In general, what is the ethically correct response if a minor tells you someone is molesting him/her? (page 3)

Glander

Do what I did, call the police and report the SOB. It works quite well.

Lady Lee - Thanks for the info b/c I was wondering what you meant by clergy privilege. So what about the notion you mentioned earlier about someone acting in a professional capacity like a camp counselor, etc. and a victim disclosing abuse? Would a JW elder be considered a "professional" if a minor comes to him for help? That's kind of what prompted my question. As a man, I was thinking, "If I were an elder, and a child came to me for help, what would I feel ethically obligated to do?" My first reaction is to think I should contact professionals in these matters & get the kid some help. Then I wondered if the WT would dream of suggesting I do otherwise. Then I got a little PO-ed & typed my question.

Glander

CALL THE POLICE AND REPORT THE SOB! Jesus Christ, what happened to common sense ?

InterestedOne

Glander - Certainly immediate reporting to the police was my first thought. However, I think the WT elders are taught to do otherwise, and I was wondering what ethical reasoning they would have for an alternate course. I was also wondering how often they do the right thing & report regardless of what the WT says, and how often they neglect to report based on some kind of weird religious reasoning.

Igot2bme

Definitely call the authorities and child protective services. If a child comes to you with a story of abuse against them, we are then in a position of mandatory reporting the situation to the proper authorities. If we do not we then are liable for neglect.

djeggnog

@Lady Lee:

But the WTS is pretty good at changing the rules when it suits them.

I don't agree with you. I'd also say that you have a beef against Jehovah's Witnesses that prevents you from being precise. This is one of those times when what you are articulating here, which I would assume to be true, should be both precise and specific. We don't change rules at our own pleasure. I never do this. This is a lie.

So whenever a victim discloses abuse they should by all legal reason contact the authorities to protect the child.

What is does "all legal reason" mean? Did you make this up or does this expression actually have a meaning?

Elders are to call Bethel first to find out if they should report the abuse accusation. Bethel legal will then let them know if they should report. In the US it seems to depend on what state this happens in.

And you know this how?

We know from many experiences that if the accused is not a Witness or associated with the Witnesses they will be told to report. But if the accused is a JW they will most likely not tell them to report.

I do believe that there was a time when Jehovah's Witnesses in the local congregation would investigate the circumstances surrounding the report, and then, based on the results of their investigation, would report (i.e., child abuse, spousal abuse, extortion, other criminal acts that might be taking place) to the authorities, but those days have ended. I want to add here though that this distinction you make is ridiculous and isn't true. It may have been true in the cases that you have personally observed, but unless you have personal knowledge of such cases, they are unverified accounts that may or may not have involved an unbaptized child, but whether the child involved in child abuse matters may be that of one of Jehovah's Witnesses or the child of a non-Witnesses is incredible, pure fiction on your part.

Now the next piece of this goes like this:

The victim or family will be told they can go to the authorities if they are told that much.

This isn't true. In such cases, the families of alleged victims of child abuse are asked if they are comfortable about reporting the alleged abuse themselves, especially since the accused abuser may be a family member living in the household (e.g., a father or a sibling), and, if not, we will report the abuse on their behalf.

But they will also be told they have a responsibility to:

not bring shame on Jehovah's name or on the Cong

they should not do anything that would cause divisions where people would have to make a choice between the accused and the victim

they should deal with this within the Cong by the elders by following the Bible rules

confront the accused - if that doesn't work

take 1 or 2 people as witnesses to the confrontation

take the issue to the elders

How will a child's being sexually or physically abused by someone associated with the local congregation, whether the accused individual is a baptized Witness or is unbaptized, bring shame on Jehovah's name or on the congregation? Please explain that one to me. Who even thinks like this, but someone with an active imagination as to what might be taking place behind-the-scenes in such cases, someone that is a central depository for gossip, both true and false? As to any victim of abuse of any kind not making a choice between himself or herself and the accused, if someone, a brother, in one family should be accused of sexually abusing a child in another family, this report is one where criminal behavior may have taken place, so divisions between and among various families acquainted with or friendly to the accused and the victim will accordingly be made, which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone!

Like I said above, the elders are going to ask the family of the alleged victim if they feel comfortable about reporting the alleged abuse themselves, and if they would prefer not to do so, then the elders will do so, period. The kinds of things with which we deal in the local congregation has to do with the spirituality of the parties involved, so no matter what the superior authorities might require the accused and his or her victims to do, we are going to investigate the facts of the report made, and if at least two witnesses confirm the report, the matter is established in our minds, regardless of what police and judges do. If we learn that the alleged abuse of a child in this case was reported by another child in a different case, then where, in both cases, the same allegations involving sexual abuse are made against the same individual, but by different children, this, too, will establish the matter.

Once it goes to the elders it works like this:

The elders will listen to the accused and the victim separately and then together. The victim will have to sit in front of the abuser and 3 elders and explain in detail what was done without their parents being in the room

if the accused denies it the victim will be expected to have 2 or 3 witnesses to the abuse - like abusers are going to do it while a couple of people sit and watch

if she (or he) doesn't have the required witnesses it comes down to the child's word against tan adult. Since it is assumed children lie or take things out of context or misunderstand the elders will most likely say there is no proof and it ends there

the victim will then be told they cannot mention this to anyone in the cong including other family members so they don't

slander the accused

cause divisions

Case closed.

None of what you wrote here is even close to being true. Only one elder will interview the child, and not alone, but with the child's parent or adult guardian present. Only with the permission of the parent might the accused and the child victim be in the same room at the same time, and since no two children are alike, a 14-, 15- or 16-year-old might be put in a position to confront his or her accuser with the parents of that child and only one elder present, and I suppose a 12-year-old child might be put into such a position if his or her parents consent to it, but the elders may not want to put a 12-year-old into this position. In most cases, and contrary to what you write here, child victims do not confront their alleged abusers, usually because the parents do not consent to it or the elder involved does not think it to be a good idea, but they will interview the child separately in one place for a few minutes' time over a week or so while interviewing the alleged abuser in another place over that same week.

What happens next depends upon the situation and the decision of the judicial committee that will ultimately decide the matter.

As you can see the path is convoluted and there is little chance of a child getting any real help

The only thing "convoluted" here are the things you have said here. You have never been an elder, but you seem to be chock full of opinions, aren't you, @Lady Lee?

Elders are not policemen and no one ought to think them to be able to step in for law enforcement in any criminal matter. Many of them are not lawyers, so they are not qualified to dispense legal advice to anyone. The ethically correct response if a minor tells you someone is molesting him/her, is to ask them if they have informed their parents or guardians, those that have the primary responsibility for the child's well-being, as to the abuse to which they have become victims, and if they haven't done so, then inform the child's parents. The child may not want you to do so, but whether you are an adult confidant or a child confidant, it is not the place of anyone, but the child's parent or adult guardian to handle the matter. Your ethical responsibility is discharged once you have informed the child's parents of the crime. It is up the child's parents do carry out their ethical responsibilities toward their own child, not yours.

If one of the child's parents or guardians is the one about whom you are informed has been involved in sexually abusing the child, then your responsibility is to report the crime to the police, so that you do not become an accessory after-the-fact by being sworn to secrecy by the spouse of the abuser. Your ethical responsibility is discharged once you have informed the authorities of the crime.

@djeggnog

cheerios

and egghead weighs in with his ridiculous comments ...

where i live, it is the legal responsibility of every citizen and resident to report any such incident to the police. failure to do so is considered a crime. imho, anyone who has to check with a legal department first is just a buck-passer.

DagothUr

Just call the Police, they know what to do after that.

Murray Smith

Lord have mercy eggnog . . .

You must know by now that a good many of the posters here, like myself, have spent 20,30,40 years or more in this Organisation all over the world. Yet you come on here with your sanctimonious dissertations to tell us all "how it is"

I have been involved in sexual impropriety toward minors in various capacities involving communications from branch offices and Brooklyn, and none have ever resembled the steps taken in your post. More than half involved MS's or Elders. In the great majority of cases parents were intimidated into not advising the authorities "for the sake of God's name".

This organisation cares more about it's reputation, than destroying the lives of a few thousand children and their families, and that is a fact.

Take your pail of whitewash and keep painting your own grave white . . . it aint going to hide anything here

Glander

The elders actually scolded me for going to the police. I was not intimidated. The 21 yr old punk got into deep doo doo and had to register as a sex offender. Did I mention he was the nephew of one of the elders?

In general, what is the ethically correct response if a minor tells you someone is molesting him/her?

Share this