AP Story about Abuse

[webbles]

10 hours ago, Tacenda said:

And the church deserves to get flak and their law firm deserves to get flak. And last but not least, the two bishops & the mother that were all aware of this horrific abuse right under their noses, deserve to get flak. To think, they all slept for 2,920 nights (stands for 8 years, 1st year the creep confessed and got counseling and then 7 yrs until he was caught outside of any help from the church), all those nights, knowing about it and not saving two innocent precious little girls from rape and abuse.

Just want to point out that the second bishop would have no knowledge of the second girl's abuse.  She was born after the man was excommunicated so the abuser was no longer talking to bishops.  I, personally, would have expected the first bishop, as their doctor, to have recognized something with the new born baby and reported it.  At that point, he was no longer their bishop so he was under no "priest-penitent" privilege.  He, the first bishop, really failed the family.

The wife has gone to jail for what happened, so she is already being punished.

10 hours ago, Tacenda said:

The bishops were beholden to the church's law firm's advice and told they could be sued. Oh dear, I guess they were more worried about their pocket book or for disregarding advisement from the K&M law firm.

I haven't seen that anywhere.  The bishops were told that they could be liable for reporting?

10 hours ago, Tacenda said:

But why is the church getting sued? It's simple, it's because they do what they did in this case. They (bishops/stake presidents and the leaders) become the middle men in between an abused victim and getting help from law enforcement (whoever reads this and tells me that the church's helpline hasn't had bishops tell victims or victim's family not to report, are flat out misinformed).

Wait, the helpline has told bishops to tell victims to not report?  I'm sorry, but I don't believe you.  The victims, abusers, family, etc are all legally allowed to report without any repercussion (besides the abuser being arrested).  The helpline is to help the bishop know if they (the bishops themselves) can report.  And yes, the helpline has told the bishops that they can't report.  But I highly doubt the helpline has told the bishops to tell victims to not report.

Deseret News just published a story about a woman who is a child abuse survivor, convert to the church, and lawyer on the helpline (https://www.deseret.com/2022/8/5/23292405/i-survived-abuse-church-help-line-ap-story-broke-my-heart-latter-day-saints-associated-press-mormon).  She's pretty adamant about the usefulness of the helpline.

Quote

Behind the curtain, so to speak, the church was doing everything it could to get it right. 

This is why the AP article was so hard to read for me. Those I worked with on the help line were uniformly advocates for victims of abuse, focused on helping those in need and complying with the law. 

It simply broke my heart to read the AP’s account of the disgusting abuse suffered by these innocent girls.

And this particular article was doubly hard, because it depicted one part of my identity as a child sexual abuse survivor while also misrepresenting another part of my identity as a lawyer who used to work on the church’s help line. 

There should be no stigma in helping abuse victims. The help line is exactly that — a resource designed to help during times of crisis.

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

27 minutes ago, Nofear said:

Not in the PR releases. The publicist who wrote it was too defensive. Sometimes, even with the best of policies and practices, errors happen that fail to address the horrors that happen. I suspect that acknowledging that would have been helpful, albeit minimally.

The first step of repentance is to admit you did something wrong. 

27 minutes ago, Nofear said:

From the AP or enraged maddicted bloggernacle? No, no that estimate won't be mentioned.
https://publicsquaremag.org/editorials/are-reported-sexual-abuse-cases-exceptional-or-illustrative-of-the-church-of-jesus-christ/

Instead, they want the Savior with his whip to come through the "temple" and cast out the money-changers in the Church bureaucracy.
 

There seems to be a number of problems with the 1/66 number. They didn’t show their math, it applies only to clergy, but most of all it appears to be comparing apples and oranges. Leaked reports of sexual abuse (did we get all reports?) vs the estimated rate of sexual assault occurrence. Sexual assault is one of the least reported crimes as I understand it. 

[jkwilliams]

39 minutes ago, Nofear said:

Not in the PR releases. The publicist who wrote it was too defensive. Sometimes, even with the best of policies and practices, errors happen that fail to address the horrors that happen. I suspect that acknowledging that would have been helpful, albeit minimally.

From the AP or enraged maddicted bloggernacle? No, no that estimate won't be mentioned.
https://publicsquaremag.org/editorials/are-reported-sexual-abuse-cases-exceptional-or-illustrative-of-the-church-of-jesus-christ/

Instead, they want the Savior with his whip to come through the "temple" and cast out the money-changers in the Church bureaucracy.
 

I’ve never known Mike Austin to be addicted to self-righteous outrage (and I’ve known him over for over 30 years). As I mentioned, he really helped me get over my negative attitude toward the church. If you’re going to single out a fault-finder, you’re way off. 

Edited August 6, 2022 by jkwilliams

[Harry T. Clark]

30 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I’ve never known Mike Austin to be addicted to self-righteous outrage (and I’ve known him over for over 30 years). As I mentioned, he really helped me get over my negative attitude toward the church. If you’re going to single out a fault-finder, you’re way off. 

I just read Mr. Austin's article in the By Common Consent blog.  His changes to the church statement, to focus more on the victims and cleaning up the mess, are greatly appreciated.  Hopefully, his suggestions resonate with those in charge.  https://bycommonconsent.com/2022/08/05/a-few-minor-and-hopefully-helpful-editing-suggestions-on-the-lds-churchs-recent-statement-about-abuse/

[Tacenda]

54 minutes ago, webbles said:

Just want to point out that the second bishop would have no knowledge of the second girl's abuse.  She was born after the man was excommunicated so the abuser was no longer talking to bishops.  I, personally, would have expected the first bishop, as their doctor, to have recognized something with the new born baby and reported it.  At that point, he was no longer their bishop so he was under no "priest-penitent" privilege.  He, the first bishop, really failed the family.

The wife has gone to jail for what happened, so she is already being punished.

I haven't seen that anywhere.  The bishops were told that they could be liable for reporting?

Wait, the helpline has told bishops to tell victims to not report?  I'm sorry, but I don't believe you.  The victims, abusers, family, etc are all legally allowed to report without any repercussion (besides the abuser being arrested).  The helpline is to help the bishop know if they (the bishops themselves) can report.  And yes, the helpline has told the bishops that they can't report.  But I highly doubt the helpline has told the bishops to tell victims to not report.

Deseret News just published a story about a woman who is a child abuse survivor, convert to the church, and lawyer on the helpline (https://www.deseret.com/2022/8/5/23292405/i-survived-abuse-church-help-line-ap-story-broke-my-heart-latter-day-saints-associated-press-mormon).  She's pretty adamant about the usefulness of the helpline.

 

Here's only one, of many. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fox9.com/news/from-registered-sex-offender-to-church-leader.amp

Bishop tells family not to discuss it.

Edited August 6, 2022 by Tacenda

[webbles]

6 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Here's only one, of many. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fox9.com/news/from-registered-sex-offender-to-church-leader.amp

Bishop tells family not to discuss it.

The bishop tells them to not discuss it with neighbors.  Per the article, he doesn't tell them to not got to police.  And the article mentions nothing about the helpline telling the bishop to tell them not to discuss it with police.  Yes, bishops have told people not to talk about or even not to go to the police.  But I do not believe that the helpline has ever told a bishop to do that.

[Harry T. Clark]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Here's only one, of many. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fox9.com/news/from-registered-sex-offender-to-church-leader.amp

Bishop tells family not to discuss it.

In my stake, in the 1970's, we had a case where a sex offender committed some horrible acts on some of the youth in the stake.  I was a witness to some of it and was counseled by our stake president to let them, the church, handle it.  He said he had counseled with some higher authorities and that is what they counseled.  This was some time ago but it shows that the policy of keeping things locked up internally has a long history.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, webbles said:

The bishop tells them to not discuss it with neighbors.  Per the article, he doesn't tell them to not got to police.  And the article mentions nothing about the helpline telling the bishop to tell them not to discuss it with police.  Yes, bishops have told people not to talk about or even not to go to the police.  But I do not believe that the helpline has ever told a bishop to do that.

http://lanternproject.org.uk/library/abuse-and-the-churches/abuse-and-the-mormon-church/does-the-mormon-church-conceal-child-sexual-abuse/

[webbles]

5 minutes ago, Harry T. Clark said:

In my stake, in the 1970's, we had a case where a sex offender committed some horrible acts on some of the youth in the stake.  I was a witness to some of it and was counseled by our stake president to let them, the church, handle it.  He said he had counseled with some higher authorities and that is what they counseled.  This was some time ago but it shows that the policy of keeping things locked up internally has a long history.

Yeah, the idea of "keeping it in the family" is probably as old as time.  It still exists even today.  I believe the church has been trying to stop that with all of their announcements, helpline, etc.  But you'll still have people who feel that way and those people can become bishops.

I'm also amazed by the idea of going to the bishop first instead of just going directly to the police.  If my child came to me and said that a ward member flashed them, I'd go straight to the police.  I may or may not go to the bishop.  I don't understand people who, in the last decade or so, go to the bishop first when they see a crime but I've heard of it happening, unfortunately.

[webbles]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

http://lanternproject.org.uk/library/abuse-and-the-churches/abuse-and-the-mormon-church/does-the-mormon-church-conceal-child-sexual-abuse/

You appear to be conflating two different things:

1. The helpline telling the bishop that he needs to tell the victims and family members to not report it.

2. The bishop telling victims and family members to not report it.

#2 is definitely happening.  It is wrong and should be stopped.

I do not believe #1 is happening.  Nothing about the helpline has given me any indication that it has told the bishop to tell the victims to not report it.  That is illegal advice and if it is happening, it is legally liable.  But the AP article about the helpline, the Deseret News article about the helpline, and personal anecdotes that I've read have never given the impression that #1 is happening.

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, webbles said:

You appear to be conflating two different things:

1. The helpline telling the bishop that he needs to tell the victims and family members to not report it.

2. The bishop telling victims and family members to not report it.

#2 is definitely happening.  It is wrong and should be stopped.

I do not believe #1 is happening.  Nothing about the helpline has given me any indication that it has told the bishop to tell the victims to not report it.  That is illegal advice and if it is happening, it is legally liable.  But the AP article about the helpline, the Deseret News article about the helpline, and personal anecdotes that I've read have never given the impression that #1 is happening.

I believe the church does not do that now. But in the past I remember reading stories similar to Harry T. Clark's comment. And how do we know, since everything is deleted afterwards on what the hotline tells bishops. 

Edited August 6, 2022 by Tacenda

[The Nehor]

23 minutes ago, Harry T. Clark said:

In my stake, in the 1970's, we had a case where a sex offender committed some horrible acts on some of the youth in the stake.  I was a witness to some of it and was counseled by our stake president to let them, the church, handle it.  He said he had counseled with some higher authorities and that is what they counseled.  This was some time ago but it shows that the policy of keeping things locked up internally has a long history.

To be fair in the 1970s depending on where this was there may not have been a government agency equipped to investigate and respond to child abuse. If there was it may not have had the resources or legal ability to do even basic stuff like pull kids out of the offender’s home.

The sad truth is that prosecuting the offender may also have been difficult or impossible.

Edited August 6, 2022 by The Nehor

[bluebell]

18 minutes ago, Harry T. Clark said:

In my stake, in the 1970's, we had a case where a sex offender committed some horrible acts on some of the youth in the stake.  I was a witness to some of it and was counseled by our stake president to let them, the church, handle it.  He said he had counseled with some higher authorities and that is what they counseled.  This was some time ago but it shows that the policy of keeping things locked up internally has a long history.

It shows it has an old history.  It might have a long history too, but that sad example in your stake doesn't show it.

I'm really glad that we've come a long way from earlier decades where no one wanted to deal with sexual abuse so they just put their head in the sand.  It's really really good that most of the examples that people have of that happening in the church are from 40+ years ago. That means that the church is doing better and that is a good thing to acknowledge. 

But I agree with you that the church needs to make sure whatever failed with these poor little girls can't fail again (and since this was 11 or so years ago--and a lot has changed in the church regarding protecting kids from sexual abuse since then--maybe/hopefully it has).  I do think that, no matter how good we are doing in general, we still need to have it as our goal to do better.

[Harry T. Clark]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

To be fair in the 1970s depending on where this was there may not have been a government agency equipped to investigate and respond to child abuse. If there was it may not have had the resources or legal ability to do even basic stuff like pull kids out of the offender’s home.

It was in SLC, and my parents were asking about reporting this to the police.  This is why the SP counseled not to do it and bring on unwanted publicity that perhaps people like the Tanners could use.  A family friend was a high up in the SLC police department and my parents knew of the resources available to report crime.

[webbles]

11 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I believe the church does not do that now. But in the past I remember reading stories similar to Harry T. Clark's comment.

I'm not sure when the hotline was created and started to be used, but before that, I can believe church officials (even going to the First Presidency) recommending keeping it "in house".

15 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

And how do we know, since everything is deleted afterwards on what the hotline tells bishops.

And that is a good thing and probably required by law.  The details that are mentioned in that hotline probably are covered under a ton of privacy laws.  Deleting them makes it far simpler to protect the privacy of the victims.  It isn't to cover up.

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, Harry T. Clark said:

It was in SLC, and my parents were asking about reporting this to the police.  This is why the SP counseled not to do it and bring on unwanted publicity that perhaps people like the Tanners could use.  A family friend was a high up in the SLC police department and my parents knew of the resources available to report crime.

The Stake President told your parents his main concern was the Tanners or is that an inference? I’d believe either sadly.

The police could investigate but in the 70s that was more of an uphill battle. There weren’t trained specialists taught how to get accounts of what happened out of children. Often children couldn’t testify or their testimony was of dubious value and usually the child had to sit on a witness stand with the person who abused them staring at them and be questioned about it. The whole process was a grotesque mess.

I wasn’t trying to justify the church’s response. I was saying the government’s response at the time was capable of being equally useless.

It is still a mess but a slightly better mess.

[jkwilliams]

A quote from Mike Austin that resonated with me:

”I don't know how to love an institution without asking--and in some cases demanding--that it be better.”

[Calm]

Posted this to Smac’s thread as he has lots of links there for those who want a more in-depth study of the case, but just in case you are not reading both threads:

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/blog/2022/08/06/reflections-on-abuse-reporting-and-the-church

An interview the author, Jennifer Roach, a mental health therapist, gave on the helpline. No transcript and haven’t listened yet, so no clue about it except she is usually a quality speaker/writer, Imo. 
 

https://leadingsaints.org/reporting-abuse-church-helpline-the-bishop-an-interview-with-jennifer-roach/

She gave a FAIR 2020 presentation on bishops’ interviews.  Unfortunately I don’t think there is a transcript up yet. I wonder if I can make a bargain with God that if he makes it so I can sit up again, I will spend 10% of my sitting time transcribing FAIR presentations and anything else needed. 😛 

Edited August 7, 2022 by Calm

[jkwilliams]

18 hours ago, Calm said:

I wonder if I can make a bargain with God that if he makes it so I can sit up again, I will spend 10% of my sitting time transcribing FAIR presentations and anything else needed. 😛

 

I’m sorry you’re going through that. I’m amazed at the good humor with which you get on with life. All the best to you. 

[The Nehor]

18 hours ago, Calm said:

She gave a FAIR 2020 presentation on bishops’ interviews.  Unfortunately I don’t think there is a transcript up yet. I wonder if I can make a bargain with God that if he makes it so I can sit up again, I will spend 10% of my sitting time transcribing FAIR presentations and anything else needed. 😛 

I told God He really should take this deal and also that you kind of deserve it in general. Even put in a good word for a full body cure.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

I’m sorry you’re going through that. I’m amazed at the good humor with which you get on with life. All the best to you. 

I have had a long time to get used to it.  I look at others and much prefer my own issues rather than theirs.  But I am also very, very grateful for my support system.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I told God He really should take this deal and also that you kind of deserve it in general. Even put in a good word for a full body cure.

Sounds good to me.  Full body cure and I will start hitting all the ward and RS service projects too.   I don’t see how God can resist such a good deal.

Edited August 7, 2022 by Calm

[jkwilliams]

28 minutes ago, Calm said:

I have had a long time to get used to it.  I look at others and much prefer my own issues rather than theirs.  But I am also very, very grateful for my support system.

I feel the same way about my mental health. I don’t enjoy depression, but it could be much worse. Glad you are doing well and have good support. 

[Meadowchik]

On 8/4/2022 at 5:34 PM, jkwilliams said:

It's also pretty sickening to hear the church's attorney say the victims are just engaging in a "money grab." 

Long term victims of abuse can be impacted for life. I've witnessed how victims' health, personal relationships and ability to provide for their families are hindered by the effects of abuse...and the church offering barely enough for a year of therapy. That institutional response is wrong.

[2BizE]

On 8/4/2022 at 5:09 PM, Fair Dinkum said:

After the church settles this law suite for several million dollars and has the file sealed so there is no chance of public accountability, I hope they decide to put victims needs ahead of the churches reputation.

This. Thanks for your thoughts Fair Dinkum.  The church has failed our children by putting the church and its image before the safety and health of the children.