|
Post by juliette on Oct 12, 2007 20:12:45 GMT -5
sounds like someone condones child molestation and would prefer that they get away with it. Sounds like someone condones a witch hunt and vigilante action without regard that it could forever damage innocent people. I wonder what the ratio is of unreported and/or covered up sexual abuse cases vs. innocent people who have been falsely accused of molestation. I bet it's not even statistically significant.
|
|
|
Post by FREE2BEME on Oct 12, 2007 20:28:18 GMT -5
:)Nitro you're too funny!
|
|
|
Post by Observing on Oct 13, 2007 14:45:50 GMT -5
I wonder what the ratio is of unreported and/or covered up sexual abuse cases vs. innocent people who have been falsely accused of molestation. I bet it's not even statistically significant. You would be very surprised and wrong in your assumption. The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform reports that: In fact, out of every 100 children investigated as possible victims of abuse, at least 66 simply weren't - the report was false. 18 were "substantiated" victims of neglect, 6 were victims of all forms of physical abuse, from the most minor to the most severe, 3 were victims of sexual abuse and two were victims of psychological maltreatment. The rest fall into a category listed as "other." Or would you say that 2/3 is not statistically significant? Suppose they were off by a factor of 10? Wouldn't 6-7% of falsely accused people be something to consider before bringing out the pitch forks? The following is from a repost put out by Prevent Child Abuse America referring to a study done in Denver. The data was examined and there were some obvious problems with the analysis. They reported that only eight percent of reports were false. But their figure only applies only to deliberate falsehoods. The data (from the Denver study) shows that an additional 17 percent were made in good faith but turned out to be false. In an additional 24 percent of cases they couldn't determine if the report was true or not and removed it from the study. Thus, what the data supported was that at least 23 percent and perhaps as many as 47 percent of the sexual abuse allegations examined in this study were false. False accusations is a very real problem. Do you recall the case in Massachusetts (Fells Acres) where the owners and workers in a day care were accused and sentenced to jail for molesting children? This is a very narrow part of the child abuse landscape but it is frequent enough that it has a substantial listing in Wikipedia. I know wikipedia is not a verified source but most of these trials were public knowledge and you can easily verify the results. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_care_sexual_abuse_hysteriaI have a somewhat close connection with the Fells Acre case. The lives of these people were completely destroyed because of the work of a single health care worker (and I use that term very loosely) who, for all intents and purposes, told these children what they repeated in court. Recovered memories have been shown to be nothing but implanted memories. www.religioustolerance.org/ra_fells.htmFor people who cannot take the time to look at all the data here is a brief bit regarding a trial in NJ: “In 1985, Kelly Michaels, a former teacher at the Wee Care Day Nursery in Maplewood, New Jersey, was accused of a staggering array of abuses: assaulting children in a tractor; spreading peanut butter on their genitals and licking it off; raping them with knives, forks and Lego blocks. As Rabinowitz recounts, one child testified that Michaels had turned him into a mouse while he was in an airplane on the way to visit his grandmother. In closing arguments, prosecutors compared Michaels to Hitler; she was sentenced to 47 years in prison.”I am aware this is not a popular stance. I have seen the ridicule hurled at others who have tried to raise this issue. Stopping child abuse is a great and wonderful thing. The witch hunt this message board has deteriorated into is a sad statement.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Oct 13, 2007 15:17:52 GMT -5
Observing, In regards to: ...I am aware this is not a popular stance. I have seen the ridicule hurled at others who have tried to raise this issue. Stopping child abuse is a great and wonderful thing.
The witch hunt this message board has deteriorated into is a sad statement.
Thank you for your post. I have had PM's and emails from a few who have brought up these issues. I have been asked for names to be given out. I know that in most cases, all I have been given is hearsay. I have no desire to give a name to anybody which could lead to a false accusation against any worker or elder (or anybody for that matter...) It is an issue that I have struggled some with, and prayed about. Those names who have which belong to people who 'bear watching' (or more) are the names of people who have been given to me from multiple sources which have no connection. For example a recent name which has been given in regards to a recent issue and an issue that is decades old, and involves the same type/gender of abuse. I am not going to indiscriminately give these names out. Obviously the best thing for parents to do when feeling that a child has been abused is to contact the legal authorities so it can be investigated. Another thing that needs to be done is to hold the workers (and elders) accountable for their actions. This is biblical, and it is happening now across the U.S. I'd like to thank all who have been making sure that I too am held accountable for the things I am doing. I have been given a task to do, and I am trying to do it as well as I can. Scott
|
|
|
Post by Observing on Oct 13, 2007 16:17:49 GMT -5
Thank you for your post. I have had PM's and emails from a few who have brought up these issues. I have been asked for names to be given out. I know that in most cases, all I have been given is hearsay. I have no desire to give a name to anybody which could lead to a false accusation against any worker or elder (or anybody for that matter...) That is a great stand. This is hardly a statement of truth. I think the test might be "Would a court accept this connection"? I certainly did not mean to imply that. They might want to check with the child first. Let's remove the conditional. Anyone guilty of any abuse should be held accountable. The same should be true for people who issue false accusations. This is not a spiritual issue. It is a criminal issue. This is the root of the problem. People look at it as a spiritual issue and take it to the leaders who then pray and talk about it, declare the criminal 'cured', move the criminal to another location, and hope it all goes away. None of this could have happened had the victim (parents of the victim) gone to the people who actually deal with crimes. You have decided to do this and are, as far as I can tell, doing a good job. But unless I am sadly mistaken, this is not an assigned task. A public forum is not the place to try criminals. The vast majority of people dealing with this have demonstrated time and again that they do not have the training or understanding of what it takes to bring a criminal to trial. While I understand their passion it is a knee-jerk response that, in my opinion, will do much more damage than good. Discussing the details of a criminal case in detail and on a public forum does not help when and if the case goes to trial. Having no understanding of the fact that many accusations are made in anger or as a face saving tactic will only lead to possible damage of innocent people, including the very children that people believe they are protecting. Sure, everyone wants to protect the child, find the criminal, apply the tar and feathers, procure the rail, and take part in helping the criminal out of town. But what do I know. I am just a poor fool posting on a public message board! Check with people who do this for a living and see what they think would be a good way to deal with this.
|
|
|
Post by nitro on Oct 13, 2007 17:22:36 GMT -5
observing Watch your sources! Visitors do not need specialized qualifications to contribute, since their primary role is to write articles that cover existing knowledge; this means that people of all ages and cultural and social background can write Wikipedia articles. With rare exceptions, articles can be edited by anyone with access to the Internet, simply by clicking the edit this page link. Anyone is welcome to add information, cross-references or citations, as long as they do so within Wikipedia's editing policies and to an appropriate standard. For example, if you add information to an article, be sure to include your references, as unreferenced facts are subject to removal. This is not a spiritual issue. It is a criminal issue. Sooner or later it will become spiritual. All will have to answer to God of their sins. Here on earth or on Judgment day. nitro
|
|
|
Post by nitro on Oct 13, 2007 17:33:12 GMT -5
Your second source lets us know right away what to look for. The importance of faith/belief statements: We feel that every denomination, para-church organization, religious group, and religious web site should consider creating a statement of belief or faith and displaying it prominently. This is particularly important among Christian groups who may use the term "Christian" to refer to only the Roman Catholic Church, or only to Evangelical Protestantism, or to the full range of Christian denominations and beliefs, or to some other subset of the religion. Quite often, when we visit a Christian web site for the first time, we have to search around among its articles to find out exactly what part of the total religion of Christianity they serve.
What is the 2x2 church belief statement?
nitro
|
|
|
Post by wellwell on Oct 13, 2007 18:26:48 GMT -5
Things do come out to light sooner or later, or in this case, similar cases. I was sexually abused by an "outstanding and prominent friend", and when the situation was found out, I asked a female worker to ask this man not to attend X or X conventions, (I gave a few options), so that I could attend it, and I did not want to ever see him again. I was also going to ask if they would let me know at which one he was going to be, (did not get a chance to ask this much). It sounds like you were an adult. You were the victim of a crime. Why was the man free to walk the streets? You are blaming the wrong people. The man committed a crime and no one reported him. He was free to harm others. People need to take responsibilities for their actions, or lack thereof. You are right about my age at the time. I had just turned 18, and when I think back, I think how immature I was at the time to think the workers would help me through this ordeal. I wish I had not looked up to the people I thought would back me up. If you think I am blaming the wrong people because they did not come through for me when I thought I could count on them, then you are right again. Kudos for you. Hope the creeps you represent pay you well. Now I am free and know that only God will be with me through any tribulation and on a happier note, through all joyous moments. ww
|
|
|
Post by juliette on Oct 13, 2007 21:18:42 GMT -5
I wonder what the ratio is of unreported and/or covered up sexual abuse cases vs. innocent people who have been falsely accused of molestation. I bet it's not even statistically significant. You would be very surprised and wrong in your assumption. The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform reports that: In fact, out of every 100 children investigated as possible victims of abuse, at least 66 simply weren't - the report was false. 18 were "substantiated" victims of neglect, 6 were victims of all forms of physical abuse, from the most minor to the most severe, 3 were victims of sexual abuse and two were victims of psychological maltreatment. The rest fall into a category listed as "other." Or would you say that 2/3 is not statistically significant? Suppose they were off by a factor of 10? Wouldn't 6-7% of falsely accused people be something to consider before bringing out the pitch forks? The following is from a repost put out by Prevent Child Abuse America referring to a study done in Denver. The data was examined and there were some obvious problems with the analysis. They reported that only eight percent of reports were false. But their figure only applies only to deliberate falsehoods. The data (from the Denver study) shows that an additional 17 percent were made in good faith but turned out to be false. In an additional 24 percent of cases they couldn't determine if the report was true or not and removed it from the study. Thus, what the data supported was that at least 23 percent and perhaps as many as 47 percent of the sexual abuse allegations examined in this study were false. False accusations is a very real problem. Do you recall the case in Massachusetts (Fells Acres) where the owners and workers in a day care were accused and sentenced to jail for molesting children? This is a very narrow part of the child abuse landscape but it is frequent enough that it has a substantial listing in Wikipedia. I know wikipedia is not a verified source but most of these trials were public knowledge and you can easily verify the results. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_care_sexual_abuse_hysteriaI have a somewhat close connection with the Fells Acre case. The lives of these people were completely destroyed because of the work of a single health care worker (and I use that term very loosely) who, for all intents and purposes, told these children what they repeated in court. Recovered memories have been shown to be nothing but implanted memories. www.religioustolerance.org/ra_fells.htmFor people who cannot take the time to look at all the data here is a brief bit regarding a trial in NJ: “In 1985, Kelly Michaels, a former teacher at the Wee Care Day Nursery in Maplewood, New Jersey, was accused of a staggering array of abuses: assaulting children in a tractor; spreading peanut butter on their genitals and licking it off; raping them with knives, forks and Lego blocks. As Rabinowitz recounts, one child testified that Michaels had turned him into a mouse while he was in an airplane on the way to visit his grandmother. In closing arguments, prosecutors compared Michaels to Hitler; she was sentenced to 47 years in prison.”I am aware this is not a popular stance. I have seen the ridicule hurled at others who have tried to raise this issue. Stopping child abuse is a great and wonderful thing. The witch hunt this message board has deteriorated into is a sad statement. Welcome back, friend! This is all very interesting. I think that the false positive rate for sexual abuse would be less than the false positive rate of regular abuse. When you quote from the source about 66/100 possible abuse cases being unfounded, that could take into account angry ex spouses, paranoid neighbors, etc. But your statistics about falsely accused sexual abuse is interesting. I think that needs to be looked at in conjunction with the number of sex abuse cases that are never reported. Taking THAT into account I think would make the rate of falsely reported sex abuse cases a much smaller percentage of the total. How many people have you personally come in contact with who have been falsely accused of sexual molestation or abuse (for me, the answer is one). And how many people have you come in contact with who were sexually abused in some way, many unreported? For me the answer is well over 25.
|
|
|
Post by Observing on Oct 13, 2007 23:34:31 GMT -5
Thanks Yes it would take that into account as well as people reading message boards with a number of loose statements being made! Let there be no mistake about it, cases of sexual abuse are often reported as a means of revenge or, in the case of the Catholic Church, for example, as a source of income. In the case of a person who was in a very restrictive religious group and forced, by their parents, to follow what the workers said - what better way to get even? I think not because it is, as you said, an unknown. Estimates range all over the place. For statistics to any validity at all (and they certainly be twisted) you cannot throw in unknowns and expect any meaningful results. Until THAT can be quantified there is not much to discuss. The point is that the system requires that once a report is made that it be followed through to some determination. That leads to the destruction of people's lives. That is not a factor. Whether it is 200 or 5 that I have come into contact with does not change the data Unreported to whom? I assume they were all reported to you. The question is, if they are reported to you why are they not reported to someone who can do something about it? If someone who has been reported to the state, and there are thousands, slips through the cracks people go crazy about a child molester being allowed to go free. But, as you have said, people are telling you of abuse but they have not reported it. The abuser has been allowed to go free. They are as much at fault, in these cases, as the state. The number I come into contact with is, again, meaningless. But they have all been reported to the agency. The problem, as I see it, is a lack of education regarding sexual abuse. Children are abused and the parents go to the leaders of the group that the abuser is a member of. They are not, almost always, professionals and the actions taken are not the correct ones in the majority of the time. On the other hand, when the cases are brought to the proper authorities, action is required to be taken. The case is investigated and a determination of sexual abuse is made by people whose job is to examine cases of sexual abuse. If the goal here is to help children and prevent abuse, the starting place is education and not a witch hunt.
|
|
|
Post by Observing on Oct 13, 2007 23:51:56 GMT -5
observing Watch your sources! Visitors do not need specialized qualifications to contribute, since their primary role is to write articles that cover existing knowledge; this means that people of all ages and cultural and social background can write Wikipedia articles. With rare exceptions, articles can be edited by anyone with access to the Internet, simply by clicking the edit this page link. Anyone is welcome to add information, cross-references or citations, as long as they do so within Wikipedia's editing policies and to an appropriate standard. For example, if you add information to an article, be sure to include your references, as unreferenced facts are subject to removal. Oh golly gee. Thanks so much for pointing this out. I had a feeling I had written " I know wikipedia is not a verified source but most of these trials were public knowledge and you can easily verify the results." for some reason but could never figure out why. You may or may not be correct. However, it is a criminal issue. Whether or not it will be a spiritual issue at some unspecified place and/or time in the future is a whole other subject.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Oct 14, 2007 0:43:46 GMT -5
Howdy again Observing, In regards to: The problem, as I see it, is a lack of education regarding sexual abuse. Children are abused and the parents go to the leaders of the group that the abuser is a member of. They are not, almost always, professionals and the actions taken are not the correct ones in the majority of the time.I agree totally that the overseers are not professionals in regards to abuse, but if they are serious about the welfare of those who are members of the 'truth', then it is their responsibility to make sure that the issue IS referred to the proper authorities. This is not unique to just those who are in the 'truth'. It is normal to look to your pastor/priest/worker when issues happen in ones life. No, I don't agree that it is the correct thing to do in an abuse situation, but it is normal to rely on those in the clergy in ones church for direction. On the other hand, when the cases are brought to the proper authorities, action is required to be taken. The case is investigated and a determination of sexual abuse is made by people whose job is to examine cases of sexual abuse.I agree. Same as above. If a worker has been asked for advise, the advise should be to call the authorities, or even to call the authorities on behalf of the parents. If the goal here is to help children and prevent abuse, the starting place is education and not a witch hunt.Again I agree. In the recent Minnesota case, education was used. Lyle Shober not only sent a letter to all the families in his field with the name of the admitted pedophile, he also sent information concerning pedophiles, and informed everyone that if they thought another child was abused then to call the authorities. (not the workers) Another thing that has come about because of all the attention this issue has gotten here on the TMB is that professing folks around the U.S. and Canada are approaching the overseers in their field and asking that this issue be addressed. Personally I think this has a lot to do with the 'education' that they are getting here on the TMB. They have heard how an overseer has dealt with this issue and how it can be resolved without hiding it, but rather bringing it out of the darkness and into the light where it is exposed and dealt with. Another thing that is coming out of this in regards to education is a board that is being set up now where victims of abuse can go to get help from other abuse survivors. It is a direct result of these 'witch hunts' that you are referring to. It is being set up with the input of both exes and professing people who are abuse survivors. Once again it is education. Could you please help us out in regards to educating people about this? You say that it is all about education. I for one welcome any input and help with this issue. Are you willing to get involved and talk to the workers and professing people about these issues in your area? How about posting your email address as Juli and I have done in order that people can contact you and share these issues with you. I have made quite a few new friends by doing this, and am now talking to more professing folks than I have in the last 30 years, and have met a lot of exes who have questions and stories to share. Scott
|
|
|
Post by Observing on Oct 14, 2007 0:48:44 GMT -5
I was sexually abused by an "outstanding and prominent friend", and when the situation was found out, I asked a female worker to ask this man not to attend X or X conventions, (I gave a few options), so that I could attend it, and I did not want to ever see him again. I was also going to ask if they would let me know at which one he was going to be, (did not get a chance to ask this much). She did not even let me finish, and said: no, we never tell people not to go to convention. So I understood I was the one to make a choice whether or not to go to convention. I never went back to convention in that state. Sexual abuse in adults usually falls into the sexual harassment or rape category since, as an adult, you have the capacity to make choices. Sexual harassment generally takes place in the workplace or other environment where, for a number of reasons, the victim is required to me. Rape is broadly defined as coercing an individual to engage in any sexual act. Since you didn't mention this was a workplace occurrence it raises the question of why you would report rape to the workers and not to the authorities? This is an example of where education would have been a benefit - if it is a crime it is reported first to the authorities. No matter who the criminal is. This seems like an easy thing for parents to teach their children. WellWell was let down by the educational system. She should have been taught: - You are not responsible for other people’s actions and it’s important to remember that it is not your fault if another person pressures you to have sex against your will, tricks you, or is violent towards you.
- You do not have to succumb to pressure to have sex. It is your body. You control it and have the right to decide what you are comfortable with. Saying "NO" means "NO" and anyone who continues to pressure you after that may not be someone you want to have sex with anyway. Having good self-esteem is important to making decisions that are best for you, and not being focused on what your partner or others may think.
- If you think there is a chance that you might find yourself in a situation where you could be pressured into sex with your partner, but you’re not feeling ready, practice saying "NO" to the person in your mind beforehand. Think through how you could respond to what they might say, and how to stay in control. Talk to your friends about successful experiences they might have had, and how they handled the situation.
- Know that you have the right to say no to sex.
- Agreeing to go on a date with someone is not the same as agreeing to have sex. It is okay to remind the person that you only agreed to a date if they pressure you for sex.
- Learn to communicate in a direct confident way. For example if someone wants to have sex with you and you don’t, clearly and definitely say ‘No.” If you don’t clearly state no, the other person may be unsure what you want. By communicating clearly there is no doubt. Put the message across- No means No.
- If the person doesn’t listen to you, making a stand verbally might stop them. Tell the person with a strong voice, or yell to stop. Use whatever words you think are appropriate.
- If that doesn’t work, decide on what you think is the safest thing for you to do. You could pretend to faint, have an asthma attack, tell them you need to go to the toilet - and then escape. You may decide it’s safest to go along with what they want. You may decide to run away or physically defend yourself.
- You may want to enroll in a self defense course so you can learn how to hurt the person in a way that will help you to get away.
- If the person hurting or pressuring you is in your family or is a close family friend or partner, you may find it easier to talk to someone else you trust instead of dealing with that person yourself. People who don’t respect your right to say no can try to stop you from talking to others. By speaking to someone you trust, the person can be confronted and might be stopped from pressuring anyone else.
- If you are abused/assaulted/raped contact the authorities.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2007 4:37:17 GMT -5
We must be extremely careful of putting too much importance on statistical information. We are living in days of "zero tolerence" for matters such as sexual and domestic abuse. This means there is virtually a compulsory reporting or investigation of any allegations or suggestions of these matters. Many people, particularly in responsible positions, when they hear about incidents where there "may" be even an outside possibility of abuse, now report these matters to the authorities. That clears them of their responsibility and in many cases they are just following procedures.
The problem with this is that many matters do not deserve on their own merits to be reported in the first place. There is absolutely no substance to them, or there may be no evidence of any misconduct. Nevertheless these type of matters become "statistics." In other words they are a negative statistic to start with.
In recent times in the UK, reports of domestic abuse have soared, but conviction rates do not appropriately reflect this. I many cases, based on percentages, detection and conviction rates have gone down, though in real terms this is not the case.
In the past in the UK up to 90% of husband/wife + wife/husband abuse matters, although investigated were resolved through police mediation without reports to prosecutors.The reason for this was simple, many matters are generally unfounded or are of a minor nature, which by and large were quickly resolved and the fueding parties soon forgot their differences and carried on living together.
Nowadays, everything with sufficient evidence, irrespective how minor it is, is reported to the prosecutor. Bear in mind also, many spouses make efforts to drop charges against their partners days or even weeks after the events. Lawyers too encourage people on how to get one over their partners, advising them to report any instances of abuse. These might be just verbal as happens in most marriages from time to time, but they do suggest to their clients to add the odd allegation of slapping etc (no injury/his word against hers/etc). These won't go anywhere in one on one situations where there are no other witnesses and are hard to disprove, but can be used in a civil court in a divorce/separation case.
Instances of reported sexual abuse, particularly involving minors, have soared, because people now believe in better safe than sorry with this issue. However, many of these matters have little or no substance to them, and in the past would not have shown up as statistics. If you have several such matters for every confirmed case coming to light added to statistics, then the percentage of false or unsubstantiated cases is always going to outweigh those which are confirmed.
I am only posting this to remind people to be very wary of statistics. With better or compulsory reporting nowadays, confirmed abuses have gone up, but statistically numbers can reflect poorly as percentages against the other categories such as unsubstantiated, unproven or false accusations.
|
|
|
Post by Observing on Oct 14, 2007 14:54:01 GMT -5
It is normal, wrong, and needs to be changed. I agree. Same as above. If a worker has been asked for advise, the advise should be to call the authorities, or even to call the authorities on behalf of the parents.[/quote]They should do both and tell the victim way they are going to do. This is what should have been happening all along. What ossue are you talking about here? The past or looking forward to the future? OK - there is no surprise you believe this. But it was not the overseer that was the solution. It was the parents going to the authorities. As far as I am concerned the workers are not part of the probem or, in fact, the situation. The victims(or parents) go to the authorities. The criminal is arrested. The legal system (in most locations) is responsible for the dissemination of information. At this point the workers can be involved or not as the victim sees fit. In general: - Level 1 - If the risk of repeat offense is low, a level one designation shall be given to such sex offender. In such case the law enforcement agency or agencies having jurisdiction and the law enforcement agency or agencies having had jurisdiction at the time of his or her conviction shall be notified pursuant to the article.
- Level 2 - If the risk of repeat offense is moderate, a level two designation shall be given to such sex offender. In such case the law enforcement agency or agencies having jurisdiction and the law enforcement agency or agencies having had jurisdiction at the time of his or her conviction shall be notified and may disseminate relevant information which may include the name of the sex offender, approximate address based on sex offender's zip code, a photograph of the offender, background information including the offender's crime of conviction, modus of operation, type of victim targeted, the name and address of any institution of higher education at which the sex offender is enrolled, attends, is employed or resides and the description of special conditions imposed on the offender to any entity with vulnerable populations related to the nature of the offense committed by such sex offender. Any entity receiving information on a sex offender may disclose or further disseminate such information at its discretion.
- Level 3 - If the risk of repeat offense is high and there exists a threat to the public safety, a level three designation shall be given to such sex offender. In such case, the law enforcement agency or agencies having jurisdiction and the law enforcement agency or agencies having had jurisdiction at the time of his or her conviction shall be notified and may disseminate relevant information which may include the sex offender's name, exact address, a photograph of the offender, background information including the offender's crime of conviction, modus of operation, type of victim targeted, the name and address of any institution of higher education at which the sex offender is enrolled, attends, is employed or resides and the description of special conditions imposed on the offender to any entity with vulnerable populations related to the nature of the offense committed by such sex offender. Any entity receiving information on a sex offender may disclose or further disseminate such information at its discretion. In addition, in such case, the information described herein shall also be provided in the subdirectory established in this article and notwithstanding any other provision of law, such information shall, upon request, be made available to the public.
Comfort perhaps. Help - it will remain to be seen. Given the differences in state statues there is not a lot of cross information that is useful when going to the authorities. Or you thinking they are not going to be encouraged to report these deeds? There is a plethora of sites out there. Will adding more reduce the rate of abuse? As you know, I am not shy about voicing my opinion right here for one and all to read. I am involved by posting here. As I have stated in the past, I deal with these on a professional level and am limited by license to a couple of states. No, I cannot in good faith do that. I am not licensed to help most of these people but there are agencies in each of their areas who are. How about posting the email addresses/ information of organizations who can help? Why would I want people to share issues with me when, if the cases are true, they should be shared only with the authorities? These open discussions, especially when children are concerned, can be very damaging to a case - and with a mistrial the criminal walks. Contamination of the jury pool, while perhaps slight, is a possibility. The help these people need is to assist parents in explaining to their children what sexual abuse is. And when this has been brought up before there is a outcry because people don't want their children exposed to the meaning of oral sex, the definition (using real words and real explanations)of vag ina, pe nis, and the very concrete explanation of what sexual abuse is and who they should report it to. This is not rocket science. It is a simple decision. As far as education goes, it is a long and involved process and in the vast majority of these cases will not work. Step one is to understand that the bible (NT in this case)is perhaps in error. Paul clearly states that a Christian is not to sue another Christian in a secular court of law. Rather, the disputed matter should be arbitrated or judged by a wise Christian or Christians. 1 Corinthians 6:1-8So the true Christian is in a dilemma. The workers will undoubtedly throw this up, even if it can be argued this is not at all what Paul means. On the other hand, in this same area there are some stern words about sexual offenses. As wonderful as it is to think that god will take care of this, the record so far is not good. This has nothing to do with god - it is a criminal offense. Oh sure, forgiveness is great but it is sadly not an effective solution or a solution at all People can certainly PM me but I probably will not be offering them what they are looking for. Great. I am glad this is working out for you. I am not looking for friends attracted by soliciting their stories of sexual abuse. If they have a story to tell, tell someone who can do something.
|
|