|
Post by sick at heart on Mar 16, 2008 13:47:16 GMT -5
Who will come forward to stop this sickness that has spread to all places? We can never trust the workers in our homes again.
|
|
|
Post by Many on Mar 16, 2008 14:52:31 GMT -5
Many have tried--Most of them have been kicked out--(Excommed)
|
|
|
Post by aussiegal on Mar 16, 2008 21:53:03 GMT -5
I wouldn't go so far as to say that "no worker" can be trusted. There is a website that is working towards eradicating child sexual abuse amidst the Truth Fellowship, and is there to help the victims recover, as well as to help those that have concerns of their own about this very topic and ways they can address them. Scott Ross is doing a lot of work behind the scenes on this very matter too. www.wingsfortruth.info
|
|
|
Post by Ned Kelly on Mar 17, 2008 2:46:11 GMT -5
Edgar,
"unique to 2x2" i suggest you read the Melbourne Victoria Australia papers of the past few days.
A Jewish school head mistress was quietly whisked back to Israel after allegations of abuse by her of her pupils. This was an exclusive Jewish group. I guess they didn't want publicity also.
One other thing, my learned friend, don't for one minute believe that any worker that came into my home had exclusive access to my children. If that was your experience when you were a worker, then you must have been among very unusual people.
I would never, never have let my children to be in a place where they could be abused by anyone, not least of all a worker.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2008 1:38:46 GMT -5
I wouldn't go so far as to say that "no worker" can be trusted. There is a website that is working towards eradicating child sexual abuse amidst the Truth Fellowship, and is there to help the victims recover, as well as to help those that have concerns of their own about this very topic and ways they can address them. Scott Ross is doing a lot of work behind the scenes on this very matter too. www.wingsfortruth.info I would of course agree that 'most' workers (as well as 'most' people in general) can be trusted. This is the fact that makes child abuse as much of a subtile danger as it is. The thing most dangerous within 2x2ism is that central doctrine spreads the false notion that workers should be trusted above all other people in the world --- That somehow or other the risks for sexual child abuse are something to be disregarded as far as 2x2 'servants of God' are concerned. (even if leadership is aware of countless individual problems in this regard) Refusal to declare blind acceptance of the 'divinity of 'the work' (which puts it above suspicion) was the reason most of the mass excommunications in western Canada a few years ago. This 'all important' aspect of 2x2 doctrine creates a perfect environment for sexual preditors. The risks are equall high in any group of single males placed in a highest trust status in the intimacy of of home environment with sexually developing children. What makes it even more dangerous is the doctrinal policy for a group sponsored 'vanishing act' if anyone should suspect or complain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2008 7:40:44 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2008 3:36:32 GMT -5
There is enormous interest in the subject (recently over 23 000 hits on this thread)-- and many express dismay -- Yet nothing happens. Is there a reason?
|
|
|
Post by posse on Mar 22, 2008 9:50:51 GMT -5
There is enormous interest in the subject (recently over 23 000 hits on this thread)-- and many express dismay -- Yet nothing happens. Is there a reason? And what should be happening? Should we be on an active witch hunt? Always on the attack? Taking them out, one at a time, always after the most likely, until there is only ones self left? The criminal I know of IS in jail, I do not know of another one still on the loose. Should we just pick someone and start attacking? Is that the best way to keep something 'hapening.'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2008 2:45:17 GMT -5
Seems to me that you 'posse' are one of the few that seem to think that there are no ongoing problems with sexual abuse withing the fellowship of friends and workers. (inspite of countless accounts that would suggest otherwise).
Unlike you, most group supporters ARE aware of problems but choose to ignore them and go along with the worker propaganda that it is 'the perfect way of God' --
Shifting total responsibility to the police authorities is also a cowardly way to avoid personal responisiblity. "If the police don't fix it, then it isn't a problem"
|
|
|
Post by indoctrinated on Mar 25, 2008 5:17:00 GMT -5
Edgar, from what I read on these posts, it appears the police are not allowed to get involved in most cases. I think that is the root of the problem. If half of these instances would get reported, the police investigations would turn up so much more. I think that is why so much is swept under the rug for fear of exposing "great leaders' in Christ. It was this whole "secrecy" thing that turned me off about 2x2ism, everything was a big secret, from finances, inner workings, member interaction, discipline, doctrine, worker movement, determining open homes, etc...... it was way too much for me to understand and I found it quite foolish, actually. Only the "elite" friends and head workers knew anything and made all the decisions.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 25, 2008 8:54:46 GMT -5
Seems to me that you 'posse' are one of the few that seem to think that there are no ongoing problems with sexual abuse withing the fellowship of friends and workers. (inspite of countless accounts that would suggest otherwise). First of all, even the rumors are not countless. The majority of the accounts are nothing more than anecdotal accounts with only the vaguest hint of facts to back them up. And then there are the sad cases where there are hard facts and for whatever reason the victims and/or their guardians refuse to go to the proper authorities. Being aware of rumors concerning the problem and having information that would allow a person to take action are two very different things. This is a complete distortion of what has been discussed. The police have absolutely no responsibility until they have been provided with the facts. If you know of a case and have the information to present go to the police. Report the incident. I get the feeling you expect people to run to the police with the rumors that abound. This is not the solution. The solution is to get the victims and/or their guardians to report the crimes to the authorities instead of to the workers. The workers need to direct the people who do report crimes to them to immediately go and report the crime to the proper authorities. Of course, if anyone has direct evidence of a crime they can file a report. Do you have direct evidence? You said countless. How many of them can you report?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2008 8:59:30 GMT -5
The kind of 'proof' that the legal system needs is seldom available to people outside the home where sexual crime takes place -- And even for folks living in the same home, it isn't always easy to obtain as sexual crime by nature is nearly always committed without witnesses. This doesn't mean that it didn't happen!!!! And it DOESN'T absolve anyone with reasonable suspicion of a responsibility to act to protect.
I agree that using the full force of the law is commendable when the right kind of evidence for conviction is available --- but 99% percent of sex crimes committed by workers would never have enough forensic evidence to stand up in court, if denied by the accused. Even most professing parents are reluctant to testify unless they 'saw it happen' -- which is seldom the case. -- or if the perpetrator actually confesses. This doesn't mean that it didn't happen!!!
Companions to sex offenders probably have the greatest access to relevant information -- but again -- the reluctance of a 2x2er to take a 'servant of God' to court is enormous, no matter what crime they may have committed.
I will restate my opinion that the folks who think that "what the police can't prove, is nothing to be concerned about" -- are simply anxious to shrug off personal responsibility for an ungodly ingredient in 2x2ism -- sexual abuse of the defenseless.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 26, 2008 9:50:34 GMT -5
The kind of 'proof' that the legal system needs is seldom available to people outside the home where sexual crime takes place -- And even for folks living in the same home, it isn't always easy to obtain as sexual crime by nature is nearly always committed without witnesses. This doesn't mean that it didn't happen!!!! And it DOESN'T absolve anyone with reasonable suspicion of a responsibility to act to protect. No one said it doesn't happen. I happen to disagree with you stand that it happens more in the F&W organization than it does elsewhere. Again - no one said it doesn't happen. But you cannot just accuse people based on rumors. You have implied that there are companions of workers who have abused children, that knew about the abuse but have not reported it. Is this based on fact? I don't believe anyone ever said this. What is the personal responsibility if the only knowledge someone has regarding child abuse is rumor and hearsay? If you want to solve this problem you need to educate parents and children that this is a crime and not a spiritual issue and at the first suspicion that your child is being abused report it to the authorities, not to the workers. The authorities will inform them in due course. Why is everyone so quick to remove all responsibility from the parents regarding their duty to protect their children? Edgar, you post on and on about the workers and their lack of action. What about the people whose job specification is to protect their children? There is no question that the guilt is on the criminal. There is no question that if the workers, or actually anyone, protect a known child abuser it is unethical and probably illegal. But the difference between your outlook and mine is that you feel the workers should be monitoring/managing/punishing/arresting or whatever any worker accused of abuse, even if there is not enough evidence to report them to the authorities. This amounts to slander or libel. I believe that if you publicly accuse someone of sexual child abuse you should have enough evidence to notify the police and should have gone to the police first. If it is just a feeling you have, keep it to yourself and protect your children. I believe the responsibility for the protection of children is first and foremost with the parents. In the case of Jean, she claims her father caught IH molesting her and allowed it to continue. Certainly IH bears the guilt of the abuse but her father, for all intents and purposes, helped IH.
|
|
|
Post by no name on Mar 26, 2008 10:03:25 GMT -5
I don't believe anyone ever said this. What is the personal responsibility if the only knowledge someone has regarding child abuse is rumor and hearsay? If you want to solve this problem you need to educate parents and children that this is a crime and not a spiritual issue and at the first suspicion that your child is being abused report it to the authorities, not to the workers. The authorities will inform them in due course. Why is everyone so quick to remove all responsibility from the parents regarding their duty to protect their children? Edgar, you post on and on about the workers and their lack of action. What about the people whose job specification is to protect their children? There is no question that the guilt is on the criminal. There is no question that if the workers, or actually anyone, protect a known child abuser it is unethical and probably illegal. But the difference between your outlook and mine is that you feel the workers should be monitoring/managing/punishing/arresting or whatever any worker accused of abuse, even if there is not enough evidence to report them to the authorities. This amounts to slander or libel. I believe that if you publicly accuse someone of sexual child abuse you should have enough evidence to notify the police and should have gone to the police first. If it is just a feeling you have, keep it to yourself and protect your children. I believe the responsibility for the protection of children is first and foremost with the parents. In the case of Jean, she claims her father caught IH molesting her and allowed it to continue. Certainly IH bears the guilt of the abuse but her father, for all intents and purposes, helped IH. Exactly. Very well said.
|
|
|
Post by posse on Mar 26, 2008 13:10:40 GMT -5
Seems to me that you 'posse' are one of the few that seem to think that there are no ongoing problems with sexual abuse withing the fellowship of friends and workers. (inspite of countless accounts that would suggest otherwise). Not true, I do believe there most likely are problems, but the US is a big place and I have neither the time or money to travel the country following up on "rumors." If it happens in my "greater backyard," I'd be glad to stick my nose in. Not true again. I am aware and do not choose to ignore, but have no idea wha the workers are saying (so I may/may not be in agreement with them) But it IS the police's responsiblity, (not us in the posse). If I try to take on that resposiblity, then I will be the one in jail. This must be your statement, as I said nor implied nothing of the kind. Edgar, you missed my point. I am not aware of anything criminal or alledged within 50-100 miles, so what are we to do to keep everyone worked up? Accuse someone of something?
|
|
|
Post by posse on Mar 26, 2008 13:21:22 GMT -5
You have implied that there are companions of workers who have abused children, that knew about the abuse but have not reported it. Is this based on fact? "greates access to releveant information" I took this to mean that the companions would be the ones most likely to know who/where/when/how (but not why) the sex offender was doing. But that is also like saying that a spouse is the one most likely to know that they are being cheated on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2008 17:07:59 GMT -5
You have implied that there are companions of workers who have abused children, that knew about the abuse but have not reported it. Is this based on fact? "greates access to releveant information" I took this to mean that the companions would be the ones most likely to know who/where/when/how (but not why) the sex offender was doing. But that is also like saying that a spouse is the one most likely to know that they are being cheated on. What I was saying is that the same-sex-couples configuration that is one of the peculiarities of the 2x2 doctrinal construction would imply that they would know what each other is doing. Even within the group itself it is well understood wisdom that if you want to know what a certain worker is really like, ask the folks that have been his/her companions. I can guarantee that the first person to suspect sexual deviation in a worker would likely be their companion. Of course, suspecting is not the same as having forensic evidence. Unfortunately this suspicion most often motivates solid 2x2 workers to make sure they keep clear of ever being left with 'forensic evidence', as this would only create problems for them amongst leadership. And it would place the responsibility on them to report to authorities. Better and easier to just 'look the other way' so you don't get left holding the bag with something concrete to report!!!
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 26, 2008 17:38:13 GMT -5
What I was saying is that the same-sex-couples configuration that is one of the peculiarities of the 2x2 doctrinal construction would imply that they would know what each other is doing. You keep saying this but in the case of child abuse I find it difficult to see how it applies. Have you ever worked with sexual predictors? One of the reasons they are 'successful' in their conquests is because they do not reveal, even to those closest to them, their true nature. I have no doubt about that. But let's think about other situations where same sex people live together. College dorms. Do you think everyone knows the sexual preferences of their room mate? Army barracks. How much would someone know about the guy sleeping next to them? People traveling together and sharing a room does not mean they know every thing about each other. I have to wonder what such a guarantee is worth. This very much has the ring of a conspiracy theory.
|
|
|
Post by Gest 15 on Mar 26, 2008 19:30:17 GMT -5
It is the civic duty of everyone in the developed world to report suspicions or allegations of child abuse to the police or other competent authority.
It is their duty to investigate these reports for evidence to substantiate these suspicions or allegations, or to show otherwise.
It is not for lay joe soap to investigate and provide police with evidence, oral, written, forensic or otherwise. Great if its to hand, but the courts in most developed countries jealously guard the rights of an Accused person and will reject any evidence which has not been gathered fairly. Only the police and other competent authorities are trained for this purpose.
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Ackerov on Mar 26, 2008 19:38:49 GMT -5
It is true that educating parents and children regarding aspects of child abuse is extremely advisable in tackling child abuse.
However, only a fool would over-subscribe to this notion for many reasons. It is only a first, albeit important, layer of protection. It is no more than putting on underwear to face a winter's day. More layers of protection are needed to combat the elements.
Now, if we could only get paedophiles to go out in winter wearing only their underwear, then there would be no child abuse. In the case of men, they would be little more than eunuchs (emphasis on the little).
|
|
|
Post by snooty on Mar 26, 2008 19:43:44 GMT -5
I don't follow your line of thought Ivan.
Only someone a few fries short of a happy meal would tramp around in the dead of winter with just their whitey tidies on.
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Ackerov on Mar 26, 2008 19:50:13 GMT -5
The point is comrade, educating children and parents about child abuse is only the "first" layer of protection you put on to combat the evil elements who participate in child abuse. You need additional layers of protection in society to achieve a far greater and more appropriate level of protection.
Prancing about in undies in the dead of winter was to offer up a comparison to the foolishness of relying solely or mainly upon child and parental education, important though this aspect is.
Da ?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 26, 2008 21:36:28 GMT -5
The point is comrade, educating children and parents about child abuse is only the "first" layer of protection you put on to combat the evil elements who participate in child abuse. You need additional layers of protection in society to achieve a far greater and more appropriate level of protection. I would like very much if you would name some of the additional levels of protection that you would suggest to prevent the first time offender from abusing children?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2008 2:03:07 GMT -5
I agree that educating children and parents about child abuse is a very important 'layer of protection' --- This includes a radical deprogramming of the 2x2 'unquestioning trust for workers' in their doctrinal role as the highest, exclusive and unquestionable 'servants of God'.
The next layer of protection is the disassembly of (or distancing from) a system that invites and accommodates child abuse and child abusers. Forced unnatural (for many unbearable) celibacy -- along with unmonitored cohabitation with potential victims in the intimacy of a home environment with the privacy this creates.
The legal system is another layer -- but probably the one that has the least potential for success without the first two being in place.
|
|
|
Post by Chey Kinghead on Mar 27, 2008 3:56:51 GMT -5
I think you are needing to come in from the cold Rational and put some more layers of clothing on to keep warm ?
For starters, some children need protection from THEIR OWN PARENTS. That alone signifies a demand for another layer or two.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 27, 2008 6:59:34 GMT -5
I agree that educating children and parents about child abuse is a very important 'layer of protection' --- This includes a radical deprogramming of the 2x2 'unquestioning trust for workers' in their doctrinal role as the highest, exclusive and unquestionable 'servants of God'. This is not just a 2x2 issue. The same happens in many religions and the education needs to be broader than just a single sect. It is true that this is the focus of this group but until you can see that the problem is catholic and needs to be treated as such the sooner change can be implemented. The issue of sexual child abuse needs to be stated for what it is, a criminal event. If it was learned that a worker had robbed a bank they would be reported to the police. Repeating this over and over does not make it correct. The system does not invite child abuse any more than the director of a cay care does. It is a situation where children are present and this is where child abuse will happen. Although asked, you have never been able to back up your claims that sexual child abuse is any worse in the F&W than it is in the world population at large. Again, this is an education problem. Parents should protect their children from this type of situation. The legal system is designed to protect only after there has been a crime. From what you have posted, your 'solutions' are all focused on eliminating the 2x2s. This is not a solution. Abuse will still happen as long as the parents do not protect their children. One person related to me that the worker that molested her was just one of a number of people who took advantage of her. At the time of the molestation she viewed the attention as positive and a physical manifestation of the fact that someone cared about her. There are many cases on record where a child has learned to provoke their abuser to violence because the negative attention is preferable to being ignored.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 27, 2008 7:07:16 GMT -5
I think you are needing to come in from the cold Rational and put some more layers of clothing on to keep warm ? For starters, some children need protection from THEIR OWN PARENTS. That alone signifies a demand for another layer or two. You can talk about adding additional layers and all the things that should be done but so far I have not seen what these layers are. How do you protect children from their parents? A very good question. We have just learned that in a family in our community there has been on going abuse for the past 4 years. We know the family, the extended family, have been there for dinner, spend time with a variety of the people, and there was never anything that hinted at what was going on. It was not until the wife/mother became involved in some classwork that was required for her profession regarding the subject that she realized the gravity of their situation and went to the authorities. It was an educational process. So if you think more layers of protection are needed - I agree. What do you propose?
|
|
|
Post by Chey Kinghead on Mar 27, 2008 8:12:51 GMT -5
Rational, you need to look at what the rest of society has in place for these additional layers. They are plainly defined. Look at any school, youth group, nursery, proper church group, etc and you will soon see that there is a rather large building built upon the "foundation" of educating parents and children. This building involves the rest of society in many shapes and forms. I'm not going to argue with you over the obvious. If you wish to remain blinkered so be it. I have every confidence that virtually ever other poster accepts there is much more to this than just educating parents and children.
I would accept that child sex abuse may not be any worse in the F&W's sect than the world at large, I would point out that in reality WE DO NOT KNOW THIS FOR SURE. Workers seem very keen that the carpet is kept firmly nailed to the floor. Those workers in authority tend to be the older ones. Are they hiding something ? Domestic cleanliness will sweep under the carpet !
Even if the occurrence of child sex abuse in the F&W's is equal to or even less that the world at large, this does not excuse them from spiritual or moral, even legal responsibility to report any suspected matters they may become aware of within their ranks.
The more they procrastinate or evade, the more relevant the questions "what are they hiding ?" and "what are they fearing ?" becomes !
|
|