|
Post by juliette on Oct 27, 2007 13:35:11 GMT -5
God Bless you, Juli. It is very clear if you & Scott hadn't taken the right path; this too would have been swept under the rug and the abuse would have continued. I feel so bad for sex abuse victims as it seems the first thought of parents is to protect the worker & not their children. And, why? Aren't the children more important than a worker? God Bless How is this very clear? Not to detract from what Juli and Scott did, Tim has turned himself in before they took any steps. It is difficult to sweep an arrest under the rug. This is true. This case was different from the beginning because the authorities were called. This is HUGE. If the authorities were called in every case, that would take care of much of the problem. This case was also different because the abuser was caught in the act. The abuse had apparently been happening for a while, but because of the insidious ways of this pedophile, the child never told the parents. That brings us back to the issue of education; teaching children about what is appropriate and what is not and what to do if something bad happens to you.
|
|
|
Post by guest5 on Oct 27, 2007 13:37:41 GMT -5
I think Scott and Juliette knew about the Tim S. thing before he turned himself in. He was already back in his field in SW MN when word came that he turn himself in. I was told this from the person where Tim was staying when he got a call to turn himself in.
|
|
|
Post by How long on Oct 27, 2007 13:56:56 GMT -5
Educating parents and children will certainly go a long way towards raising awareness and reducing opportunities for child abuse occurring. However, it will NOT stop child abuse criminals. It WILL restrict them. Nothing will stop the first time offender and that is the problem with the workers. Most have been known from birth and, to the best of my knowledge, there has never been a worker with a criminal record. Prevention is only possible if it is put in place by the person being molested or their caretakers. Children need to be educated so they know that it is expected that they will talk to their parents about questionable behavior regardless of what the criminal tells them. Child abuse is usually not a sudden event but builds and there are very often signs that are ignored mainly because the parents and children have never discussed the issue. This is not a friends and worker problem. It is a child abuse problem. This sounde good in theory but have you ever tried to run a background check on an individual? As an individual? I thought not. This is not a spiritual issue but a legal one. Exactly what do you think a background check shows? Since, as you observed, the vast majority would show no criminal record isn't this providing a sense of false security? "Oh, I can leave my chiuldren alone with this person because they passed a background check." If, as in the case of Tim, a worker is discovered abusing a child, who is responsible? He had no record. A background check would have been negative. How are these things related? I am guessing the young single woman is not a child. What makes a young single woman more at risk than a young single male? Who are these "potentially vulnerable persons"? Are you saying it is the stress of living in the spotlight that causes these abuse problems? Have you worked in this field long? The simplistic solutions presented do not show much of an understanding of the dynamics of abuse.
|
|
|
Post by juliette on Oct 27, 2007 14:01:47 GMT -5
I think Scott and Juliette knew about the Tim S. thing before he turned himself in. He was already back in his field in SW MN when word came that he turn himself in. I was told this from the person where Tim was staying when he got a call to turn himself in. I actually did not know about the Tim issue until at least 6 weeks after he was in jail. We no longer go to meetings, so it wasn't until I talked to a friend that I found out. That was actually the reason I got so involved.... no one had contacted us to tell us about Tim even though he had spent time alone with our children. The fact that he was alone with our children was known by our parents and several of Tim's companions. Even those in the fellowship only knew about the issue via the gossip channels, and the info was of course not all accurate or complete. The workers in MN were originally told not to tell people about what had happened.
|
|
|
Post by Perhaps on Oct 27, 2007 14:12:32 GMT -5
I think Scott and Juliette knew about the Tim S. thing before he turned himself in. You think or you know? Have you read any of the posts by Juli? Maybe you should just read what Julie wrote: " I found out about the situation about 6 weeks after it occurred." Your post, like so many other postings, is nothing but gossip. Perhaps Juli or Scott will once again provide a time line of the sequence of events. The veracity of your reports are very much in question.
|
|
|
Post by Perhaps on Oct 27, 2007 14:12:36 GMT -5
I think Scott and Juliette knew about the Tim S. thing before he turned himself in. You think or you know? Have you read any of the posts by Juli? Maybe you should just read what Julie wrote: " I found out about the situation about 6 weeks after it occurred." Your post, like so many other postings, is nothing but gossip. Perhaps Juli or Scott will once again provide a time line of the sequence of events. The veracity of your reports are very much in question.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2007 15:17:18 GMT -5
To "How Long,"
Although far from being an expert I have considerably far more experience in dealing with matters of child and sexual abuse than you may imagine. I know only too well the distress and trauma such things cause.
I have addressed on other posts such matters as first time offenders, some being upwards of 70 years of age. Preventative measures can seriously restrict offenders. Every situation cannot be legislated for, nor forseen, but all reasonable measures can and should be taken to prevent as far as possible those unfortunate incidents from occurring in the first place.
No Worker has a criminal record "to the best of your knowledge." Very good. Criminal records are not found under carpets where these crimes are often swept ! This is only a part of the issue though !
You say that "prevention is only possible if it is put in place by the persons being molested or their caretakers." This is like saying that it is my fault that my house gets broken into if I forget to lock my door, or if I get beaten up in the street at night that it's my own fault for going out after dark ? I can take wise steps to reduce the risks of these things occurring in the first place, but nevertheless it is not my fault if they do occur. We are not quite at an age where criminals are not held responsible for their crimes. The responsiblity for committing crime lies with the criminal. This is why prevention methods must be to a great extent directed at restricting their opportunities to commit crimes. We can all do our bit to prevent crime, but the main thrust is in addressing the criminal. That's why they get locked up.
Are you honestly expecting people to buy into the notion that child abuse or other instances of sexual misconduct committed by Workers, is NOT a problem for the Friends and Workers in general to address, but only those affected by it ? A reality check, please !
You ask if I have ever done background checks on an individual ? I have for many years and still do to a certain extent. They are only the beginning of a process to see if someone is a suitable candidate. By receiving security clearance a person may qualify for the next step in the process. You fail to recognise that I am trying to point out that such things also "protect" the organisation from future claims or legal processes that may enquire that they have carried out all reasonable (and in some cases legal) steps before appointing a person. Most organisations, churches and voluntary groups, carry out these checks as "standard procedure." So why not the Friends and Workers ? Are they different from the rest of society ? Are they above committing the offences that make such things necessary ?
In the case of TS, a background check may well have proved negative. Okay he may have passed that test. What about the other preventative steps I mentioned. They certainly would have "prevented" some of his abuses from occurring !
You refer to one of my statements as being a legal one, not a spiritual one. I'm afraid both are so intertwined in these circumstances, they are both. Loving thy neighbour gives us a duty of care responsibility which is both legal and spiritual.
You are right that young single men may be as much at risk as young single women. My oversight ! Thanks for pointing that out. However, young single women are generally much more at risk from men than young single men are from women, or don't you accept this ?
"Potentially vulnerable persons" may include children, young women, people of low intellect, mentally challenged people, the frail, the mentaly impaired, the weak, those who have had trauma in their lives and are vulnerable to misplacing their trust. This list is far from exhaustive and to a degree any one of us can be vulnerable to exploitation at some time or another. A good time to introduce sensible policies.
You may not be aware of it, but stresses and tensions in life can lower our self control and cause us to behave in ways not consistent with our normal being. Medication can sometimes have that effect also. Go speak to your Doctor. He'll enlighten you about these things. They crop up in court rooms every day.
Have you worked in this field long? The simplistic solutions presented do not show much of an understanding of the dynamics of abuse.
My concerns are the protection of the innocent through preventaive measures and the detection of offenders where offences have been committed. The matters I have brought up, particularly about standard procedures, have been adopted by by society as a means of addressing potential for harm. The other areas I have covered are my own suggestions to address the unique way in which the work operates. I consider them not only sensible but advisable. I think many outside organisations would be alarmed that these type of things are not already in force.
The dynamics of what causes "individuals" to abuse (sexually or otherwise) is a separate issue and can be addressed separately. There have been many debates citing medical psychological and social issues. These things I will leave to the experts in those fields. Hopefully they will agree some day and come up with proper cures.
As far as "weak" Workers are concerned the Lord's prayer contains a necessary preventative measure, i.e. "Lead me not into temptation..." The measures that I have suggested would go a long way towards addressing an environment of temptation.
|
|
|
Post by tooeasy on Oct 28, 2007 7:06:40 GMT -5
;D ;D ;D ;D Just reading some of the posts on here, it looks like a little competition to see who's got the best mouth! In all honesty Pedophiles, no matter what they do or where they are or what they represent, are still pedophiles and should be treated as such! You molest or take advantage of someones kids and you suffer! Theres one way around this and thats for all the governments everywhere to make a law that states that it is illegal to be alone with someone else's children unless you are a family member. And even then, it would still not work! So until the Lord returns, pedophiles are here to stay, whether your In or whether your Out! The "good worker" Timbo was humping a 6 year old with his clothes on? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Unbelievable, i just wish I could have seen the look on his STUPID face when the parents walked in on him, I would have told that sweet thing to get out of my house pronto cause I'm going to get a baseball to make meat patties out of him. And *anyone* else including workers who wants to try that absolutely disgusting trick on children deserves to be in jail. Let it be a lesson.
|
|
|
Post by tooeasy on Oct 28, 2007 7:10:05 GMT -5
|
|
think out of the box
Guest
|
Post by think out of the box on Oct 28, 2007 8:29:13 GMT -5
In all honesty Pedophiles, no matter what they do or where they are or what they represent, are still pedophiles and should be treated as such! Pedophiles represent only a small fraction of the cases of child abuse.
|
|
|
Post by Observing on Oct 28, 2007 8:57:42 GMT -5
No Worker has a criminal record "to the best of your knowledge." Very good. Criminal records are not found under carpets where these crimes are often swept ! This is only a part of the issue though ! I think the point here is that most workers are drawn from a pool that precludes them having been arrested, especially for a sexual crime. Thus, a background check would show nothing and could, as stated, give people a false sense of security. [/quote]You say that "prevention is only possible if it is put in place by the persons being molested or their caretakers." This is like saying that it is my fault that my house gets broken into if I forget to lock my door, or if I get beaten up in the street at night that it's my own fault for going out after dark ?[/quote] I didn't see anyone, except you. placing blame on the victims. In most cases of sexual abuse the only people present are the victim and the criminal. I don't think we can count on the criminal to prevent the crime so the task of prevention falls on the victim. This is where the aspect of education comes in. Again, I don't recall anyone placing blame. agreed. This would be where the parental education comes into play. Don't leave you children with other people without seriously considering the possibilities. They get locked up because they either get caught or the victim reports them. Preventing a single, or even multiple occurences of child abuse by a criminal does not solve the problem. It just moves it to an alternative opportunity. It is not restricted to the F&W. It is a problem for all people. They are an organization that, having no official status, would have problems getting an agency to to preform a background check. In most states to run a criminal background check you have to have the permission of the person being checked and some official level of organization. I assume you are not talking about the bogus $19.95 background checks but a check approved and preformed by, for example, child protection services. Very true. I don't know about the statement you are referring to but in my case, as an atheist, there is a legal side. And that is the only side that can be used to get the criminal off the street. Reporting the crime to the church, as has been demonstrated in a number of cases, is useless. I think the risk to young boys is more from homosexual advances than heterosexual ones.
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 28, 2007 10:27:42 GMT -5
I think the risk to young boys is more from homosexual advances than heterosexual ones.
Not so! You are mixing two different issues here. Sexual Orientation and Pedophilia are not the same issue. A pedophile is a pedophile. Period. Some like little girls. Some like little boys. Some are attracted to a certain look or age group and when this age group hits puberty, they are no longer attractive to a pedophile. Pedophiles will marry someone with certain age children so they can get to a child under a "safe" environment. Getting married will not stop pedophiles and their urges. Heteral sexual relationships do not stop pedophiles. On the other hand, a homosexual/lesbian person is not attracted to children because of their sexual orientation. Again, these are not the same issues. I know, it's all very hard to wrap your brain around, but please, encourage everyone to get educated on these issues.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2007 10:38:22 GMT -5
Observing, I don't know if you are also "How Long", or if I am addressing two different posters.
For the sake of appreciating each others' perspectives, I am writing from the UK, not the States. Recently, in speaking with some colleagues I learned that most background checks return a negative result, almost routinely so. Often they seem like a waste of time. However, in addition to proving that those with a criminal record are much less inclined to attempt to gain employment where that record would bar them from employment, post employment experiences appear to be showing that standard measures measures such as background checks and early reporting of allegations and suspicions, seem to also be deterring potential criminal elements who have no past criminal record from entering employments where they would be dealing with vulnerable persons. The reduced amount of reports suggests this to be the case. It also shows that deterrent factors, though not foolproof can be effective.
You are right in that in most cases of child abuse there is only the perpetrator and the child present. The measures that I've suggested are to prevent as far as possible this from happening. The education you mention puts the responsibility on the children and their parents. This is a bit like looking at the moon. One side in light, the other in permanent darkness. The workers have to take responsibility by restricting this as far as possible from happening. To relieve them of this responsibility is giving a free hand to perpertrators. After all, Workers hold immense authority and power over many families. Society makes such people in every other organisation responsible. The workers are no exception. And please, don't come away with, "they are not an organisation ?"
Your views on prevention need revised. About 95% of crime, including sexual crime occurs as a result of opportunity, rather than through premeditation. Put in place preventative measures and you will reduce offences from occurring. It is simply not true that the problem will be merely shifted elsewhere. By this I don't mean you will stop a perpetrator, but say he has opportunity to offend ten times. If nine of these are prevented through lack of opportunity, then he may only have opportunity to commit one.
Yes we want to catch those who offend. That's why I say report all allegations which come to light. The commonest reply given by sexual offenders (when they give one) is "I don't know why I did it !" Opportunity coupled with their moments of weakness is why it occurred.
No one said this matter is restricted to the Friends and Workers. It is a problem for society as a whole to address. However, on this board we are discussing child abuse by Workers. Anything that I am suggesting is merely how society are addressing these issues and how I would expect (from experience) how society might approach the unique circumstances of Workers staying in the homes of friends where there might be vulnerable people residing.
In the UK individuals can and do often get their own background checks carried out by the Police Force in the area of their residence for the sum of £10 (c. $20). Noproblem. It's a routine matter over here.
All crimes of a sexual nature should be reported to the police for investigation, especially those involving child abuse. It is not the church's responsibility to investigate and deal with these. It IS their responsibility to report any such matters that come to their notice occurring within their ranks. They can quite easily implement common sense procedures which would seriously restrict opportunities for potential offenders, as I have suggested in previous posts.
"The risk to young boys is more from homosexual advances than heterosexual ones." How true, and believe me I have had to deal with a few of those in my time. May I add, this has a big influence in me holding the views that I do with regards to the ministry taking responsibility to restrict the actions of the few.
Nothing that I have said would not be regarded as sound common sense and good practice by society as a whole, for I am largely basing my views on how society is addressing these issues.
|
|
|
Post by tooeasy on Oct 28, 2007 17:18:20 GMT -5
OK then, Well make it "child abusers"...Is that better?
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 29, 2007 7:54:19 GMT -5
RAM: "The risk to young boys is more from homosexual advances than heterosexual ones." How true, and believe me I have had to deal with a few of those in my time. May I add, this has a big influence in me holding the views that I do with regards to the ministry taking responsibility to restrict the actions of the few.
It sounds like an adult/s made advances on you? If you were a child, this person/s is a pedophile. Pedophile first...........homosexual tendencies second. Young boys are at risk to the pedophiles who prefer young boys. Pedophiles are women too. Generalizing homosexuality is wrong. It only adds fuel to the fire of "homophobic" thinking. During puberty, many people report having "sexual thoughts" or "experiments" of the homosexual nature. But they are not homosexuals. It can be a part of the craziness of puberty. I encourage everyone to become more educated in these areas. One of the leading "hate crimes", happens due to homophobia. Have a great day.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2007 8:13:36 GMT -5
Thanks ecarg. Thankfully I was never molested by any sexual offender during my younger years. I was abused plenty (verbally) by my wife (now ex) during our marriage, though !
I wrote what you have quoted based upon my experiences as someone who in the course of their employment has had to investigate a wide variety of sexual offences, including those against young children, et al. Personally I don't think it is wise to pigeon hole or categorise sexual offenders too much because I have seen a wide overlap. This is not to say there are not those who are prone to predate upon children or other categories of victims. Often opportunity and environment have played a big part, e.g. I recall one instance where there were two male homosexuals who were part of a homosexual ring (consenting adults). However, both these men were employed as "carers" in a residential home for wayward/deprived boys. Between them, these men brutalised at least 45 young boys over a period of quite a few years. Although all of these victims confirmed they had been buggered by one or both men in whose care they had been, because some were adult/ married etc, they were either too embarrassed or did not want those now sharing their lives to know what had happened to them, thus they were unwilling to testify in a court of law. Only 15 out of the 45 gave statements, sufficient though to put these guys behind bars for quite a few years.
I remain wary of over-categorising.
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 29, 2007 8:32:48 GMT -5
Good Morning Ram, Thanks for the information. It sounds like we agree on most of these issues. Tough stuff you've had to deal with. ( even verbal abuse reeks ) Please continue to share you knowledge about these issues. I understand "opportunity" plays a role. As in most other crimes too. I guess it's hard to really know the premeditative state of criminals. I know that the pedophiles in my experience, placed themselves in positions of opportunity first, before they abused. ( jobs, etc ) Sometimes grooming goes on for years. UGH! Have a great day. I enjoy your posts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2007 9:04:55 GMT -5
Thanks ecarg. I do not pretend to even have begun to understand what motivates these people to do what they do. However, I know we are all born imperfect and have our own battles to fight to overcome whatever weaknesses we have inherited, genetic or otherwise.
I can only relate from my experiences as an investigator, which was largely concerned with gathering evidence of the actual crimes. Believe me it can take a lot of patient and sensitive enquiry before you get anything near the truth of these matters. The case I mentioned above came to light from a similar but virtually unrelated matter.
A male in his 50's who had no previous convictions, worked in a local snack bar. He was fairly well respected. However, he had be-friended a 13 year old boy who worked at the snack bar at weekends to get pocket money. Eventually the adult male started giving the young lad pocket money for sexually gratifying favours which eventually led to the buggery of the boy. This continued for a while until the young boy's 15 year old brother also got a job at the snack bar. In time the adult male befriended him also and then tried to obtain sexual favours from him. When he refused the man tried to win him round by telling him his younger brother acceded and so on. Well the 15 year old went home and told his mother who in turn called us.
Despite a careful and sensitive approach to the 13 year old, he maintained the man had only had sex with him twice or three times. However, over the coming days he confided in his brother and said two adult male friends of the man had been at him as well. When I spoke to the Doctor who had examined the 13 year old his exact words were "his a**e has been well and truly bu****ed," suggesting considerably more activity than the young lad had made out. The two other males are the ones whom I mentioned in the earlier post who were carers at the residential home. All three males were part of a homosexual ring. Of course the can of worms was well and truly opened then.
Some may wonder why I harp on about having thorough investigations and putting into practice certain radical procedures to protect the innocent. Well, when your called to deal with these matters your own innocence very quickly goes out the window.
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 29, 2007 9:25:54 GMT -5
Sounds like major grooming was taking place. Isn't it amazing how children will lie to protect their abusers? Even those that have been kidnapped. The emotional and psychological damage is off the charts. It's such craziness. It's even more crazy when abuse happens "in the name of God" by preachers. It rapes every thread of a young person. I can relate on several issues. Being a sexual abuse survivor, I understand the depth of the abuse on a spirit. I also relate to not being "shocked" about much of anything. The human condition is just that, the human condition. I understand that everyone has a cross to bear ( no matter how sick it seems to others ). I also understand how nothing is as it seems on the surface. We all have a personal "lens" that we look through, and most things are a matter of perspective. I don't however, want to lose hope or faith or "will" or whatever one wants to name it. I won't allow my spirit to be broken. I bet, with all you see and deal with, this is also a struggle for you. Please hang in. COntinue educating others and sharing your gifts with us all. Have a blessed day!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2007 10:42:43 GMT -5
ecarg, investigating these type of matters virtually drains you of every ounce of effort, tact, patience and sensitivity, as you seek to slowly but surely arrive at the truth and the whole truth of these affairs. Give me a pub rammy any day !
Anyway, I'm retired from all that now, although I have re-joined my former employers in a civilian capacity, but not front-line.
Children as they grow up learn as much from trial and error over what's right and wrong. They are constantly learning by their mistakes and expect to be in the wrong. It is part of their learning process. I think that may be one reason for their willingness to blame themselves in sexual abuse cases. In their eyes adults are usually right and children are usually wrong. It becomes easy for them to blame themselves. This makes it easier for them to reconcile issues beyong their understanding. Sometimes it is difficult to convince a child in these circumstances that they have done nothing wrong and that it is "solely" the adult's fault. It is only once you have convinced the child that they have not done wrong , but instead have been "wronged" that you win child's confidence and feel you may obtain anything like full details from them.
It's good you have maintained your spirit despite what has happened to you. That is very encouraging.
I can relate to not being shocked about almost anything. Nothing about human nature surprises me any more. I'm sort of de-sensitized to it. Probably another reason I'm wary about categorizing human failures.
Take care and keep that strong spirit.
|
|
|
Post by Time for answers on Oct 29, 2007 10:50:45 GMT -5
Isn't it time for a court decision in the MN case this week?
And is there someone following up on all the rumors that have flown around these last months about other cases?
Is someone assisting in getting help for the victims?
I would like to see this taken care of (no, not swept under the rug!) and life to move forward.
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 29, 2007 11:13:24 GMT -5
I'm all for it. Infact, I'm praying and discerning these issues daily. Who to talk to, who to take my information to, what to discuss, etc..... I'm trying to reach out to a few people on this board, but when it I'm not sure how involved people really want to get. When really hard questions and issues get brought up, most people run. I'm not running. I've told serveral people that Craig was a companion with my abuser in the 70's. No one want's to investigate him. He was Tim's companion. I agree. Things need to be done. If this were the Catholic Church, or any other organized Religion, it would be all over National news. Do you have any suggestions? And the "rumors" are likely the truth. I'd like to hear your ideas.
|
|
|
Post by do whats right on Oct 29, 2007 11:34:11 GMT -5
To ecarg...I have never been in your situation so first of all I would like to say how sorry I am that you have been thru what you have been... You posted that you had told several people that Craig had been a companion to the worker who had molested you...did they give any feedback on what to do? Is this "worker" still in the work? I wish I had some ideas on how to help you...I really admire your strength and your determination ! But the more I think about it...if it had happened to me..I would pursue it ..Best to you! Keep strong like you are... Take care
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 29, 2007 12:07:35 GMT -5
Thanks. Timing is everything. I have family in "the truth" and their feelings/thoughts are important to me too. Potential fallout is huge. My abuser is dead, but abused many others. I hope to reach out to as many of them that I can. I do have information for them, along the lines of healing and getting help. I still believe that other peope in the truth knew. I feel that they should deal with accountability too. Otherwise things never change. The head workers did move abusers around to different "fields". They said they were "resting". Bad stuff. But just one of the many life issues. Thanks sooooooo much for the encouragement. Have a great day!
|
|
|
Post by Observing on Oct 29, 2007 16:03:32 GMT -5
I think the risk to young boys is more from homosexual advances than heterosexual ones.Not so! You are mixing two different issues here. Sexual Orientation and Pedophilia are not the same issue. A pedophile is a pedophile. Period. Some like little girls. Some like little boys. Some are attracted to a certain look or age group and when this age group hits puberty, they are no longer attractive to a pedophile. Pedophiles will marry someone with certain age children so they can get to a child under a "safe" environment. Getting married will not stop pedophiles and their urges. Heteral sexual relationships do not stop pedophiles. On the other hand, a homosexual/lesbian person is not attracted to children because of their sexual orientation. Again, these are not the same issues. I know, it's all very hard to wrap your brain around, but please, encourage everyone to get educated on these issues. Nope. You are not reading carefully. The original statement was that single young women were at risk. The implication that these were women of marriage age and thus not children. I only said that young men in that age group were more at risk from adult male advances than from adult female advances. But thank you for the explanation.
|
|
|
Post by do whats right on Oct 29, 2007 21:01:18 GMT -5
To ecarg...thanks for your reply back!..I am glad to see the concern you have for your family's thoughts/feelings that are in the truth....and of the potential fallout...perhaps you may feel like you are walking thru a field of landmines? Not quite sure what step you have to take but you know within your heart that you need to? Whether this has any bearing on anything or not...I don't know but I go to meetings...but I feel like you do that people should be held accountable..that it can't be or should NEVER be swept under the rug..that switching workers from one field to another IS NOT the solution to the problem...It was a real eye opener for me when I started reading the posts on this board about child molestation by workers.... So again with all sincerity and straight from the heart...keep strong like you are...keep determined...remember there are people (like me who are keeping you close in thought and heart...again take care ecarg!
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 29, 2007 23:02:22 GMT -5
Observing...............You said "young boys" . I hope you can see my confusion. I didn't realize you meant young men. Thanks for the info.
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 29, 2007 23:05:54 GMT -5
DO WHATS RIGHT.....................Way coooooooool. Thank you for the awesome reply. I needed it! Peace!
|
|