Do Jehovahs Witnesses shun Child Victims of Sexual Abuse

[Guest]

Anna, about the reporting to the authorities, if they are just allegations, why should they report them to the police?  They don't have proof, and if they parents of the child suspects it they can report it, they are the primary caretakers!  I understand that there is a risk to the child, but if the person may be innocent and they have no proof, why should they report them if it isn't a legal requirement?  And how can the commission find wrongdoing if it isn't required by law?  They did say that if they truly suspect the child is at risk, they do report them

I read some of that other stuff and women can not be involved in the decision making, they aren't elders!  I would imagine that they could accompany the victim and support them and help explain!

The two witness rule is not just two witnesses to the actual act, but if another person experienced the abuse his or herself this would count, plus any evidence that comes out in court would count!  Also the elder's investigation is not the same as a criminal investigation, they are not trying him on a criminal level, that is the job of the courts! 

I don't know if the society admitted that they made mistakes on their level or not, but the royal commission could twist things, this report is not in the words of the elders, it was compiled by worldly people and presented to us!  I don't think we should speak against the society, they are handling things and we are not the judges ourselves, we don't have all of the details!  If they are wrong, Jehovah will let them know eventually!  He withholds his spirit and corrects the brothers

 

 

[TrueTomHarley]

5 hours ago, Nicola said:

And how can the commission find wrongdoing if it isn't required by law?  They did say that if they truly suspect the child is at risk, they do report them

If 'going beyond the law' is the new gold standard, why doesn't that become the law? Could any solution be more straightforward?

[Evacuated]

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

If 'going beyond the law' is the new gold standard, why doesn't that become the law?

Yes I agree. It seems that JWs are accused of not meeting a standard that the authorities have not consistently set.

Mr Stewart's request on Day 54 is telling:

"I'm only asking you what assistance you can give to the Commissioners in their deliberations in making recommendations as to what the law should be,"     26523 Line 36-39.

[Anna]

11 hours ago, Nicola said:

but the royal commission could twist things, this report is not in the words of the elders, it was compiled by worldly people and presented to us! 

I don't think it's in the Royal Commissions interests to "twist" things because their concern is to find the best possible solution for child protection and in order to do that they need facts. Their concern is not to malign the Witnesses, they are not Apostates. I don't know if you are aware that we were only one out of many other institutions that were investigated.

11 hours ago, Nicola said:

I don't think we should speak against the society, they are handling things and we are not the judges ourselves, we don't have all of the details

Very true, we don't have all the details. But the Commission had all details, both from the victims and the "society" and was therefor able to handle it within that framework. It has nothing to do with "speaking against the society", this involves facts.

11 hours ago, Nicola said:

If they are wrong, Jehovah will let them know eventually! 

I hasten to say, but I think that is exactly what may have happened in this case.

You must also remember that the situation with child sexual abuse is unlike any other - "eventually" may give enough time for another child to be abused, so I don't think  "Jehovah letting them know eventually" is really  applicable here. It is not like it concerns an adjustment in understanding prophesy, or even facts of immorality between two adults coming to light. We are talking about protecting innocent children.

4 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Yes I agree. It seems that JWs are accused of not meeting a standard that the authorities have not consistently set.

Mr Stewart's request on Day 54 is telling:

"I'm only asking you what assistance you can give to the Commissioners in their deliberations in making recommendations as to what the law should be,"     26523 Line 36-39.

So we may actually be helping the Australian government to get their act together as well.  I guess we should not view this as a battle between "us" and "them" but this should be a mutual effort with the ultimate aim of protecting children.

[Evacuated]

4 hours ago, Anna said:

this should be a mutual effort with the ultimate aim of protecting children.

Which is not our remit as an organisation, but as members of the human race in these critical times.

[Guest]

Anna, I am not saying that the commission are apostates, but they are judging Jehovah's Witnesses by unfair standards, trying to tell us that we need to associate with people who clearly tell Jehovah's Witnesses that they don't want them anymore, and telling us that we should let women take on elder's duties!  And by my saying that Jehovah will eventually correct the brothers about the issue, is not saying that I believe that the kids who suffer in the meantime aren't hurting!  That is what Jehovah does sometimes!  Joseph was unfairly imprisoned for a long time, and Jehovah didn't immediately release him!  But he eventually did!  Perhaps this is Jehovah working to refine us, but I am careful to not say anything too judgmental since I am not involved in the process!  It sounds like they have refined some processes and may still make adjustments!  But the commission is not being fair in many ways, and yes, I am aware that the commission reviewed other religions!  It sounds like the governing body is telling us that they do not believe that we are being treated objectively, so I don't want to tell them how to do their jobs!  And the vast majority of the cases don't involve elders, they involve family situations and are in people's homes!  The elders are only involved in those cases to figure out how to discipline them or to determine wrongdoing, something very hard to do!  They are volunteers, and if the abuse victim comes forward as an adult, they are free to report it to the police!  If they are a minor child, and if they say the father did it, the mother can report it!  The elders said that if they think the child is in danger that they do get involved!  If there are laws, they do report it to the police!  And if they don't have proof, I don't blame them for being wary of reporting someone who may be innocent!  That could destroy someone's life

[Evacuated]

4 hours ago, Nicola said:

I don't blame them for being wary of reporting someone who may be innocent! That could destroy someone's life

And where there is no mandatory reporting requirement, it could be viewed as breaking other laws!

[Mike Forrest]

Would we reason the same way if it was a question of for example murder? "No we can not be sure, so we don't report it to the authorities". Of course not!

If we have reasonable suspicion of a serious crime we should report it to the police so that they can do a proper investigation. Yes, sometimes an innocent person could suffer from such an investigation. (It's the same thing with any crime investigation) On the other hand we absolutely must prioritize a likely victim and also protect potential future victims.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

3 hours ago, Micael Frost said:

Would we reason the same way if it was a question of for example murder? "No we can not be sure, so we don't report it to the authorities". Of course not!

AMEN!

If you think about the PRINCIPLES behind policy, it is immediately OBVIOUS to most educated people  that current WTB&TS policy is first and foremost ... SELF SERVING.

NOT in the best interest of Justice .... but that is beating a very dead, rotted horse. Examples are Legion.

I have been waiting for someone to verbalize and write this very thing, so I, who am as diplomatic as a runaway chain-saw, would not have to.

The essence of EVERYTHING is summed up in Michael Frost's single . two line paragraph..

.

 

[Evacuated]

7 hours ago, Micael Frost said:

If we have reasonable suspicion of a serious crime we should report it to the police so that they can do a proper investigation.

Of course. Congregation elders have been instructed that any situation where a child is at risk should be reported to the police regardless. Also, any congregation member that becomes aware of such a matter is at liberty to report the matter to the authorities regardless. Family members also have that right, congregation members or otherwise. 

This may not have always been clearly understood, but then neither has the extent of this heinous crime.

However, I do struggle with the logic that says we must put the suffering of an innocent person due to false allegations second to the protection of likely vicitms and potential future victims. Not the least factor in this is the demonstrable incompetency at times of the agencies we entrust with carrying out  "proper" investigations.

The following cases are relevant and sadly by no means isolated: 2014 David Bryant; 2015 Jay Cheshire.

[Guest-00]

On 2017-4-28 at 00:48, Anna said:

those who are not baptised cannot get disfellowshipped or disassociate regardless of age. 

[Remainder of post omitted as was not relevant to this post]

I would like to point out that we had a young unbaptised teen, who no longer wanted to attend meetings. This was considered the same as disassociation, and he was to be treated as the same as a disfellowshipped person. However, this hurtful behaviour, was not an official statement from the platform, it was more a private "marking" from several families whose parents told the solo mum she was wrong for allowing him to no longer attend the meetings, that she should be "making" him come to meetings if he lives with her. Her response was that if she was in the best position to know her son best, that if she tried to "force" her son to attend meetings the effect would be much worse. Having seen parents do this time and time again, only for the young person to become absolutely opposed to the organisation has been enough evidence to affirm that allowing someone to choose to leave [to exercise their free will] along with the statement that you still care about them and that your door will always be open, is the better and most loving course... 

But on topic, if one has also been abused, and chooses to stay away from the meetings on this basis, and if the only thing the congregation focuses on are the "rules" then they have missed the point of "I want mercy, not sacrifice". 

[Anna]

3 hours ago, Reo Raifha said:

it was more a private "marking" from several families whose parents told the solo mum she was wrong for allowing him to no longer attend the meetings, that she should be "making" him come to meetings if he lives with her.

Judging the mother and telling her what she should or shouldn't do with her son is wrong obviously.  But it is the other parents right if they decide they do not want their children to associate with the son for fear of bad association. It all depends on the situation. I have experienced quite a few cases like this, where the unbaptized teen decides they no longer want to attend, but it went hand in hand with also not wanting to associate with members of the congregation outside of the meetings either, but rather choosing worldly friends with whom they could go and do their "worldly things" as is the case when one wants to quit the truth. However, many decide to quit their worldly ways and come back and that is when they will find much support (or should). One of the unbaptized sons of a single sister in our congregation stopped going to meetings and went to live with his girlfriend. He and his girlfriend came to the memorial this year and everyone was very nice to both of them. The son looked completely at ease, talking with his former friends and they talking with him. The sisters even took his girlfriend under their wing and invited her to go to cross fit with them. I don't know where this will end, but the son knows that if he wants to come back any time, he will be most welcomed. And for just one of his steps in the right direction, the friends will take two to meet him more than half way.

4 hours ago, Reo Raifha said:

But on topic, if one has also been abused, and chooses to stay away from the meetings on this basis, and if the only thing the congregation focuses on are the "rules" then they have missed the point of "I want mercy, not sacrifice". 

If someone has been abused, and chooses to stay away from meetings the friends will try and encourage that one and show them mercy, but you will find as a rule it is the abused person who doesn't want that either. They are the ones who want to quit associating with Witnesses period, regardless of whether they are at the Kingdom hall or not.

16 hours ago, Nicola said:

But the commission is not being fair in many ways, and yes, I am aware that the commission reviewed other religions!  It sounds like the governing body is telling us that they do not believe that we are being treated objectively, so I don't want to tell them how to do their jobs! 

What’s better, to humbly accept counsel even if it may be unjustifiably harsh or unfair, or to try and make excuses or minimize the situation? You know the answer.

I agree, the ARC were handling things from a secular point of view, and therefore found it difficult at times to understand our Bible based view. But again, the only objective here is to protect the children and find a balance between what the secular view is and Bible principles. I think the GB wear big boy’s pants and we need not worry about them and feel we need to run to their defense. I do not think they have been too upset by the investigation and about being corrected, and do not need our sympathies or protection. Nothing bad has happened. A few insufficiencies were found which needed correcting. There are insufficiencies in all strata of society and regularly need to be assessed and revised. Also in our organization, and it has been the case as you know. Of course this is Satan’s world and so humans will never achieve a perfect solution, and neither will we as an organization because we too are imperfect.

16 hours ago, Nicola said:

That is what Jehovah does sometimes!  Joseph was unfairly imprisoned for a long time, and Jehovah didn't immediately release him! 

Being unfairly imprisoned, and being sexually abused and raped as a child is quite different, at least in my opinion.