|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 19, 2012 8:57:42 GMT -5
I think that can happen....trying to protect someone. For me one time when I had a complaint I was cut off with "so&so is a friend of mine and of good report among the brethren". Didn't matter what I had to say. So, I think it can happen. And sometimes I think there is just doubt even when a complaint is made. "So&so would never, could never do that." Further is I think there is misunderstanding about the nature of some crime/sin/behavior or at least has been in the past. Many people do not have to go about everyday thinking "only 1800 calories today" or "I will not drink today" or "I will not steal today" or "I will not abuse today". Some people do and some people really should. I think the good report and the reputatuion and the position/office and the mostly known public behavior of some weighed too heavily in the moving around of abuser and the giving of second and third and perhaps more chances to "repent". And yes, there could have been some "silent" protecting of the esteeem of the ministry. Those with a behavorial problem need a support system and not the "I am sorry (to the leaders) and it won't happen again." What to do with an abuser that is made known? When you read the name "Ira" what comes to your mind? A man who gave years to a ministry? A man deemed qualified for overseership? Or some other mental picture? And in these current days, when you read the name "Jerome" what comes to your mind? How would you feel listening to one preach? Or give testimony? Or even just sit across from you or next to you in meeting? In someplaces a divorced and remarried person is made silent in the church? Is that appropriate for the others? As for the abused, I think they need not be identified. "Oh, s/he is the one that was abused by that elder/worker." Hard to make that go away. This might contribute to the low profile of some abuse cases - protect the victim. And maybe the powers that be know or think the abuser needs to be protected, too - from the "friends". Yet, the peace and welfare of the friends - especially the children - must not be compromised. Even if the ministry and church suffers shame. Good post Greg. The desire to protect is a huge problem which leaves gaping holes of vulnerability. This is particularly a problem with regard to future victims. We can't see future victims, we don't know who they are, so our desire to protect what we can see takes precedent. When there is a known offender in a group, children become extremely vulnerable when their parents don't know about the heightened risks associated with an offender. CSA offenders are different than many criminals because a lot of them are compelled to do what they did and are frequently thinking about the next victim, planning, grooming, establishing themselves as trustworthy in the eyes of the parents and child etc. That's why there is a need for parents to know about an offender who is close to them. In the meeting situation, it is the responsibility of the workers and elders to inform those who "need to know". Specifically, that means the parents of children who would be in contact with the offender through the meeting system. Taking away hymn-announcing duties is practically useless and without value in terms of eliminating the risks of children. Even moving a meeting out to another home is at best a minimal risk-reducer. The only way to significantly reduce risk is to inform the "need to know" people in the meetings with the offender. That may not be an easy or pleasant task, particularly when offenders are, as Greg suggests, often intelligent and affable people, or even more difficult, is when the offender knows about a lot of other hidden problems in the church and can threaten to cause trouble. All of these concerns must be overridden in favour of informing parents with vulnerable children. Knowledge will save them. Anything less makes those in charge as accessories to any future crime. There is a "need to know" section in the CSA Guidelines. If someone has been charged with a CSA offence, who should know? Some of the church guidelines I've seen cast quite a wide net. When our daughter was first away from home for school she frequently attended meeting with a man who had a 'cease and desist' on contact with juveniles. (He is identified on the WINGS site). I believe that we should have been informed about this, although nothing untoward happened. So based on that experience, I think that everyone within the catchment of a common convention or conventions should be informed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2012 9:06:52 GMT -5
Good post Greg. The desire to protect is a huge problem which leaves gaping holes of vulnerability. This is particularly a problem with regard to future victims. We can't see future victims, we don't know who they are, so our desire to protect what we can see takes precedent. When there is a known offender in a group, children become extremely vulnerable when their parents don't know about the heightened risks associated with an offender. CSA offenders are different than many criminals because a lot of them are compelled to do what they did and are frequently thinking about the next victim, planning, grooming, establishing themselves as trustworthy in the eyes of the parents and child etc. That's why there is a need for parents to know about an offender who is close to them. In the meeting situation, it is the responsibility of the workers and elders to inform those who "need to know". Specifically, that means the parents of children who would be in contact with the offender through the meeting system. Taking away hymn-announcing duties is practically useless and without value in terms of eliminating the risks of children. Even moving a meeting out to another home is at best a minimal risk-reducer. The only way to significantly reduce risk is to inform the "need to know" people in the meetings with the offender. That may not be an easy or pleasant task, particularly when offenders are, as Greg suggests, often intelligent and affable people, or even more difficult, is when the offender knows about a lot of other hidden problems in the church and can threaten to cause trouble. All of these concerns must be overridden in favour of informing parents with vulnerable children. Knowledge will save them. Anything less makes those in charge as accessories to any future crime. There is a "need to know" section in the CSA Guidelines. If someone has been charged with a CSA offence, who should know? Some of the church guidelines I've seen cast quite a wide net. When our daughter was first away from home for school she frequently attended meeting with a man who had a 'cease and desist' on contact with juveniles. (He is identified on the WINGS site). I believe that we should have been informed about this, although nothing untoward happened. So based on that experience, I think that everyone within the catchment of a common convention or conventions should be informed. In the meeting situation, it's mostly pretty straightforward. Without question, parents with minor children must be informed if they attend meeting on Sunday, Wednesday or Union meeting....and so should the meeting elder. That's the simple part. It becomes more of an art from there. Gospel meeting is usually a different sort of gathering as it is public and in a public place. However, if workers/elders know of close relationships between the offender and the parents of minor children, they should definitely be informed too without hesitation. Elders and workers are in a position to identify these group dynamics and assess who is at a heightened risk and who is not. It's good simple eldership to do do. The people who "need to know" don't need to know everything. In fact, they don't need to know much except that there are heightened risks of offense against their children around that person. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 11:20:01 GMT -5
If someone has been charged with a CSA offence, who should know? Some of the church guidelines I've seen cast quite a wide net. When our daughter was first away from home for school she frequently attended meeting with a man who had a 'cease and desist' on contact with juveniles. (He is identified on the WINGS site). I believe that we should have been informed about this, although nothing untoward happened. So based on that experience, I think that everyone within the catchment of a common convention or conventions should be informed. I think I am safe in saying that if a known offender lives near a college, that college would feel NO responsibility to advise the parents. At least we were told in parent orientation that nothing of our child's personal life would be reported to us (including grades). We were clearly instructed that they are now adults.  |
|
|
|
Post by JO on Apr 19, 2012 12:06:49 GMT -5
Emy, do you believe its God's job to protect children from sexual predators in our fellowship?
If not, who do you think is responsible?
Some will say its the parents responsibility.
What if the parents don't know that their esteemed worker, elder, or close relative is a sexual predator?
If YOU knew, would you tell them or leave it for God to tell them?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2012 14:02:38 GMT -5
Child Protection is "EVERYONE'S" responsibility.
|
|
|
|
Post by JO on Apr 19, 2012 15:22:36 GMT -5
I agree RAM that Child Protection is "EVERYONE'S" responsibility.
One problem is that we've been taught to "look to ourselves" and to esteem and trust everyone who is higher up in the hierarchy than we are.
Another problem is that we've been taught that "God's people" i.e. the friends and workers are special, and protected from the evil that is in "the world".
This all plays into the hands of the sexual predators amongst us, giving them a wonderful opportunity to take advantage of our naivety.
What will it take for us to emerge from our little dream world bubble and all take responsibility for the protection of the most vulnerable amongst us?
|
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 19, 2012 15:54:45 GMT -5
"(*who has been in this field of work for decades and who has set up and administered a NZ police funded abuser rehabilitation program.)"
I think it would be interesting to know the "success" rate of this "professional's abuser rehabilitation program."
We've heard that many more times then not that abuser rehabilitation is not successful due to the inner-lying mental/emotional drive that an abuser may have....I think this was speaking to "real sex abusers."!
I know that people who are rapists are repeaters of the offense and often make a success of making their victims as being the "fault" of the rape. I also understand that this very type of "grooming" takes place with real CSA perps that are pedophiles.....
It IS about CONTROL and not about SEX!
Again, Noels, has managed to "reassure" those who question on this thread that the workers are doing what they're supposed to do.....IF so, WHY are the friends that have these concerns NOT AWARE of their workers doing what is the "right thing"....
I understand the workers have ALWAYS done the "right thing" in the sight of God and man! Noels! So why is it then IF they have ALWAYS done the "right thing" and the offending workers/elders keep their position in the fellowship and the victims are told to keep quite?
Has there been a "change of the way of doing" in the workerszhip? And WHEN are the people who are in the fellowship/workership going to KNOW that for a fact? Never?
|
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 16:37:27 GMT -5
Emy, do you believe its God's job to protect children from sexual predators in our fellowship? If not, who do you think is responsible? Some will say its the parents responsibility. What if the parents don't know that their esteemed worker, elder, or close relative is a sexual predator? If YOU knew, would you tell them or leave it for God to tell them? I think you missed something. What mentioned an adult daughter who had contact (in the fellowship, I think) with an offender. I was saying it isn't CSA policy to notify parents of adults about the location of offenders. That had nothing to do with what I think should happen when an offender is identified for certain.
Emy, do you believe its God's job to protect children from sexual predators in our fellowship? No
If not, who do you think is responsible?
Some will say its the parents responsibility.
I agree it is the parents' responsibility, but more often than not, the parent is the offender. I also believe total protection is not possible without causing some anxiety issues in children. IOW, if a child is cautioned to never show affection to anyone because of the danger of CSA, then since the greatest danger is family and friends, who will they learn to be affectionate with? They must be taught to trust someone who will believe any report they make of inappropriate touch, conversation, etc. It's wonderful if that someone is a parent, but sadly that's not 100% the case.What if the parents don't know that their esteemed worker, elder, or close relative is a sexual predator?
If YOU knew, would you tell them or leave it for God to tell them? Yes, of course I would tell them, but I'd look for confirmation, not gossip. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 16:56:03 GMT -5
This is not true for NZ and I wonder if it is the same for other countries. If an offender lives near a school the school does tell the children and parents that an offender is living near by. Occasionally it slips through the net and people (including the school) are not aware that an offender lives near by but then an offender usually has strict rules that prohibits them from living within a certain distance of a school. The courts do not have to tell the school that an offender is living in the area but the school does inform the students if an offender is living in the area. I would guess that it is the same in other parts of the world. ... You did notice I was replying to What and speaking of adult children away from home? It's colleges that do not report personal info on students to parents, not other schools. |
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 19, 2012 16:58:19 GMT -5
This is not true for NZ and I wonder if it is the same for other countries. If an offender lives near a school the school does tell the children and parents that an offender is living near by. Occasionally it slips through the net and people (including the school) are not aware that an offender lives near by but then an offender usually has strict rules that prohibits them from living within a certain distance of a school. The courts do not have to tell the school that an offender is living in the area but the school does inform the students if an offender is living in the area. I would guess that it is the same in other parts of the world. ... You did notice I was replying to What and speaking of adult children away from home? It's colleges that do not report personal info on students to parents, not other schools. I do not understand. What does schools not telling parents about their college students have to do with CSA? |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 16:59:07 GMT -5
What if the parents don't know that their esteemed worker, elder, or close relative is a sexual predator? Emy wrote: If YOU knew, would you tell them or leave it for God to tell them? Yes, of course I would tell them, but I'd look for confirmation, not gossip. And how will you determine the difference? A lot of children deny the abuse out of fear. Should any hint of abuse should be taken seriously until proven otherwise or vice versa? If I knew an accusation had been made AND reported to authorities, I'd expect an investigation to be done quickly and the result of that investigation would determine what I would say to families that are affected. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 17:02:47 GMT -5
Here is the exchange. Please read carefully. If someone has been charged with a CSA offence, who should know? Some of the church guidelines I've seen cast quite a wide net. When our daughter was first away from home for school she frequently attended meeting with a man who had a 'cease and desist' on contact with juveniles. (He is identified on the WINGS site). I believe that we should have been informed about this, although nothing untoward happened. So based on that experience, I think that everyone within the catchment of a common convention or conventions should be informed. I think I am safe in saying that if a known offender lives near a college, that college would feel NO responsibility to advise the parents. At least we were told in parent orientation that nothing of our child's personal life would be reported to us (including grades). We were clearly instructed that they are now adults. Thus, in our CSA aware society adult children are expected to take care of themselves. Should we shelter our fellowship young adults more than that? |
|
|
|
Post by JO on Apr 19, 2012 17:06:37 GMT -5
I agree it is the parents' responsibility, but more often than not, the parent is the offender. Emy, you probably have no idea how offensive that statement is for parents who've had their children stolen from them by child sexual abuse. Its not only offensive but its flat out wrong. Its not uncommon for step parents to abuse children in their care, and I agree that some natural parents sexually abuse their children, but to say "more often than not" demonstrates a need for you to educate yourself on this matter. Here's a place to start: www.theage.com.au/victoria/mother-cant-forget-the-day-she-lost-her-beautiful-boy-20120417-1x5p8.html |
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Apr 19, 2012 17:26:56 GMT -5
I agree it is the parents' responsibility, but more often than not, the parent is the offender. The times that I'm aware of a parent being the CSA offender, usually the parent was an ex-worker, who left the work to avoid being discovered. Further proof that marriage doesn't cure a CSA offender. |
|
|
|
Post by Done4now on Apr 19, 2012 17:31:21 GMT -5
Here is the exchange. Please read carefully. I think I am safe in saying that if a known offender lives near a college, that college would feel NO responsibility to advise the parents. At least we were told in parent orientation that nothing of our child's personal life would be reported to us (including grades). We were clearly instructed that they are now adults. Thus, in our CSA aware society adult children are expected to take care of themselves. Should we shelter our fellowship young adults more than that? Yes. You should. Obviously people at a college are of age to be away from home and take care of themselves. Most are over the age of 18 and are not considered to be minors. How old was JAT when she was abused? How old were RM's victims? In most cases we are talking about little children here--not college aged adults. As a Godly person--you should desire to protect ALL souls from predators, however YES you have more responsibility to the innocent 5 year old who has no idea how to protect herself than you do to the 20 year old college student who lives on his own, takes care of himself and knows all about the birds and the bees. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 17:34:08 GMT -5
Emy, you probably have no idea how offensive that statement is for parents who've had their children stolen from them by child sexual abuse. Its not only offensive but its flat out wrong. Its not uncommon for step parents to abuse children in their care, and I agree that some natural parents sexually abuse their children, but to say "more often than not" demonstrates a need for you to educate yourself on this matter. Here's a place to start: www.theage.com.au/victoria/mother-cant-forget-the-day-she-lost-her-beautiful-boy-20120417-1x5p8.htmlAs a mother of sons, my heart goes out to that mother and family, but that doesn't change facts: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse#DemographicsIncest between a child or adolescent and a related adult has been identified as the most widespread form of child sexual abuse with a huge capacity for damage to a child One researcher stated that more than 70% of abusers are immediate family members or someone very close to the family. Another researcher stated that about 30% of all perpetrators of sexual abuse are related to their victim, 60% of the perpetrators are family acquaintances, like a neighbor, babysitter or friend and 10% of the perpetrators in child sexual abuse cases are strangers..... Having had a brother who was mentally ill for years before reaching a firm diagnosis, I also know something about schizophrenia. Mid-teens is often a stage when it is triggered, but I doubt the trigger can be called a cause. I am very sad for that family. I understand how mental illness affects relationships, though my brother was not eventually diagnosed as schizophrenic. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 17:40:24 GMT -5
Yes. You should. Obviously people at a college are of age to be away from home and take care of themselves. Most are over the age of 18 and are not considered to be minors.How old was JAT when she was abused? How old were RM's victims? In most cases we are talking about little children here--not college aged adults. As a Godly person--you should desire to protect ALL souls from predators, however YES you have more responsibility to the innocent 5 year old who has no idea how to protect herself than you do to the 20 year old college student who lives on his own, takes care of himself and knows all about the birds and the bees. Isn't that what I just said? Along with saying that our society does not feel a need for young adults to be protected by parents in many areas of life. |
|
|
|
Post by lazarus66 on Apr 19, 2012 17:47:02 GMT -5
Greg, I know whereof you speak when you have a situation that is brought up and then quashed because of the persons "Standing". I have heard "oh, so and so wouldn't do that", and that led to my exit. The funny part is that I was going against an elder that had been chosen to move to a new town to fulfill a need for a home for meeting. Once he had everyone fooled, he moved and left the 2x2's and now is trying to be a "Harley Davidson Outlaw". I know not all HD riders are outlaws but this guy thinks he is. I wonder what the overseer would have to say about that situation. This man was so holy, and wouldn't cheat a "brother" and then he leaves the 2x2's and becomes a self proclaimed "Outlaw". I can laugh.
As for Emy and Kiwi, I agree, keep it quiet. It is giving too many a bad name, especially the guilty ones...................Sweep it, sweep it.........
|
|
|
|
Post by JO on Apr 19, 2012 17:51:17 GMT -5
What if the parents don't know that their esteemed worker, elder, or close relative is a sexual predator? Emy wrote: If YOU knew, would you tell them or leave it for God to tell them? Yes, of course I would tell them, but I'd look for confirmation, not gossip. And how will you determine the difference? A lot of children deny the abuse out of fear. Should any hint of abuse should be taken seriously until proven otherwise or vice versa? If I knew an accusation had been made AND reported to authorities, I'd expect an investigation to be done quickly and the result of that investigation would determine what I would say to families that are affected. So an accusation is only gossip until there's a conviction? You would leave children at risk until an investigation has been completed? Emy, most sexually abused children don't report the abuse. They become good at covering it up. Some would prefer to commit suicide than report the abuse. Of those who do report it, often its many years afterwards. Child Sexual abuse is far worse than adult rape because a child doesn't have the mental capacity or sexual maturity to process the crime. How many child sexual abuse accusations amongst friends and workers have proved to be false accusations? It would be more common for victims to be accused or suspected of laying a false accusation. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 17:55:32 GMT -5
So an accusation is only gossip until there's a conviction? You would leave children at risk until an investigation has been completed? A conviction and a complete investigation are 2 different things. |
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 19, 2012 17:56:47 GMT -5
If someone has been charged with a CSA offence, who should know? Some of the church guidelines I've seen cast quite a wide net. When our daughter was first away from home for school she frequently attended meeting with a man who had a 'cease and desist' on contact with juveniles. (He is identified on the WINGS site). I believe that we should have been informed about this, although nothing untoward happened. So based on that experience, I think that everyone within the catchment of a common convention or conventions should be informed. I think I am safe in saying that if a known offender lives near a college, that college would feel NO responsibility to advise the parents. At least we were told in parent orientation that nothing of our child's personal life would be reported to us (including grades). We were clearly instructed that they are now adults. You're confusing two different policies. Universities don't want to play nursemaid for parents; and that's why they won't advise parents on marks and the like. Still, they do have policies on sexual offenders. Googling at random - www.utexas.edu/police/alerts/sex_offenders.htmlIf our daughter had been told instead of us I would have been quite happy with that, however she was a minor at the time. It wasn't a serious problem, but illustrates to me how poor the CSA policies really are. I know that in my brother's church the entire congregation (about 1000 people) are informed if there are allegations of child sexual abuse. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 19, 2012 17:57:47 GMT -5
Here is the exchange. Please read carefully. Thus, in our CSA aware society adult children are expected to take care of themselves. Should we shelter our fellowship young adults more than that? Yes. You should. Obviously people at a college are of age to be away from home and take care of themselves. Most are over the age of 18 and are not considered to be minors. How old was JAT when she was abused? How old were RM's victims? In most cases we are talking about little children here--not college aged adults. As a Godly person--you should desire to protect ALL souls from predators, however YES you have more responsibility to the innocent 5 year old who has no idea how to protect herself than you do to the 20 year old college student who lives on his own, takes care of himself and knows all about the birds and the bees. In normal family life, this may well be true...however there are families that have grown up in the fellowship for years, their children are "isolated" from "normal" sex behaviours and how to know what is normal and what is abnormal and HOW to HANDLE any of that. The isolation of the children growing up in the fellowship tend to make them ideal targets for not only CSA as youngsters, but for acquaintance and/or date rape as adults, because sex has always been an subject well covered up in the fellowship. I think that the fellowship's children typically are being a little more exposed to these things in this day and age, but there still are some parents that cannot bring themselves to speak much about sex, much less sexual crimes with their growing children. I think sex education along with CSA education is an IMPERATIVE needful thing for the families in general within the fellowship. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 18:01:14 GMT -5
In normal family life, this may well be true...however there are families that have grown up in the fellowship for years, their children are "isolated" from "normal" sex behaviours and how to know what is normal and what is abnormal and HOW to HANDLE any of that. The isolation of the children growing up in the fellowship tend to make them ideal targets for not only CSA as youngsters, but for acquaintance and/or date rape as adults, because sex has always been an subject well covered up in the fellowship. I think that the fellowship's children typically are being a little more exposed to these things in this day and age, but there still are some parents that cannot bring themselves to speak much about sex, much less sexual crimes with their growing children. I think sex education along with CSA education is an IMPERATIVE needful thing for the families in general within the fellowship. Maybe this was true when your generation and mine was growing up, but our children's generation? I don't think so! |
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 19, 2012 18:01:41 GMT -5
Emy, do you believe its God's job to protect children from sexual predators in our fellowship? If not, who do you think is responsible? Some will say its the parents responsibility. What if the parents don't know that their esteemed worker, elder, or close relative is a sexual predator? If YOU knew, would you tell them or leave it for God to tell them? I think you missed something. What mentioned an adult daughter who had contact (in the fellowship, I think) with an offender. I was saying it isn't CSA policy to notify parents of adults about the location of offenders. That had nothing to do with what I think should happen when an offender is identified for certain.
Emy, do you believe its God's job to protect children from sexual predators in our fellowship? No
If not, who do you think is responsible?
Some will say its the parents responsibility.
I agree it is the parents' responsibility, but more often than not, the parent is the offender. I also believe total protection is not possible without causing some anxiety issues in children. IOW, if a child is cautioned to never show affection to anyone because of the danger of CSA, then since the greatest danger is family and friends, who will they learn to be affectionate with? They must be taught to trust someone who will believe any report they make of inappropriate touch, conversation, etc. It's wonderful if that someone is a parent, but sadly that's not 100% the case.What if the parents don't know that their esteemed worker, elder, or close relative is a sexual predator?
If YOU knew, would you tell them or leave it for God to tell them? Yes, of course I would tell them, but I'd look for confirmation, not gossip.As I mentioned this particular person had a police record, and a 'cease and desist' order on interacting with minors. As far as I know the person in question was not a child sex offender, but was found in possession of child pornography. It was not a big deal as far as our personal situation. I take as a 'canary in the coal mine' though, and the canary died. It indicates to me that there are not sound policies in place, and meeting kids are vulnerable to sexual predators. I also have a question. If you heard gossip about a sexual offender in the fellowship who would you see to obtain confirmation? |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 19, 2012 18:03:20 GMT -5
Emy, you probably have no idea how offensive that statement is for parents who've had their children stolen from them by child sexual abuse. Its not only offensive but its flat out wrong. Its not uncommon for step parents to abuse children in their care, and I agree that some natural parents sexually abuse their children, but to say "more often than not" demonstrates a need for you to educate yourself on this matter. Here's a place to start: www.theage.com.au/victoria/mother-cant-forget-the-day-she-lost-her-beautiful-boy-20120417-1x5p8.htmlAs a mother of sons, my heart goes out to that mother and family, but that doesn't change facts: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse#DemographicsIncest between a child or adolescent and a related adult has been identified as the most widespread form of child sexual abuse with a huge capacity for damage to a child One researcher stated that more than 70% of abusers are immediate family members or someone very close to the family. Another researcher stated that about 30% of all perpetrators of sexual abuse are related to their victim, 60% of the perpetrators are family acquaintances, like a neighbor, babysitter or friend and 10% of the perpetrators in child sexual abuse cases are strangers..... Having had a brother who was mentally ill for years before reaching a firm diagnosis, I also know something about schizophrenia. Mid-teens is often a stage when it is triggered, but I doubt the trigger can be called a cause. I am very sad for that family. I understand how mental illness affects relationships, though my brother was not eventually diagnosed as schizophrenic. Emy, do you really believe that IF the examing doctors of the young man that is in that story would have known about the CSA that that dr. would have diagnosed "schizophrenia"! I doubt it...I doubt that that examiner would have mentioned any definite mental disorder......but depression and oppression......it just doesn't happen that way....that schiz is going to be an automatic diagnosis when a person has been sexually abused esp. in childhood! |
|
|
|
Post by JO on Apr 19, 2012 18:05:20 GMT -5
I agree it is the parents' responsibility, but more often than not, the parent is the offender. Emy, you wrote :"more often than not, the parent is the offender." Now to justify your statement you've switched to "a related adult" which is something very different. That could be an uncle, a cousin, a sibling, etc. Sometimes a parent, but more often another related adult. It probably includes a step-parent as well. Could you please quote an authoratative source that would back up your statement that "more often than not, the parent is the offender." As a mother of sons, my heart goes out to that mother and family, but that doesn't change facts: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse#DemographicsIncest between a child or adolescent and a related adult has been identified as the most widespread form of child sexual abuse with a huge capacity for damage to a child One researcher stated that more than 70% of abusers are immediate family members or someone very close to the family. Another researcher stated that about 30% of all perpetrators of sexual abuse are related to their victim, 60% of the perpetrators are family acquaintances, like a neighbor, babysitter or friend and 10% of the perpetrators in child sexual abuse cases are strangers..... |
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 19, 2012 18:09:38 GMT -5
Here is the exchange. Please read carefully. Thus, in our CSA aware society adult children are expected to take care of themselves. Should we shelter our fellowship young adults more than that? Yes. You should. Obviously people at a college are of age to be away from home and take care of themselves. Most are over the age of 18 and are not considered to be minors. How old was JAT when she was abused? How old were RM's victims? In most cases we are talking about little children here--not college aged adults. As a Godly person--you should desire to protect ALL souls from predators, however YES you have more responsibility to the innocent 5 year old who has no idea how to protect herself than you do to the 20 year old college student who lives on his own, takes care of himself and knows all about the birds and the bees. Students away from home are vulnerable though. Students and adults 'need to know' not only incidents of sexual abuse but also harassment. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 19, 2012 18:10:02 GMT -5
So an accusation is only gossip until there's a conviction? You would leave children at risk until an investigation has been completed? A conviction and a complete investigation are 2 different things. Why a "complete investigation" before someone is warned, eh? When a "complete investigation" is done, then there are going to be "legal charges" or a "legal dismissal". This would not protect the children in the meantime. Emy, due to the reluctant nature of CSA victims to want to discuss what has happened at the time it has happened, this gives time to the offender to move, to get their push in for their "greatness of service" or some other wording sjuch as Ray Hoffman used for Ira Hobbs.....but also gives more time for the "grooming of more victims" and likely more accounts of CSA for that offender. Why not protect the children beyond that, eh? Why do you have to have an investigation even started yet to want to protect the children. And no you don't have to make the children anxious in the meantime...THIS is when parents and other responsible adults within the social group to be the ones who keep their eyes open and their children within their knowledge of where they are 24/7. |
|
