|
Post by snow on Mar 16, 2014 22:45:31 GMT -5
I've already said both my wife and I read the petition and letter to 43 overseers and didn't see the tone as a plea. That could explain why there are people who read but do not openly support the petition and letter to 43 overseers, the Code of Conduct and others like them. They too might have seen the same tone we did. What I'm trying to do is offer advice on how to write stuff like that. If you remember I was practically bullied into saying what I thought of the letter to 43 overseers. I didn't finally answer just so I could argue about it. It's ok if no one wants to consider our thoughts and advice as being real or valid. That is good feedback. But now the question is, how could have been written that would make it more of a plea?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 17, 2014 0:12:58 GMT -5
Could it be rational has a point about CSA investigation vs other kinds of abuse? Of course Rational has a point. I don't want to see kids at convention with bruises, broken limbs and rearranged noses.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 0:25:59 GMT -5
You're twisting what he said. He said more emphasis or at least as much needs to be put on other types of abuse. He can correct me if I'm wrong, but why would we ever want to let up on prevention of CSA? I'm sure if it was your child, these words would never come out of your mouth; "undue emphasis on CSA?" As others have pointed out, the potential for it will always be there. Point taken. Thanks I also see my logic is likely flawed, THe statistics given do not necessarily indicate investigation of other abuse. There is another statistic that will blow your mind, that is the total abuse numbers. They could be figured out from the previous numbers I gave but I will give them to you in gross number form. It is certainly true that other abuses need to be considered, although I would contend that the big one, neglect, is not anywhere near the significant problem among the friends as it is among the general society. Before that is said though, it is true that CSA is on the decline significantly, but it remains important for several reasons. One is the fact that CSA causes a lot more damage than some of the more frequent abuses that get reported. Secondly, the F&Ws are behind the curve in protecting children. There is no widespread recognition among workers or friends that we must be more proactive about protecting children from CSA. Nor do we recognize that the "system" such as the worker homestay program does provide a risk window that is not common among many other organizations, and those who do have similar risks make a huge effort to keep kids safe. Anyway, here are the numbers for All Substantiated Maltreatment Investigations. 1993.....12,309 2003.....58,425. While CSA had a whopping decrease, other forms of abuse had a whopping increase. The increase is primarily in reports of neglect but the numbers include physical abuse as well. To be really clear about the difference between total investigations and substantiated investigations, it is not false reports. The difference is almost all reports made in good faith but for various reasons didn't pan out. Actual malicious reports are very small, For total abuses, malicious reports occur in 3% of total reports. For CSA, malicious false reports account for 1% of the reports.
|
|
|
Post by jondough on Mar 17, 2014 0:43:38 GMT -5
Point taken. Thanks I also see my logic is likely flawed, THe statistics given do not necessarily indicate investigation of other abuse. There is another statistic that will blow your mind, that is the total abuse numbers. They could be figured out from the previous numbers I gave but I will give them to you in gross number form. It is certainly true that other abuses need to be considered, although I would contend that the big one, neglect, is not anywhere near the significant problem among the friends as it is among the general society. Before that is said though, it is true that CSA is on the decline significantly, but it remains important for several reasons. One is the fact that CSA causes a lot more damage than some of the more frequent abuses that get reported. Secondly, the F&Ws are behind the curve in protecting children. There is no widespread recognition among workers or friends that we must be more proactive about protecting children from CSA. Nor do we recognize that the "system" such as the worker homestay program does provide a risk window that is not common among many other organizations, and those who do have similar risks make a huge effort to keep kids safe. Anyway, here are the numbers for All Substantiated Maltreatment Investigations. 1993.....12,309 2003.....58,425. While CSA had a whopping decrease, other forms of abuse had a whopping increase. The increase is primarily in reports of neglect but the numbers include physical abuse as well. To be really clear about the difference between total investigations and substantiated investigations, it is not false reports. The difference is almost all reports made in good faith but for various reasons didn't pan out. Actual malicious reports are very small, For total abuses, malicious reports occur in 3% of total reports. For CSA, malicious false reports account for 1% of the reports. I would think that a large reason for this increase is the number of reported abuses - whereas they wouldn't have been reported in the past, along with what we now interpret as abuse. Do you have any information on how that has had an affect on these numbers?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 8:08:26 GMT -5
There is another statistic that will blow your mind, that is the total abuse numbers. They could be figured out from the previous numbers I gave but I will give them to you in gross number form. It is certainly true that other abuses need to be considered, although I would contend that the big one, neglect, is not anywhere near the significant problem among the friends as it is among the general society. Before that is said though, it is true that CSA is on the decline significantly, but it remains important for several reasons. One is the fact that CSA causes a lot more damage than some of the more frequent abuses that get reported. Secondly, the F&Ws are behind the curve in protecting children. There is no widespread recognition among workers or friends that we must be more proactive about protecting children from CSA. Nor do we recognize that the "system" such as the worker homestay program does provide a risk window that is not common among many other organizations, and those who do have similar risks make a huge effort to keep kids safe. Anyway, here are the numbers for All Substantiated Maltreatment Investigations. 1993.....12,309 2003.....58,425. While CSA had a whopping decrease, other forms of abuse had a whopping increase. The increase is primarily in reports of neglect but the numbers include physical abuse as well. To be really clear about the difference between total investigations and substantiated investigations, it is not false reports. The difference is almost all reports made in good faith but for various reasons didn't pan out. Actual malicious reports are very small, For total abuses, malicious reports occur in 3% of total reports. For CSA, malicious false reports account for 1% of the reports. I would think that a large reason for this increase is the number of reported abuses - whereas they wouldn't have been reported in the past, along with what we now interpret as abuse. Do you have any information on how that has had an affect on these numbers? The report I am citing is focused on CSA so it didn't have much information on the overall increase of all abuses. This report was for Ontario Canada but it had some Canada-wide stats which indicated the same trends: CSA down significantly in those years and overall investigation up significantly but no breakdown or explanation of what's going on. What is also interesting in this report is that CSA reports rose significantly in the 1980's (think about 2.5X), peaked in 1992, then started dropping noticeably. I think that what you are suspecting is correct: awareness of CSA in the 1980's brought on a lot of reporting, especially old cases but by the 1990's not only were a lot of the old cases processed by then, but public awareness and action was also having a great effect on the number current offences. My theory is that the same process for neglect and physical abuse started happening in the 1990's and the reports started pouring in due to awareness. What no one thought was abuse of neglect or emotional and physical abuse prior to the 1990's, the public became aware that these were actual abuses and started reporting in droves. The numbers I have show that the overall reports of substantiated investigations peaked and levelled off in 2003 until 2008, which shows no increase over those five years. I don't have newer comparable numbers but I suspect it is most likely declining now over the last 8 years. I think the huge increases in the overall abuse reports is a tremendous advancement for our society. Tolerance for all kinds of abuse is dropping and people won't stand for it anymore. While there are still plenty of risks for children out there, our Western societies are now probably the safest in history. But let's not stop here, there is still plenty to do to promote child safety.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Mar 17, 2014 9:22:13 GMT -5
Seems like one of snow's taglines would be applicable here: "You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete" Buckminster Fuller I would be most interested in what Jesse might propose for a "new model". I haven't read this thread, but I always somehow knew that the petition approach would probably not be effective in this situation. (I've in fact seen huge backlash from management in a company I've worked in, when someone circulated a petition. I never quite knew why this was the case.) I think petitions are only effective when people in decision making capacities are bound by public opinion. A lot of the conditioning with a group like the F&W's is that going against popular opinion is a good thing. I know I still have a lot of that tendency in me. While petitions may not seem effective, and even cause backlash, one thing can be for sure: the message is heard. No organizational leader wants to admit they are doing something wrong. A petition is a public revelation of their inadequacies and it is normal for proud human beings to strike back or try to ignore it. But no rational human being can ignore the voices of a group of people and they don't.....they just wait until it blows over to respond appropriately. Actually due to the economy and so many working people are out of a job or a good paying job with some security, the people who would be served with petititons are able to push back quite well. Their answers often are something like "If you don't like it, leave! We can easily replace you. Fact is, people are lining up outside for potential hiring." So perhaps "petitions" are not the rule of today.....and I had spoken to the young lady and warned her she might receive a "polite" answer of "Thanks, but no thanks from her area's workers!" That I didn't expect them to be abusive about it, but nonetheless would not be open to it. I should think the workers would feel relief that the friends and other workers would report a suspected perpetrator to the authorities, that way the workers don't have to stifle the victim and parents nor have to figure out just where they can send the perp!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Mar 17, 2014 9:33:23 GMT -5
The petition isn't reaching many friends or workers.I would disagree with that statement Jesse. I know of some workers who have contacted me discussing the petition, and whether WINGS was involved in creating it some way. (which we are not). I also know that there are a some workers who have discussed it with each other, after sharing the link to it. What is interesting to me about this, is it was created by an individual who was NOT a part of any group (such as WINGS) who has been dealing with these sorts of issues, and it is from the daughter of a convention ground owner. (and incidentally.... another convention ground owner contacted me and commented about it and expressed support about it) As expressed above by Arwen89: Obviously, this petition has raised questions in the minds of her parents, which have appear to have been inadequately answered. Although Arwen89 is still going to meetings, her home has become one of many that is now hanging out "The Inn is Closed" sign for workers. As I mention, people who love the fellowship and their local meetings are relying less and less on the workers, because the workers are losing trust and respect by many members. To close off one's home certainly shows this lack of trust and respect. While this is someone who was B&R in the fellowship, we have also seen this in the situation with the couple who have worked hard to get answers to their questions concerning sexual immorality within the ranks of workers. That home is also closed off, and they no longer attend meetings. The more I hear, the less these situations appear to be random isolated acts. Many simply do not discuss these issues with the workers, and tend to stop attending the gospel meetings, or inviting workers over to stay. Although there weren't as many signatures on the petition as one would like and there are many excuses, some of which are still not believing that this is an issue in the workers at all. That said, anyone who is a young parent as is Arwen will think twice if they allow workers in their home...maybe causing them to be more watchful and alert to the possibility though they doubt it is a real concern because they just don't believe that the workers would be of such perps. So all in all, the petition is not without a considerable mount of merit IF it simply causes people who have young children to be more careful and watchful. I knew that Arwen's area workers would likely reply as they did! And there are many reasons for that...but as it was suggested the workers have lifted their collective voices inb indicating that all the hoop-de-lah is just "persecution" and that it proves that they feel themselves "worthy" to be despised as Jesus is despised! But at the same time in the back of their minds they have to know that they will stand before a "righteous judge" in the end and if they have failed to NOT offend any of these little ones, then they are toast......and it's sad but many of the leading workers today will have received all of their due rewards in this life and little to be expected beyond life......they WILL stand judgment for their refusal to come up to "obeying the laws of the land".....Paul said that those in power over the land are there by God's approval and they are there for our safety and not for our disobedience. I've wondered if we disobey the laws of the land, are we "disobeying God"?
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Mar 17, 2014 9:51:13 GMT -5
Square one; what is your bedrock objective proof "they" aren't putting kids before the ministry? A bunch of speculation and assumption here on TMB? Have you talked to a worker one-on-one face-to-face about it? I have. And I'd say the assumption is wrong. What did they say? Why don't most people know where they stand? Do you think it is the responsibility of the workers who are the leaders of your church to make it known to their members just what exactly they are doing to make children their priority? Why would they be reluctant to do that? Are they reluctant to do that? Is there a reason why people are left to wonder exactly where their ministers stand on the issue? Should there be any reason why people are left to wonder where their ministers stand on the issue? When addressed like they were with this petition, why wouldn't they try to educate the people about what they are doing about such a serious issue? Have they done this and I just don't know about it? When people are informed they don't need to do petitions or raise questions. If the workers don't like the questions and the petitions wouldn't it make sense for them to make it known in written form just what they have done and are doing about issues? Then there would be no need to rehash this over and over trying to figure out what is being done. The best way to shut people up is to give them answers. jmt It is a sad thing but for always of the inception of the 2x2 religion, the workers have been taught that the workers always have the "say" about anything as far as the friends are concerned! It is the "control" factor for them. They do not accept "questioning" freely. NOr do they seem to appreciate someone not buckling under their "way" of doing things. Also there are many workers who are not able to tell what they think or believe as to everyday problems in life and part of that is because they just don't "experience" everyday life! I've noticed this in the difference between workers that have worked a number of years in the public and those who have spent little to any time working in the public. One elderly worker was a bookkeeper for some major company many years before he went into the work and probably due to the fact that he nor his folks had not heard the gospel yet! Yet he was willing to sit down and discuss many things with the friends and/or other workers. There was another worker who had been much of an adult before he heard the gospel and it wasn't against his "religion, so to speak" for people to lose their tempers sometimes and curse.....he showed that one time when a friend called him and asked him to come to their home....he did and it came out that the lady of the house got locked out of the house by her husband and he'd left for some hours...he didn't realize she wasn't in the house so yes, she was mad.....she took this older worker out to the wood pile to tell him all of this and showed him all the work she'd accomplished while being locked out of the house.....she still got upset about the thing and she told him what curse words she'd used....he told her to go ahead and tell him the blanket-blank story! She was so shocked at him using the same foul words she did and then she realized he was opening the story for her to tell like it really was and that there was no great harm in it as long as no one was really offended with it! Course being out there at the woodpile was not one but her and the worker! But this kind of worker is rare, nmost have little idea what it is to just make a living, standing the tests of being a part of the world whether or not, etc. So naturally anything adverse to most workers will feel like "persecution" because of their lack of experience! I'm not certain being laid-back about one's griefs makes for more awareness at all......but when the doors start closing to the workers, they are going to start finding themselves unwelcome and it won't matter who they are because people will not be playing "favorities" for they should know by now "favorities" are a capable of offending and abusing as not.....and NOW the conv. ground owners are into the mix and something they all need to think about is that they will be liable if a child is sexually assaulted on their conv. grounds. It won't be the workers who will have to stand "good" for that assault! BUT IF all the conv. ground workers put down their feet and tell the workers that they cannot allow "Known" CSA perps, then the workers are going to start buckling under the pressure....and I doubt they have enough money to keep buying their "own" conv. grounds!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Mar 17, 2014 10:07:15 GMT -5
You're twisting what he said. He said more emphasis or at least as much needs to be put on other types of abuse. He can correct me if I'm wrong, but why would we ever want to let up on prevention of CSA? I'm sure if it was your child, these words would never come out of your mouth; "undue emphasis on CSA?" As others have pointed out, the potential for it will always be there. Point taken. Thanks I also see my logic is likely flawed, THe statistics given do not necessarily indicate investigation of other abuse. Since CSA is not so much about sex but abuse altogether but carries the sexual overtones, so when CSA is investigated, I feel the authorities will look for other signs of abuse for as we saw in the case of Jean's abuse, she was a "ripe target" for the CSA perp because she felt unloved by her family....Fact is she bore her Father's accusation of being so sinful with IH instead of the Father coming down on IH and kicking his bod out the door. This was a "go ahead" signal for IH to continue his abuse of Jean! He had the Father's blessing, more or less! I've always read Jean's story as much as being abused by her family and unloved as being the main reason IH picked up on that and was able to "love" her and sexually abuse her! It was a child's nightmare all the way to kingdom come! So yes, Rat's idea of "abuse" being investigated as much and often along with sexual abuse, regardless the perp!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Mar 17, 2014 10:14:04 GMT -5
I've already said both my wife and I read the petition and letter to 43 overseers and didn't see the tone as a plea. That could explain why there are people who read but do not openly support the petition and letter to 43 overseers, the Code of Conduct and others like them. They too might have seen the same tone we did. What I'm trying to do is offer advice on how to write stuff like that. If you remember I was practically bullied into saying what I thought of the letter to 43 overseers. I didn't finally answer just so I could argue about it. It's ok if no one wants to consider our thoughts and advice as being real or valid. The couple in Texas are good people Jesse. When people like this come from outside and attend gospel meetings there is a flurry of letters and emails sent far and wide. I expect that was the case when they come from outside to profess around 15 years ago. Unfortunately no one warned them about paedophile overseers and they were shocked to discover that they'd welcomed one into the home of their children. Now no one in authority can assure them that its safe to entrust their children to this group of people so they're doing what any responsible parents would do - they're distancing themselves from the workers and friends. All of the responses or lack of adequate responses are much as they have found in the Catholic church and the CSA issues there....it has been more then 10 years ago that many Catholic priests were subjected to disciplinary behaviours due to their longterm known CSA perpatrations. And yet again, this very year a big and bigger investigation has been mounted by the International officials...so the Catholic church isn't much nearer to being freed of their scourge then the fellowship is of their scourge! It seems it is going to take some very serious prison terms by the authorities against those who are allowing the perps to continue in their public offices! I expect with the authorities down under that the friends and workers will see more authoritarian actions against their continued refusal to turn the perps in and also admit to their own part in these abuses. However friends will also be liable for more actions against them as well. It is a shame that Jerome and companion's small official sentencing has been "interpreted" by them as persecution. I had hoped the 4 days they spent with the prisoners would have given them a different viewpoint and an inspiration to really "visit" the needy instead of going from house to house of the friends and never seeking the poor in spirit wherever they could be found! The thing of it is, it seems to me that the workers have changed the workership from that which the beginning workers made it! It is more of a selfish workership then a seeking workership of those in need of spiritual comfort and knowledge!jmo
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 17, 2014 12:38:21 GMT -5
The couple in Texas are good people Jesse. When people like this come from outside and attend gospel meetings there is a flurry of letters and emails sent far and wide. I expect that was the case when they come from outside to profess around 15 years ago. Unfortunately no one warned them about paedophile overseers and they were shocked to discover that they'd welcomed one into the home of their children. Now no one in authority can assure them that its safe to entrust their children to this group of people so they're doing what any responsible parents would do - they're distancing themselves from the workers and friends. The thing of it is, it seems to me that the workers have changed the workership from that which the beginning workers made it! It is more of a selfish workership then a seeking workership of those in need of spiritual comfort and knowledge!jmo Yes, it has evolved from 100% evangelical to almost 100% pastoral. Now the Administration System is trying to impose their inefficacious model on Vietnam.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 13:02:09 GMT -5
The thing of it is, it seems to me that the workers have changed the workership from that which the beginning workers made it! It is more of a selfish workership then a seeking workership of those in need of spiritual comfort and knowledge!jmo Yes, it has evolved from 100% evangelical to almost 100% pastoral. Now the Administration System is trying to impose their inefficacious model on Vietnam. The pastoring isn't working out too well, particularly considering high ratio of worker pastors/friend vs mainstream pastors/member. The US Presbyterian church has 1 pastor/associate pastor for every 264 members. Most churches aim for a 1:150 ratio. The US workers are closer to 1 worker for every 50 friends. That is a very high ratio of workers/friend so one would think that the friends would be well served by the workers yet the indications are that the friends are getting nice houseguests a couple times/year, one gospel meeting/week for 8 months, and one special mtg and convention/year and little else. They get a social network as a spinoff benefit. Based on some worker pastoring advice I heard about this week, I would say the friends are getting only what is stated in the previous paragraph.
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Mar 17, 2014 13:18:02 GMT -5
Sharon what was the tone of the petition in the case you talked about? Actually the issue that the petition was about was extremely trivial. I don’t even remember what it was, but something of the caliber of changing something in the cafeteria. (I was not involved, did not sign the petition – as usual, I was working too hard ) If I had been trying to effect that sort of change, I would have simply chatted my way up the management chain – starting with the person who managed the cafeteria. I was shocked at the huge push-back from management. (These were extremely reasonable people, not at all autocratic.) The message that I kind of absorbed in the aftermath was “This is not the way we do things”. THAT was their main problem, not WHAT was asked in the petition. When I first noticed this thread, I did not even look at the petition. It was kind of the thought “This is going nowhere – that is not the way they do things.” When I glanced at some of the posts on the thread, I thought that me signing the petition would hurt, rather than help – so I went on my way. (I have since reconsidered – have signed the petition – not because I think it will do anything – but out of respect for the courage of the originator of the petition – and out of respect for the really good people who I saw had signed it.) Kinda like “The Drunkard’s Walk” take-home: You just keep trying and trying. Or to put it in a Biblical context “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.” I have not yet been able to dedicate the time to peruse this entire thread. But, in passing, I noticed Marie’s post : How many people that go to meeting have been willing to discuss this issue with worker when they visit your home? It you haven't why not? How many have written a letter to their overseer and told them how they feel about CSA? It you haven't YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. A PETITION WILL NOT CHANGE THIS. YOU NEED TO STAND UP IN YOUR OWN HOME AND SAY TO THE WORKERS, YOU ARE NOT WELCOME UNTIL YOU CHANGE HOW THIS IS HANDLED. STOP GIVING THEM MONEY. YOU HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE HOW THINGS ARE DONE ARE YOU WILLING FOR THE PRICE AND WHAT IT MIGHT COST YOU? I think sometimes that they should hire Marie as a consultant, if they were truly serious at solving this problem. But, I am still waiting for Jesse. Because, I think (whether he knows it yet or not) he has the solution – a balanced one. The other extreme – to move a solution forward – is to contact the media. In the end (and I know I will be consigned to hell for this one), it was the negative press coverage that finally got movement from the RCC.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Mar 17, 2014 17:49:33 GMT -5
The petition isn't reaching many friends or workers.I would disagree with that statement Jesse. I really don't care if you agree or disagree. 2500+ people viewed it and 85 of them signed on. There must be more that people disagree with than agree with to not sign on. I've said why I haven't, and what I didn't agree with concerning the letter to 43 overseers. Banning all workers from your home is like cutting of your steering wheel to protest high gas prices. My comment wasn't about people either agreeing or disagreeing with the petition. It was simply an observation that the petition WAS reaching friends and workers. I was contacted by a worker who wished to be in contact with Arwen89 to offer support. Because of 'politics', workers and most friends who agree with the petition aren't very likely to sign it. From what I have heard and read, there is more support for what the professing couple and Arwen89 sent out than is openly stated.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 18:02:22 GMT -5
I really don't care if you agree or disagree. 2500+ people viewed it and 85 of them signed on. There must be more that people disagree with than agree with to not sign on. I've said why I haven't, and what I didn't agree with concerning the letter to 43 overseers. Banning all workers from your home is like cutting of your steering wheel to protest high gas prices. My comment wasn't about people either agreeing or disagreeing with the petition. It was simply an observation that the petition WAS reaching friends and workers. I was contacted by a worker who wished to be in contact with Arwen89 to offer support. Because of 'politics', workers and most friends who agree with the petition aren't very likely to sign it. From what I have heard and read, there is more support for what the professing couple and Arwen89 sent out than is openly stated. Regardless of whether this petition is among the friends or not, the most typical reaction of people to a petition that may be controversial or might result in being questioned by authorities on it, is to put their heads down and not participate. That's just the way people are, you can't infer that no one agrees with it based on the number of signatories. When elected officials get feedback on an issue, I understand that it takes very few letters on one side of an issue to put that issue on the radar. Constituencies can be 200,000 people and if the congressperson gets a dozen letters on one side of the subject, they infer from that there is huge concern out there on the subject. The majority is truly a silent majority....only a few people ever speak out, and it only takes a few on one side of an issue to give a strong indication that they are speaking for that silent majority. I doubt that the workers are quite so sophisticated in management to know that though. In the 2x2 environment, 85 is a huge number because of all the reasons people won't sign even though they are in favour.
|
|
|
Post by openingact34 on Mar 17, 2014 21:52:13 GMT -5
I would be totally thrilled to hear something like that. In fact, that is the way it should be. There would be nothing better than the workers to put these matters into the friends hands and offer to support them in every way possible to protect children. That makes no sense. The workers aren't in danger of having CSA committed against them when they visit homes. The parents of young children are at risk when workers live with them. However, if the workers had given the friends the green light to work on protocols to reduce child abuse among the friends and arwen89 had refused to get involved, then it would be perfectly fair for the workers to criticize that.....totally fair. What is actually happening is the opposite, arwen89 wants to get involved in protecting kids along with the workers and she is getting stonewalled on it, and I don't blame her one bit for closing up her home while she has young children....there is something really wrong with that picture. If a mother such as arwen89 discovered that the administration at her children's school was covering up CSA and helping offenders avoid justice, I suspect she would be taking very similar action. Possibly pulling her children out of that school to remove them from a potentially dangerous situation, and demanding change and safeguards to prevent future incidents before letting them return. I find it hard to criticize placing the priority on your children's safety. Insisting on some answers is not unreasonable in this situation or in any similar case.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 17, 2014 23:24:09 GMT -5
If a mother such as arwen89 discovered that the administration at her children's school was covering up CSA and helping offenders avoid justice, I suspect she would be taking very similar action. Possibly pulling her children out of that school to remove them from a potentially dangerous situation, and demanding change and safeguards to prevent future incidents before letting them return. I find it hard to criticize placing the priority on your children's safety. Insisting on some answers is not unreasonable in this situation or in any similar case. The community would think it was pretty pathetic if the school's employees complained about the "tone" of the petition.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 23:42:20 GMT -5
I would be totally thrilled to hear something like that. In fact, that is the way it should be. There would be nothing better than the workers to put these matters into the friends hands and offer to support them in every way possible to protect children. That makes no sense. The workers aren't in danger of having CSA committed against them when they visit homes. The parents of young children are at risk when workers live with them. However, if the workers had given the friends the green light to work on protocols to reduce child abuse among the friends and arwen89 had refused to get involved, then it would be perfectly fair for the workers to criticize that.....totally fair. What is actually happening is the opposite, arwen89 wants to get involved in protecting kids along with the workers and she is getting stonewalled on it, and I don't blame her one bit for closing up her home while she has young children....there is something really wrong with that picture. If a mother such as arwen89 discovered that the administration at her children's school was covering up CSA and helping offenders avoid justice, I suspect she would be taking very similar action. Possibly pulling her children out of that school to remove them from a potentially dangerous situation, and demanding change and safeguards to prevent future incidents before letting them return. I find it hard to criticize placing the priority on your children's safety. Insisting on some answers is not unreasonable in this situation or in any similar case. You have nailed it on the head. All we are looking for is this: "yes we all want to protect our children and let's do it!"
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Mar 18, 2014 8:52:09 GMT -5
Sharon what was the tone of the petition in the case you talked about? Actually the issue that the petition was about was extremely trivial. I don’t even remember what it was, but something of the caliber of changing something in the cafeteria. (I was not involved, did not sign the petition – as usual, I was working too hard ) If I had been trying to effect that sort of change, I would have simply chatted my way up the management chain – starting with the person who managed the cafeteria. I was shocked at the huge push-back from management. (These were extremely reasonable people, not at all autocratic.) The message that I kind of absorbed in the aftermath was “This is not the way we do things”. THAT was their main problem, not WHAT was asked in the petition. When I first noticed this thread, I did not even look at the petition. It was kind of the thought “This is going nowhere – that is not the way they do things.” When I glanced at some of the posts on the thread, I thought that me signing the petition would hurt, rather than help – so I went on my way. (I have since reconsidered – have signed the petition – not because I think it will do anything – but out of respect for the courage of the originator of the petition – and out of respect for the really good people who I saw had signed it.) Kinda like “The Drunkard’s Walk” take-home: You just keep trying and trying. Or to put it in a Biblical context “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.” I have not yet been able to dedicate the time to peruse this entire thread. But, in passing, I noticed Marie’s post : How many people that go to meeting have been willing to discuss this issue with worker when they visit your home? It you haven't why not? How many have written a letter to their overseer and told them how they feel about CSA? It you haven't YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. A PETITION WILL NOT CHANGE THIS. YOU NEED TO STAND UP IN YOUR OWN HOME AND SAY TO THE WORKERS, YOU ARE NOT WELCOME UNTIL YOU CHANGE HOW THIS IS HANDLED. STOP GIVING THEM MONEY. YOU HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE HOW THINGS ARE DONE ARE YOU WILLING FOR THE PRICE AND WHAT IT MIGHT COST YOU? I think sometimes that they should hire Marie as a consultant, if they were truly serious at solving this problem. But, I am still waiting for Jesse. Because, I think (whether he knows it yet or not) he has the solution – a balanced one. The other extreme – to move a solution forward – is to contact the media. In the end (and I know I will be consigned to hell for this one), it was the negative press coverage that finally got movement from the RCC. Interesting reaction (and reason for it) on that petition Sharon. Something for all to consider, and along the lines of what I have been saying. Thanks for your vote of confidence on my ability to have a balanced solution. It seems a lot here would disagree with you. I did put the petition in a word doc and will see if I have time and gumption to re-write it as an example of what I'm talking about. Clearday, I like the tone and simplicity of your petition: "yes we all want to protect our children and let's do it!"
|
|
|
Post by jondough on Mar 18, 2014 8:57:35 GMT -5
One thing very important in order to improve or get change is that you give specifics.
If you give vague, general statements without specifics, everyone will think that you are talking about someone else.....they have it handled. Nothing will change.
My biggest problem with it, was that I thought it was way too long.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Mar 18, 2014 9:32:16 GMT -5
The thing of it is, it seems to me that the workers have changed the workership from that which the beginning workers made it! It is more of a selfish workership then a seeking workership of those in need of spiritual comfort and knowledge!jmo Yes, it has evolved from 100% evangelical to almost 100% pastoral. Now the Administration System is trying to impose their inefficacious model on Vietnam. Yes, it would seem to me that some head worker would relish a new field like Vietnam and wish in every way to get back to the evangelical workership there....and I believe that if the Canadian and/or American workers would have listened to the VN native workers, that is indeed what it would have become as that is what those native workers were doing their best at.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Mar 18, 2014 9:49:14 GMT -5
I really don't care if you agree or disagree. 2500+ people viewed it and 85 of them signed on. There must be more that people disagree with than agree with to not sign on. I've said why I haven't, and what I didn't agree with concerning the letter to 43 overseers. Banning all workers from your home is like cutting of your steering wheel to protest high gas prices. My comment wasn't about people either agreeing or disagreeing with the petition. It was simply an observation that the petition WAS reaching friends and workers. I was contacted by a worker who wished to be in contact with Arwen89 to offer support. Because of 'politics', workers and most friends who agree with the petition aren't very likely to sign it. From what I have heard and read, there is more support for what the professing couple and Arwen89 sent out than is openly stated. Scott, if it were possible, a table containing all of the workers that have spoken in favor of the petition or the subject of the petition and Arwen's sacrifice of NO worker home visits, would be interesting. As in not the name of the worker, but from what area the worker works in and the sex of the worker in comparison to what that worker may have had experience dealing with CSA or other sexual crimes committed by fellow workers! A ratio of approval should be obtained by that, eh? And as I suspect, there would be more sister workers more ready to say they approve of the petititon and/or Arwen's reaction of not allowing home worker visits! I would expect most field brother workers wouldn't necessarily speak their mind as to appear to be in complete agreement with the overseer of their fields! JMT
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Mar 18, 2014 9:55:16 GMT -5
The funny thing about this is that I've been posting in a completely unemotional state of mind. I'm not feeling hurt at all - not that stating these two facts will change anyone's mind. Jesse, Can you kindly revamp the petition Arwen wrote in a way you deem fit so the rest of us can understand what "tone" of voice was so wrong? I have communicated privately on this board, with individuals that have known abuse and were CSA victims. if my memory serves me correct, I think it was the poster thankful that even talked about a girl that is still bitter over her encounters with a worker who treated her wrongly Ina sexual manner. It seems some of you posters are tired of hearing the wrong and want to sweep it under the rug, as you declare that the future looks bright, and CSA is going away; because, apparently, some workers are taking basic training on CSA issues. If this was your daughter who was sexually violated, how would you feel? Another TMB poster shared that she was raped for years any someone who went to meeting, and even after they were sent to prison and served a few decades, they came back to the meetings, professed, and were welcomed back into the homes of th friends even though she had warned the friends and workers they were not to be trusted. they ignored the warning, and children were violated and property stolen. Hearing these things just helps reaffirm my commitment to protecting my family and those innocent victims. Humdidee Again, the ease which perps whether excons or not have of picking a victim within the fellowship due to the inability of the parents/guardians to keep a healthy outlook for the children is one reason perps like the 2x2 fellowship! That said, the overseers make it much easier for them by saying that after a perp has repented that they should be allowed back into fellowship and never place recommended abolishments as in no mtgs. with children, no convs. or spec. mtg or friend/workers gatherings where children may well be.....that yes, repeat offenders are going to be the rule of the thumb. These perps know well how the overseers are feeling and seeking to keep the status quo and it is a wonderful field day for the perps! They get first consideration everytime over any potential child victim, even the past victims hold no rights over a "repentant" perp!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 10:45:15 GMT -5
One thing very important in order to improve or get change is that you give specifics. If you give vague, general statements without specifics, everyone will think that you are talking about someone else.....they have it handled. Nothing will change. My biggest problem with it, was that I thought it was way too long. I think you are right but your argument is somewhat at odds with itself. Specifics are essential but specifics almost means length. That was one of the challenges of doing the CSA Code of Conduct. The goal was for 2 pages but there were so many things that seemed important to the contributors that it ended up 6 pages. It's a balancing act. I haven't criticized the petition for one simple reason: it is a petition that came from the heart, and I think that should be respected and accepted as is.
|
|
|
Post by jondough on Mar 18, 2014 11:14:31 GMT -5
One thing very important in order to improve or get change is that you give specifics. If you give vague, general statements without specifics, everyone will think that you are talking about someone else.....they have it handled. Nothing will change. My biggest problem with it, was that I thought it was way too long. I think you are right but your argument is somewhat at odds with itself. Specifics are essential but specifics almost means length. That was one of the challenges of doing the CSA Code of Conduct. The goal was for 2 pages but there were so many things that seemed important to the contributors that it ended up 6 pages. It's a balancing act. I haven't criticized the petition for one simple reason: it is a petition that came from the heart, and I think that should be respected and accepted as is. I hope I didn't come off as critical of what she has done because it wasn't meant that way. I agree that it came from the heart, and she was doing the only thing she felt she had the power to do. It was more of a critique, not criticism of what she has done if that makes any sense. And Yes, being specific, but minimizing length is most definitely a balancing act.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 18, 2014 13:36:27 GMT -5
Actually the issue that the petition was about was extremely trivial. I don’t even remember what it was, but something of the caliber of changing something in the cafeteria. (I was not involved, did not sign the petition – as usual, I was working too hard ) If I had been trying to effect that sort of change, I would have simply chatted my way up the management chain – starting with the person who managed the cafeteria. I was shocked at the huge push-back from management. (These were extremely reasonable people, not at all autocratic.) The message that I kind of absorbed in the aftermath was “This is not the way we do things”. THAT was their main problem, not WHAT was asked in the petition. When I first noticed this thread, I did not even look at the petition. It was kind of the thought “This is going nowhere – that is not the way they do things.” When I glanced at some of the posts on the thread, I thought that me signing the petition would hurt, rather than help – so I went on my way. (I have since reconsidered – have signed the petition – not because I think it will do anything – but out of respect for the courage of the originator of the petition – and out of respect for the really good people who I saw had signed it.) Kinda like “The Drunkard’s Walk” take-home: You just keep trying and trying. Or to put it in a Biblical context “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.” I have not yet been able to dedicate the time to peruse this entire thread. But, in passing, I noticed Marie’s post : I think sometimes that they should hire Marie as a consultant, if they were truly serious at solving this problem. But, I am still waiting for Jesse. Because, I think (whether he knows it yet or not) he has the solution – a balanced one. The other extreme – to move a solution forward – is to contact the media. In the end (and I know I will be consigned to hell for this one), it was the negative press coverage that finally got movement from the RCC. Interesting reaction (and reason for it) on that petition Sharon. Something for all to consider, and along the lines of what I have been saying. Thanks for your vote of confidence on my ability to have a balanced solution. It seems a lot here would disagree with you. I did put the petition in a word doc and will see if I have time and gumption to re-write it as an example of what I'm talking about. Clearday, I like the tone and simplicity of your petition: "yes we all want to protect our children and let's do it!" Jesse I would like to add my voice to that encouragement. I think it would be very helpful to have some input from you as far as what you would say, and how you would say it. You seem to understand the workers' mindset so maybe you can better direct us in the direction that will make a difference. Bottom line, that's all people are trying to do, protect the children and make a difference. If that can be done by a wording you devise then wonderful!
|
|
|
Post by lilwolfmisty on Mar 18, 2014 22:01:40 GMT -5
I signed and posted to facebook I hope it helps
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 19, 2014 15:04:45 GMT -5
If a mother such as arwen89 discovered that the administration at her children's school was covering up CSA and helping offenders avoid justice, I suspect she would be taking very similar action. Possibly pulling her children out of that school to remove them from a potentially dangerous situation, and demanding change and safeguards to prevent future incidents before letting them return. Hopefully if a mother discovered that there was CSA at her children's school and it was being covered up the action would first be to report it the authorities and once the situation had been investigated then take the action to insure that it could not happen in the future. Pulling her children out of the school does not solve the problem.
|
|