churches, day schools, yeshivas) are understandably concerned they will be inundated with lawsuits. The Catholic church’s exposure in California and Boston forced them to sell property and likely close some schools.
Schools may be sued for acts committed by their staff that they may have been completely unaware of. That of course is not a consolation to the victim, who may understandably seek recourse. Nevertheless, the school’s financial liability may be great.
If a school is found liable in even one lawsuit requiring them to pay a sum in the millions that exceeds their liability insurance, they may be forced into bankruptcy. How can a school protect itself in an insurance claim from 25 years ago or more, when insurance coverage may have been wholly different? How does that serve the best interests of their student body, parents, and community? In the end, who wins and who loses?
Instead of allowing unlimited lawsuits, we can limit them to reasonable amounts. We can cap the lawsuits, for example, not to exceed a $500,000 payout, and cap the contingency fee by attorneys to 10 percent.
There is a tendency by attorneys to throw out a huge number in a lawsuit, in the tens or hundreds of millions. This is what is creating a backlash against the window provision.
3) Insurance companies have generally stayed on the sidelines, not wanting to be involved in any aspect. They need to be brought in, even as unwilling partners.
Many victims avoid treatment, fearing they will get a diagnosis on their insurance that will “label” them and further their stigmatization. This is true of offenders, as well; hence they may avoid seeking treatment.
Further, insurance companies have in the main refused to provide coverage for treatment of sexual abuse. This is similar to the insurance industry a decade ago choosing to significantly raise liability premiums for physicians, thus effectively reducing the number of ob/gyn, anesthesiologists, and other specialists. Victims’ advocates should lobby the insurance industry to provide coverage, thus broadening the entry of professionals into this complex field of work.
The lack of insurance coverage prevents many victims from obtaining good treatment. Aside from the 40 million uninsured Americans, countless people with insurance have only limited mental-health coverage. Treatment for victims of sexual abuse often requires the services of clinical professionals with specialized training and may last one or several years. Evaluation and treatment of pedophiles also requires highly specialized work and generally lasts two to three years.
Inadequate insurance coverage is a serious obstacle to properly supervising child molesters who want help and thereby protecting the public.
Victims’ advocates should place this in their sights. This is a critical issue, and success can be had. Advocates for infertility treatment successfully lobbied two years ago to require the insurance industry to include payment for fertility treatment. These often cost $10,000–$20,000 per course of treatment. It is common for many couples to go through multiple treatment cycles over several years.
4) Through our work over many decades at Ohel with victims, and in consultations with community groups throughout the country, the issue of a victims’ fund arises.
Compensation funds exist in many local governments for crime victims. This should be expanded to include victims of sexual abuse. Such compensation would further encourage victims who come forward and offer concrete validation for their pain and suffering.
Two victims now in their forties have repeatedly stated to me this is their primary interest. They, as many others, will not speak out, because of their personal shame and privacy.
A victims’ fund needs to be established especially for those lacking insurance, as well as others who do not want these diagnostic categories listed in their insurance history.
With an air of compromise and deliberations, it is possible that some institutional groups would consider establishing such a fund and to initiate a process of reconciliation between victims and institutions.
Our work at Ohel has brought us into contact with significant numbers of victims of sexual abuse, as well as perpetrators. This is one of the most complex areas of work in the field of mental health.
In the last ten years, OHEL has conducted numerous seminars in communities throughout the country on prevention and response to sexual abuse. Invariably, at every such gathering at least one individual would privately disclose their experience as a victim some ten, twenty, even thirty years earlier or more. It is fair to say that sexual abuse ranks very high on the list of secrets and memories not forgotten.
Many victims have said that by listening to tapes by prominent rabbanim and community leaders speaking out on this issue and by attending such seminars they have been empowered.
There are few issues in life that are black and white, even though we would like them to be. Many more are the shades of gray.
These suggestions could move our system another step toward protecting our children, providing victims with renewed strength and support, and putting perpetrators on notice that with every passing day we will shut them down.
David Mandel is chief executive officer of OHEL Children’s Home and Family Services in New York City. He can be contacted at dm@ohelfamily.org.
Dear Ms. Markey:
The Rabbinical Council of America represents more than 1,000 modern and centrist orthodox rabbis. We are the rabbinic arm of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.
We support Bill No. A.02596, sponsored by you, which would extend the civil and criminal statutes of limitations for sex abuse victims.
Child sex abuse is a horrendous crime. Victims often bear the scars for entire lifetimes. They are at higher risk for clinical depression, substance abuse, and suicide.
Many victims are overcome by feelings of confusion, shame, and embarrassment. As children and teens, they are psychologically and emotionally unable to deal with the court system. Only later, as adults, and often with therapy, do they feel comfortable in working with the judicial system. Unfortunately, arbitrary statutes of limitations stand in their way.
Jewish law and tradition recognize the need for our justice system to protect the most vulnerable among us. Lowering the statute of limitations bar for child sex abuse victims would serve that purpose. Sexual predators are often recidivists and need to be incarcerated, and classified as convicted sex offenders, in order to assure public safety. Sex abuse victims deserve to be fairly compensated for their grievous injuries. Your bill will assure these laudatory goals.
Sincerely yours,
Rabbi Basil Herring
Executive Vice-President
Dear Mr. Weisenberg:
The Rabbinical Council of America represents more than 1,000 modern and centrist orthodox rabbis. We are the rabbinic arm of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.
We commend you for introducing Bill No. A.06656 on March 11, 2009, together with Assembly Member Dov Hikind and 20 additional co-sponsors. This Bill, if it becomes law, will legally mandate the fingerprinting and criminal history background checks of all prospective nonpublic school employees.
The RCA is strongly committed to the safety of the approximately one-half million children who attend religious and private schools in New York State, including 100,000 yeshiva school children. In 2005 and 2007, at our annual Conventions, we enacted Resolutions endorsing background checks for all school employees. The Resolutions can be viewed on our web site.
We strongly support passage of Bill No. A.06656. Fingerprinting and background checks are required for all public school employees. Nonpublic school children are entitled to the same legal protection.
This bill is a critical first step towards assuring the safety of nonpublic school children. We look forward to working with you and your colleagues on additional legislation that will further enhance the security of religious and private school children.
Sincerely yours,
Rabbi Basil Herring
Executive Vice-President ♦
1 - Posted on 4/30/2009 1:43:20 PM
|
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS SHOULD DO MORE TO PROTECT CHILDREN
by Sister Maureen Paul Turlish, Victims' Advocate
It is outrageous to read that the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Jewish Community are pooling their resources, not to better protect children and give all victim/survivors of childhood sexual abuse access to justice, but rather to keep inadequate and discriminatory laws on the books which give more protection to sexual predators than to their victims.
Such an action certainly fails the test of morality!
The sexual abuse of a minor is an egregious sin, a human tragedy and a major social problem that demands comprehensive solutions but, most importantly, it is a crime committed against the innocent.
It has been accurately described by Cardinal William Keeler, the former archbishop of Baltimore, Maryland, as murder of the soul and the egregious nature of such crimes demands that there should be no statutes of limitation, period.
Childhood sexual abuse is a major epidemic going on in our country, a pandemic if one considers it in its worldwide proportions so it is hard to believe, in light of recent statements in this newspaper, that we continue to have churchmen representing various religious denominations who actually oppose the removal of statutes of limitation in regard to the sexual abuse of children.
It is unconscionable that any synogogue, church or sect would hold fast to a belief that sexual predators and abusers should not be held accountable along with their enablers and that they would support the present accommodation in law that gives more protection to individuals who have been accused of the sexual abuse of children than to the victims themselves.
Window legislation, as it relates to civil statutes, is the single most important factor in holding sexual predators and any enabling institutions or individuals, if they exist, accountable whether they are religious denominations, hospitals, schools or scouts.
In the case of New York, a one year civil window just to gain access to the courts is the barest of minimums and yet religious leaders oppose it. How can the Catholic dioceses of New York state deny the rightfulness of extending statutes of limitation in regard to the protection of children?
This is not a matter belonging to what our church calls the "deposit of faith," and leaving aside the matter of mortal sin for the moment, the sexual abuse of children is a matter of criminal behavior, not to be relegated to the venial status of a lesser weakness.
On the basis of what is known today about the obstacles impeding a victim's ability in coming forward, present laws covering the sexual abuse of children are totally inadequate.
Why isn't the archdiocese distributing postcards for the members of the Catholic community to sign and send to their legislators in Albany to support the complete removal of statutes of limitation going forward in regard to the sexual abuse of children, criminally and civilly?
Why isn't the New York Catholic Conference lobbying to protect children as would befit the Holy See's signatory status to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child?
Window legislation is not "anti" any particular religion or institution but it is anti-rapist and child molester. It forces records, if they exist and have not been destroyed, to be made available in a court of justice and hopefully into the public venue as well.
We know that pedophiles, rapists, molesters and child abusers come from all walks of life and that the sexual abuse of children happens primarily in the home so it is patently unconscionable for religious denominations and their leadership to protect and enable sexual predators by refusing to support changes in the laws that would hold both the perpetrators and their enablers accountable.
No child ever deserves to be raped, sodomized, molested, abused or trafficked across state lines or international borders for purposes of sexual exploitation.
Such acts, especially when committed by a parent, family member, doctor, teacher, trusted minister, rabbi, imam or priest are crimes and the perpetrators should be treated as the criminals they are.
The Orthodox Jews and the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church should be coming together to better protect our children from these vicious individuals and those who may have protected them.
Is it about money?
The outrageous claim that Assemblywoman Margaret M. Markey's bill A2596, known as the Child Victims Act, is "designed to bankrupt the Catholic Church," as claimed by Dennis Poust, a spokesman for the New York State Catholic Conference is simply beyond the pale.
Such disinformation promulgated by the institutional church is as disingenuous as it is outrageous.
One needs to keep in mind that in 2007 the Archdiocese of Los Angeles agreed to a 660 million dollar settlement, the church's largest payout to victim/survivors of clergy sexual abuse while also paying millions of dollars to their own lawyers, lobbyists and to the California Catholic Conference to oppose settling.
At the same time the archdiocese built and paid for a magnificent new cathedral that any city in the world would be proud to showcase and they did it without ever mentioning bankruptcy.
In the New Testament Gospel of St. Matthew, Jesus says, "whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea," (18:16).
Where is it found that Jesus said justice for a child was dependent on the price tag?
Nowhere!
Neither in the Old Testament nor in the New Testament.
No, the real issue is not money.
The real issue was and still is about the exercise of power and the abuse of that power no matter the religious denominations concerned.
The Catholic bishops of the United States, for example, promised accountability and transparency in 2002 but have they been conscientious in delivering on that promise?
Investigations and grand jury reports in a number of major jurisdictions have shown that the answer is a resounding "No."
Even the Archdiocese of Los Angeles has yet to release priests' files which were part of their 2007 settlement and was ordered by the courts.
In all good conscience, I would strongly encourage our brothers and sisters of the Jewish faith along with the faithful Catholics of the Archdiocese of New York, and indeed all the good and decent people of the state of New York to support criminal and civil laws that are as strong as possible in holding accountable the sexual predators of our children and any individuals or institutions who were complicit in their protection.
The proposed New York legislation (A2596 and S2568) sponsored by Assemblywoman Margaret M. Markey, D-Queens and Senator Tom Duane, D-Manhattan, is both comprehensive and a solution that will go far to help reduce childhood sexual abuse.
__________________
Sister Turlish is a Delaware educator and victims' advocate who testified before the Delaware Senate and House Judiciary Committees in support of Delaware's 2007 Child Victims Law. She is on the National Representative Council of Voice of the Faithful and on the Board of Directors for the Delaware Association for Children of Alcoholics.
E-mail Sister Maureen Paul Turlish at maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com.
|
|
by Sister Maureen Paul Turlish |
New Castle, Delaware |
|
2 - Posted on 4/30/2009 6:16:47 PM
|
Sister Maureen's shrill and patently dishonest comments aside, there is much room for compromise that will protect children from abuse and facilitate justice. End the criminal statutes of limitation for perpetrators of abuse. Criminal defendants enjoy many guarantees of due process and the state must overcome a heavy burden to achieve a conviction. Extend the civil statute of limitation to age 28, for actions against both perpetrators and responsible third parties (institutions, employers) who knew about the perpetrators' abuses but did nothing. All extensions of statutes of limitation must apply to all perpetrators and all institutions that harbored perpetrators--including public school teachers and public schools. Justice means justice for all. As it stands right now, a child who has the double misfortune of being abused by a public school teacher only has a very short and draconian window (usually 180 days) to provide notice of the abuse, or else is barred from seeking redress. All victims must have equal access to the law to seek full redress under the law. Victims of public school teachers must be permitted to recover the same amount as victims of other perpetrators, rather than the very limited sums afforded victims of public school teachers. There are some horrific ironies in this tragedy. One, many more children are abused by public school teachers than employees of private institutions, yet these victims have only a very short period of time to report the abuse, and then are severely limited in the monetary recovery they may receive. Two, the very plaintiffs' attorneys who beat their breasts on the courthouse steps and claim to advocate on behalf of sexual abuse victims won't even represent a victim of a public school teacher's sexual abuse because their "take" isn't enough. (So much for the crockodile tears shed by such attorneys purportedly on behalf of sexual abuse victims) Three, at every opportunity that self-proclaimed victims advocates have had to partner with religious leaders to support legislation to extend true justice to all victims of sexual abuse, they have balked. Why? Because there is more interest in destroying target institutions than eradicating sexual abuse of children. Why? Because the perception is that truly just legislation that applies to all aspects of society is too hard to enact. Why? Because that's not where the money is. Window legislation only provides the illusion of justice. Where is Sister Maureen's angry, righteous indignatino about these injustices? In the current environment, where self-proclaimed abuse advocates loudly proclaim that ALL allegations of childhood sexual abuse are always true, it is nearly impossible for an institution to prove its innocence. If all allegations are true, and if all employers always know about the abuse, then all institutions and employers are always guilty, right? The truth is that sexual abuse takes place behind closed doors. Victims of childhood sexual abuse are plagued by shame, guilt, self-blame, etc. Thus, they typically don't report the abuse for many, many years. Perpetrators do not admit their abuse. Often, perpetrators are charming, likeable, gregarious extroverts (that's how they attract their victims and "groom" their families), the very people the community never suspected would commit such a heinous crime. Victims don't come forward for decades and, yet, somehow institutions are supposed to intuit that an employee or agent was committing abuse. When an alleged perpetrator has been dead for decades, and there is no record of his abuses in the files of an institution, how is that institution supposed to defend itself against allegations that it "knew" of its deceased employee's abuses...especially in a community in which so-called victims advocates have "groomed" the people in the community to believe that all allegations of abuse are true. Compromise on the window. Maybe it only opens for claims that are no more than 25 or 30 years old. Maybe, similar to California (though enforced more honestly than in California), a claimant must satisfy a burden of proof that an institution knew of an employee's abuses before he may avail himself of the window against the institution. Place limits on total verdict awards--say $500,000. If it truly is not about money, then this should be very appealing to victims advocates, as more victims can realize more recoveries rather than if only a few cliamants are able to bankrupt an institution and tap out their insurance limits. All self-righteous outrage aside, Sister Maureen knows full well that--although the overwhelming majority of victims are abused within the family--there is almost no appetite by the self-proclaimed advocates to minister to those poor children, because there's no money in it. Insurers won't cover it, and rarely are there sufficient assets to adequately reward a victim. Contrary to Sister Maureen's false rants, the best way to prevent my children from being abused is to get perpetrators off the streets through criminal convictions, not by facilitating a system in which deep pockets are targeted for a person's crimes--even when they knew nothing of it. If an institution knew of abuse but did nothing--throw the book at it. If not, then don't. Sexual predators with uncontrollable perverse sexual urges are not deterred by unlimited civil statutes of limitation that target former employers. Innocent institutions and their insurers who are "hit" with enormous awards (of which plaintiffs' attorneys take 40%--and sometimes now 50%) has no deterrent effect. There is no accountability in that equation either. Another horrific irony of this tragedy--plaintiffs' attorneys and self-proclaimed victims advocates have manipulated victims to pursue paths that benefit the attorneys and "advocates"--paths that ensure a big financial recovery for the attorneys. Meanwhile, the actual perpetrators themselves--from whom victims need accountablity--are rarely even an afterthought. Wow! With "advocates" like that, who needs detractors. Sister Maureen, what is unconscionable to me is that you have abused your position to stroke your ego and feed your narcissistic need to be the "hero" at the expense of the very constituency you are charged to protect and assist. You attribute every imaginable malicious intent to people and institutions who--in large measure--are not guilty of the things you accuse them of...and you know it. Cardinal Keeler and you are terribly wrong. There can be no "murder" of the soul. You should be using your position to help victims see God's love for them. The notion that the perverse actions of a sexual predator could "murder" a victim's soul is despicable. You should be helping these people to see that, even in their darkest hours of abuse, God was with them, that they are not damaged goods, that God is not some venal and incompetent god whose souls are so fragile that victims of abuse are somehow dead inside. You and Cardinal Keeler are telling victims of sexual abuse that our one pure connection to the Divine has been "murdered" by the despicable actions of predators. Where is the justice in that? Where is the healing in that? Where is the closure in that? They may feel like the walking dead, but your job is to help them see that it is not true. Merely pointing out the obvious--that childhood sexual abuse is a social blight and a disgusting and immoral depravity--does not lead to your conclusions that all churches should support a system of illusory justice to line the pockets of attorneys, bankrupt innocent instititutions and leave abuse victims with the hollow "victory" of a mere fraction of a large award. Sister Maureen, if you want to help, work for justice. If you want to help, help get perpetrators off the streets--stop making this about extracting as much money as possible from institutions that were unaware of an employee's abuses. Limit plaintiffs' attorneys' to 10% contingencies on such cases, and I think you will see just how truly "committed" these people are to helping abuse victims. Some of the bishops--like Law, like Mahoney and some others--have done a terrible job, but many others have done a superlative job of handling this crisis and reaching out to bring healing to victims. But, when your measuring stick of justice is all about how wide the coffers will open, you do not have eyes to see or ears to hear true justice. Your misguided, self-righteous anger has blinded you to true justice. You are so focused on bringing down institutions that you "know" are guilty, that you have no time for measures that would bring healing and justice to victims. That's sad.
|
|
by Michael |
Charlotte |
|
3 - Posted on 4/30/2009 9:10:51 PM
|
All it takes is one or two days of reading of daily vetted & verified reporting at: www.bishop-accountability.org
/abusetracker TO KNOW the Roman Catholic Church is a massive unpunished pedophile cult, that has totally gamed the civil and criminal rule of law, as well as statute of limitations, and therefore massive RICO, and strengthen child protection laws, and penalties, are required.
The USCCB (Unremoved Sexual Criminal Cabal Bishops) and Roman "La Cosa Nostra" Curia Remain Practicing the Credo & Motto of ISAIAH 28:15!
THE SOLUTION UNTIL THE LAW & PROSECUTIONS CATCH UP TO THE OVERTLY GUILTY? "Stop Donating Laity" as St. Peter Damien correctly asserted.
St. Paul (Saul Of Tarsus) to the Ephesians, 5:11 says: "Do not deal in fruitless deeds of darkness, but expose them!"
Edmund Burke reminds each of us: "The only condition for the triumph of evil is for good men (or women) to do nothing!"
Shalom, Fiat Lux, & Veritas!
Albino Luciani,
MURDERED POPE
|
|
by Albino Luciani |
Papal Crypt, Holy See |
|
4 - Posted on 5/1/2009 6:05:18 AM
|
SEX, LIES & SEALED RECORDS IN FORT WORTH
Trove of documents sheds more light on sinister world of pedophile priests
Sunday, December 3, 2006
By BROOKS EGERTON / The Dallas Morning News
For 18 years, Richard Sipe belonged to the brotherhood of Catholic priests. For the last 14, he has been helping their victims across America seek redress from men like Fort Worth Bishop Joseph Delaney – men who, as last week's unsealing of court records showed, have deceived their flocks and protected predators.
Time and again, people ask Mr. Sipe why moral leaders would do these things. The San Diego-area researcher explains with a little story, about a priest who challenged a bishop for denying knowledge of a sexual abuse case.
"Look, Father," the bishop responded, "I only lie when I have to."
He "has to," Mr. Sipe says, if he thinks it will protect the church's good name. And many shepherds equate "church" with themselves, not their sheep.
"Clerical narcissism," Mary Gail Frawley-O'Dea calls it.
"They call each other 'your excellency' and 'your eminence,' and they're serious about it," says the Charlotte, N.C., psychologist, who treats sex-crime victims and has researched the Catholic hierarchy extensively. "They really are royalty. Truth is what they say it is."
These and other students of the Catholic Church's ongoing clergy abuse crisis see much familiar in the revelations about the Fort Worth Catholic Diocese, which resulted from a 19-month legal battle waged by The Dallas Morning News and the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
The material documents complaints of depravity against seven priests who served for years under the late Bishop Delaney: enticing little girls with candy and older boys with booze; fondling kids as they prepared for first communion; masturbating them behind the altar; abusing them with enemas; attempting rape; raping. The bishop and his aides excused much of it away, helping molesters stay in ministry and hiding it all from police.
The records build on findings that date to 1998, when The News reported that Bishop Delaney had hired two priests with histories of questionable conduct with boys in other states. He retained them after they were convicted of crimes there – the first for contributing to a minor's delinquency, the second for stealing from a parish and using some proceeds on tropical vacations with boys.
Bishop Delaney told a judge that the first priest would not work again with boys, but he did. The Rev. Thomas Teczar became a target in a Texas investigation of sexual abuse and left the state with the knowledge of the bishop, who died in 2005. Bishop Delaney gave The News conflicting accounts of the matter. Authorities said he wouldn't aid their investigation.
Father Teczar faces a criminal trial in Eastland County in February. The Fort Worth Diocese paid two of his victims a settlement totaling $4.15 million last year.
Managing the fallout
None of this happened on new Bishop Kevin Vann's watch, yet he has been struggling to manage the fallout from the court records' unsealing.
He apologized at a midweek news conference for what the abusers did but not for the cover-ups that Bishop Delaney and his aides orchestrated. "Not being here at the time those decisions were made, I can't say they should have done this or that," he said.
But Bishop Vann was doing exactly that by week's end, having come under fierce criticism from victims.
"I can't defend the indefensible," he told the Star-Telegram . He said he planned to talk to, but not discipline, four priests who have been accused of enabling abusers or mistreating victims.
The News asked him repeatedly to talk about the general mindset of diocesan managers over the last quarter-century, when he was working his way up the ladder in Springfield, Ill. What, he was asked, would explain putting a priest's career above children's safety?
Bishop Vann, who was a top bishop's aide in Illinois, would not answer.
There's no good way to have that conversation without addressing the church's broader web of sexual secrecy, said Mr. Sipe, the former priest who consults on civil and criminal clergy-abuse cases. He is the co-author, with the Rev. Thomas Doyle and former priest Patrick Wall, of the recently published Sex, Priests and Secret Codes: The Catholic Church's 2000-Year Paper Trail of Sexual Abuse.
Most priests and bishops don't abuse children, Mr. Sipe said. But many, he said, violate their vows of celibacy with adults and end up afraid to challenge more serious misconduct.
"Celibacy is a myth," Mr. Sipe said. "And getting into this exposes a corrupt system."
Bishop Vann was surrounded by this culture in Springfield. An August 2006 report commissioned by the diocese there and conducted by a former federal prosecutor found that:
•Previous Bishop Daniel Ryan "engaged in sexual misconduct with adults and used his authority to conceal this misconduct ... the investigation found a culture of secrecy fostered under Bishop Ryan's leadership which discouraged faithful priests from coming forward with information about misconduct."
•A top aide to Bishop Ryan and the current bishop "was involved in sexual misconduct" before two teens attacked him in a city park and nearly killed him. He has been removed from ministry.
•Two other high-ranking veteran priests "are now on leave because of allegations of personal and ministerial misconduct."
The report did not name four other priests who were implicated in financial misconduct or using computers to access inappropriate Web sites, according to the Springfield State Journal-Register. They reportedly admitted wrongdoing and agreed to undergo rehabilitation.
Bishop Vann was not mentioned in the report.
"I have to be responsible now for making the right and just decisions now," he said at last week's news conference. "That's been the principle of all of my life. I've always tried to make the right decision wherever I've been."
There are other issues to consider when trying to understand cover-ups like the ones in Fort Worth, said Robert Scamardo, a lawyer who formerly worked for the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston.
First, he said, is that bishops do not consider priests employees.
"The analogy is that of a parent to a child," said Mr. Scamardo, who spent years in seminary but decided not to become a clergyman. "There is no group more important to a bishop than his priests."
Shortage of priests
The church's increasingly dire shortage of priests reinforces that bond, he said. And even if a bishop finally concludes that a man should be removed from the priesthood, the Vatican's expulsion process is long and cumbersome.
Charles Curran, who teaches moral theology at Southern Methodist University and formerly worked as a priest, sees another issue: Bishops tend to have more experience identifying with victimizers than victims.
Bishops' "primary experience of people doing wrong is the sacrament of penance," or confession, he said. In many cases, the bishops dispense forgiveness and "there is no consideration" of victims.
"This is the mindset."
And why don't victims speak up more often and go to the police themselves? Because they are typically devout people steeped in church traditions of secrecy and shame, said Mr. Scamardo, who was abused by a priest and a lay minister as a boy.
Instead of seeking justice via civil authorities, he said, these victims hope for better from the very people who have betrayed them: "It's this childlike belief that the church is going to do the right thing. You've got to give that up."
Four years ago, at a landmark meeting of U.S. bishops in Dallas, Dr. Frawley-O'Dea told Bishop Delaney and his brothers from around the country that secrecy was the "cornerstone of sexual abuse." They must all do penance – make "genuine confessions of failings and remorse," she said at the time.
She was the only mental health professional invited to address the bishops' gathering, which produced "zero tolerance" reforms and vows of increased transparency.
The bishops were in free-fall at the time. The Boston Globe had gotten court records unsealed that showed a pattern of violation and concealment much like that now emerging in Fort Worth. The News showed that at least two-thirds of U.S. bishops had left priests on the job after accusations of sexual misconduct.
The Rev. Wilton Gregory, who was president of the bishops' conference, praised Dr. Frawley-O'Dea at the time and pledged a new day of "openness, forthrightness and courage."
It hasn't happened, she said, citing the recent events in Fort Worth as but one example: After the Dallas promises, the diocese fought to keep the priests' files sealed, then fumbled in the aftermath.
"The transparency promise was bull," said Dr. Frawley-O'Dea, author of the forthcoming book Perversion of Power: Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church. Even now, "whenever they come to a crossroads, they take the wrong turn."
IN THEIR OWN WORDS
-----------------------------------------------
Newly unsealed court records and previously documented statements show that the late Fort Worth Catholic Bishop Joseph Delaney repeatedly deceived parishioners and others when dealing with clergy misconduct. Meanwhile, he sometimes left predators on the job – and kept police in the dark.
Philip Magaldi
"I truly believe he is not guilty." –Bishop Delaney, reacting to the Rev. Philip Magaldi's 1990 indictment for stealing more than $100,000 from collection-plate receipts and other church funds
He "probably unknowingly violated the law. ... I have every hope ... that he will be serving again in our diocese." –Bishop Delaney, in a letter to parishioners after the priest's conviction. Father Magaldi served eight months in prison and returned to duty.
There was "overwhelming evidence against him." –the bishop in a subsequent secret memo about the embezzlement
Father Magaldi "is guilty of sexual exploitation." –the confidential conclusion of Bishop Delaney's investigators in 1997, after Father Magaldi was accused of sexually harassing an 18-year-old who came to him for confession and paying him to administer enemas. The priest admitted the enemas but denied wrongdoing, and he stayed in ministry.
The Fort Worth Diocese "does not know of any accusations of sexual impropriety against Father Magaldi." –from an August 1998 church newspaper article by Jeff Hensley, spokesman for Bishop Delaney and new Bishop Kevin Vann. The article criticized The Dallas Morning News after it reported that Father Magaldi spent some of the stolen money for tropical vacations with adolescent boys and once gave a teenager he met in a park enough money to get a car.
Thomas Teczar
"He is not working with young people in his present assignment, and I intend that this will be the continuing arrangement." –Bishop Delaney, in a 1990 letter seeking to reassure a judge about the Rev. Thomas Teczar, who was charged with providing alcohol to a boy and contributing to his delinquency
"He didn't have altar boys?" –question from a lawyer for two boys whom Father Teczar was accused of abusing after 1990
"He did." –the bishop's response, according to a deposition transcript
"He decided he didn't want to be a priest in Texas anymore." –Bishop Delaney, telling The News on Aug. 12, 1998, that there was a simple reason why Father Teczar had left the state.
"Father Teczar came to tell me that he was being investigated." – the bishop changing his story on Aug. 13, 1998, after Eastland County authorities said the priest fled once they discovered he had concealed a friend's molestation of children and had encouraged the man to destroy photographic evidence. Diocese officials refused to assist in a criminal investigation, the authorities said.
"His attorneys assured me they were in touch with the authorities ... who were willing to drop the investigation if Father Teczar left the state." –the bishop, telling The News in 1998 why he didn't object to the priest's flight
"I made no deal." –response from Ronnie White, who was Eastland County sheriff at the time
Joseph Tu
"The incidents can accurately be described as pedophilia." –the confidential conclusion of Bishop Delaney's investigators in 1993, after two sisters said that the Rev. Joseph Tu had put them on his lap when they were little and wetly kissed them
"I am not at all sure that there is a problem with Father Tu's continuing to exercise ministry, since there was no proven misconduct with a minor." – the bishop in a 2002 letter to the Galveston-Houston Archdiocese, where the priest was left on duty despite U.S. bishops' recently passed "zero tolerance" policy
William Hoover
"He admitted that there were two other boys with whom he was involved." – Bishop Delaney, in a June 1995 secret memo written shortly before he told parishioners that the Rev. William Hoover had a single victim
"The care of the Catholic community requires that a full disclosure be made." –the bishop's statement to parishioners in July 1995
source: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/religion/stories/120306dnmetpriests.336761f.html#
|
|
by Catherine |
Pennsylvania |
|
5 - Posted on 5/1/2009 6:07:36 AM
|
This proposal ensures that those who harbor and cover up for predators go scott-free. There is no evidence that the institutions who paid for the damage caused by raping and sexually abusing children suffered. In fact, in CA the Catholic church paid the victims and did not cut back on any of the services provided by the church, even in San Diego where the Diocese attempted to file for bankruptcy in an effort to keep dirty secrets hidden and to shirk responsibility. A closer look at the church in Boston shows that the school closings had nothing to do with paying victims but rather was because of reduced enrollment and population shifts from city to suburb. The institutions are in a far better position than the victims and our family members to pay for the harm caused by the reckless behavior of superiors in nstitutions who allowed so many more of us to be abused than would have had they reported the crimes to civil authorities when the first allegations surfaced. The church is always holding another fundraiser for "worthy" projects from repairing leaking roofs, to building a new gymnasium to sending aid to victims of hurricanes and floods. Certainly the church and other institutions can do the same for those whose childhood was shattered when we were raped and sexually assaulted by their employees. Let's stop protecting enablers and the institutions who cover up for child molesters and start holding them accountable. In many ways they are even more responsible than the sick predators who commit these horrific crimes.
|
|
by Barbara Blaine, President of SNAP |
Chicago |
|
6 - Posted on 5/1/2009 9:52:13 AM
|
There has been some talk of a compromise that will bridge the gap between the 2 bills being considered in the Assembly. A recent Newsday Editorial supportive of the Church’s financial concerns was quite pejorative to child sex abuse survivors. Most recently an article proposing some form of compromise was written by David Mandel and printed in the Five Towns Jewish Times on April 30th. I am compelled to speak up about these insensitive and cruel articles and state my emphatic opposition to ANY compromise to the 1 year window.
Mr. Mandel states correctly that the survivors of child sex abuse have a primary concern of being heard and affirmed publicly that what happened to them was a crime and that the abuser be held to account. In my personal case, my abuser was released by his employer (Diocese of Rockville Centre) with no warning to the public at large of the credible history of his criminal behavior with vulnerable children. The most important outcome of a one year window would be to make this man known publicly for his proclivity for prepubescent boys and warn those at risk. A secondary outcome would be to expose the Diocese for their knowing cover-up and failure to protect the public at large. Tertiary outcomes would be to hold that institution accountable for their criminal behavior and to provide me with restitution. All of these factors do hold merit. Mr. Mandel asserts incorrectly that public knowledge of the wrongdoing is sufficient.
To suggest that it is in the public’s best interest to protect institutions from financial damage is a misrepresentation of risk. Any institution – religious, non-profit, for profit or public – should be held accountable for criminally protecting child sex abusers and for fraudulently deceiving their followers. The argument that the public would suffer due to cutbacks in services provided by these institutions is outweighed by the need for justice. To suggest an “amnesty” for any wrongdoers is an insult and an outrage. Who in their right mind would give a “pass” to an admitted child rapist or an institution who knowing obfuscated the truth?
My abuser and the Diocese offered me no compromise to the damage caused by his selfish and abusive acts. I was given no amnesty from the dysfunction I suffered as a result. This “1 year window” is offering lenient accountability in my estimate. The outcome of the Diocese’s criminal cover-up and Fr. Gene Vollmer’s sex crimes in my life was hospitalizations for suicide attempts. Financial damage is hardly equivalent to that. Can they resolve a lifetime of failed relationships and damaged sexuality by paying financial restitution? No – but it can be a start at least.
I urge the NY State legislature to empower the justice system to function. Give them the laws by which they can proceed. Allow the judges to determine the eligibility of the cases. If insufficient evidence or an impossibility of defense exists – let them be the judges. DO NOT stand in the way of the full justice proposed by the Markey Duane Bill. I have never been taught that the financial consequences of a defendant should be taken into consideration as an argument against just laws. Is it more important to protect the bank accounts of an institution that protected child predators or to provide restitution to those harmed? Is it just to compromise and covertly negotiate with institutions who aided and abetted child sex abusers?
Dave McGuire
|
|
by Dave McGuire |
Port Jefferson |
|
7 - Posted on 5/1/2009 1:07:10 PM
|
This proposal sounds like a last ditch, end-run by the Catholic Conference to avoid a look-back window. This is another attempt to avoid continued scandal to the faithful caused by none other than bishop after bishop in diocese after diocese. Don't let it happen here! The bishops may even deny involvement in this proposal. Don’t believe the bishops. History has proven they cannot be trusted.
Current examples in Chicago by Cardinal George, the President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, shows us it’s business as usual even today.
In addition to protecting kids, many survivors desire that the entire truth be told about every abuser. Many also want the evidence of how bishops aided and abetted hundreds of rapists to see the light of day. It’s hard for pew Catholics to believe bishops could have put children at risk, even when the evidence is compelling. But, the truth must be told.
Let’s get real about the argument that compensatory damages paid out in sexual abuse cases cause churches and catholic schools to close.
Churches close because of the shortage of ordained priests, pure and simple. And the current lot of bishops would rather restrict the Eucharist, deny the Eucharist, and abolish viable communities than to stand up and demand a return to the married priesthood. The current lot of bishops lacks the intestinal fortitude to get the job done.
Catholic schools close because costs have increased with salary costs due to the drastic reduction and almost elimination of low-paid religious sisters as teachers. The abundance of Sisters, the backbone of Catholic Schools, has diminished just like the celibate priesthood. As a result, middle class families can no longer afford a Catholic education for their children and they can no longer be guiltied into sacrificing thousands of dollars for tuition.
If the sexual abuse crisis has caused such a financial burden on the bishop and hindering his ministry why does almost every bishop live in a mansion while parishes and schools close? Cash can’t be that tight!
Regarding the burden of hundreds of lawsuits, the burden of proof in any of the cases filed under the window legislations is very high. The burden is on the accuser not the bishop. Lawyers do not take frivolous cases that they cannot win. False claims are very low and lawyers are very adept at identifying false claims.
It's been proven that the self-policing approach as it pertains to Roman Catholic bishops and the sexual abuse of children has been sorely lacking and frankly non-existent. A proposal which allows abusers to step forward and self-report is merely a way to placate and not offend the ruling hierarchy of the Catholic Church. Stop the deference to the criminal bishops!
Why would we let bishops off the hook, who by their actions have ruined thousands of lives some of which have ended in suicide? Do we really support bishops living in splendor and hiding behind charitable immunity laws when their actions have resulted in hundreds of lost lives?
If only the bishops were concerned about protecting and supporting the abused children as they are the unborn.
Update legislation to completely remove statutes of limitation and add a look-back window. Maine no longer has statutes of limitations for criminal or civil cases of sexual abuse of children.
Michael Sweatt
National Survivor Advocates Coalition
http://nsacoalition.org/
|
|
by Michael Sweatt |
Portland, Maine |
|
8 - Posted on 5/1/2009 4:39:33 PM
|
The window for civil liabilities of sexual abuse should parallel the existing one for criminal prosecution. I recently reported a decades-old continuing act of sexual molestation to a boy under 9 years old by a Irish Christian Brother at Iona, to the New Rochelle Police Department, which has not taken any action though reported over a year ago to the department and responded to by a lieutenant in a telephone call, to whom I confirmed the need for criminal prosecution to no avail to date.
|
|
by Peter Leahey |
New York |
|
9 - Posted on 5/8/2009 1:51:34 PM
|
Peter Leahey's hits on a major part of the problem. It is the resposibility of a local municipality to bring criminal charges and it isn't easy. If there is any backscratching between the municipality a public or private institution that may want this to disappear, watch out!
In such a case the next thing would be to make a lot of noise, picket, call the local tv stations and newspapers.
"The window for civil liabilities of sexual abuse should parallel the existing one for criminal prosecution. I recently reported a decades-old continuing act of sexual molestation to a boy under 9 years old by a Irish Christian Brother at Iona, to the New Rochelle Police Department, which has not taken any action though reported over a year ago to the department and responded to by a lieutenant in a telephone call, to whom I confirmed the need for criminal prosecution to no avail to date."
|
|
by SMP TURLISH |
NEW CASTLE, DELAWARE |
|
|
| |
|
Click Here To Download
this
week's paper as a PDF
Click Here For Newspaper Archive.
|
SUBSCRIBE
Get 5TJT Delivered to your door
every thursday morning.
|
Poll
5TJT Visitors
256802
|
