Latest from Australia - Victoria child protection in crisis: report

by sizemik 23 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  sizemik

  Check the following links . . . the storm isn't over for WTS.

  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-28/victoria-child-protection-in-crisis-report/3858454

  People working in religious organisations should be legally required to report suspected sexual or physical abuse of a young person by members in that group, except if that information is received during confession, the report says.

  An investigation should also be launched into how religious groups respond to child abuse perpetrated by people within their ranks.

  http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/breaking-news-national/overhaul-child-protection-in-vic-inquiry-20120228-1u0j6.html

  http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8427009

  The Baillieu Government yesterday announced sweeping reforms to the crisis-plagued child protection system.

  "The methodology of the paedophile is secrecy and the law should not itself provide a veil of secrecy to paedophiles." - Report

  http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/inquiry-rules-sex-fiends-identities-should-be-revealed/story-fn7x8me2-1226284511490

  "The failures of the child protection system in Victoria [has] been to this state's shame...We are taking action today, we're making a start." - Victorian State Premier Ted Baillieu, February 28, 2012.
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Thanks for sharing!
• 

  Lady Lee

  The problem with the WTS is that they don't hear about the abuse during cionfessions by the perpetrator of th eabuse. They learn about it when the victim or their family asks foir help. Therefre they are mandated to report the abuse and let the proper authorities deal with it.

  People working in religious organisations should be legally required to report suspected sexual or physical abuse of a young person by members in that group, except if that information is received during confession, the report says.

  An investigation should also be launched into how religious groups respond to child abuse perpetrated by people within their ranks.

  The WTS has consistently taken this wording and created an artificial loophole that needs to be closed.
• 

  Band on the Run

  I do not stay very well informed on this matter. I take that "a law should " mandate reporting means there is no such law. Yet how did Unthank get so far. The WT folded. Did it not? Or did it comply voluntarily rather than risk mandatory reporting. I don't see how any law would have enforcement abilities sans heavy fines and jail sentences for corporate officers.

  It sounds as though if Australian voters care enough, the politcal process would intervene. I would love to hear other religions are responding to the law. Is the Roman Catholic Church complying? I do see how mandatory reporting erodes a religions's powers. Certainly, children are extremely vulnerable compared to religions. Your religion protecting its behind must me more powerful than even the abuse. What would Jesus do?

  I recall another thread that contained a press report. The WT elders stated why they did not comply. It is a family religion. Most children are sexually abused by family members. Every aspect the Witness elders used to bolster their case indicated that they are completely ignorance about the dynamics of pedophilia. This would not be remarkable twenty years ago. There is no excuse for such ignorance today.
• 

  sizemik

  It's worth noting that Steven Unthank made a lengthy submission to the inquiry that led to this report, as well as persuing his private prosecution. His submission was received favorably by the inquiry head, and is likely to have contributed heavily to the part of the report that turns the spotlight on religions. It's nice to see all his hard work bearing some fruit.

  Ted Baillieu is the State Premier . . . they don't come any higher. This will create more headaches for WTS than the attempted prosecution IMO, and could well be part of the reason for the dismissal of his case.
• 

  Violia

  I so hope they lose their charity status. it is a joke they claim it. they should be forced to prove they provide charity.

  the wts is balking on this b/c once they let the government's require them to have any paperwork, the government can then walk in and demand to see it. it also makes it harder to hide folks who have committed crimes .

  They swings back and forth between being clergy with special privileges and then they aren't when the situation calls for it. They should be forced to be made to take one stand or another and stop this legal loophole nonsense.

  steven Unthank, I and a lot of other folks thank you. It really does just take one determined person to set the wheels in motion. Never under estimate what one person can start.

  We will never bring the wts down doctrinally, but abuse of children, the blood policy, and money /taxes /charity may be their undoing or force major changes.
• 

  mind blown

  OMG.....this is HUGE! *cartwheels and smile* This means the "Government" (criminal prosecutions jail time) will now be stepping in child sexual abuse cases and reform!

  Sizemik....Thanx for this information Agreed about Steven Unthank! And I'm hoping after all was said and done our tons of emails helped too!

  Most child sexual abuse cases against JW's as well as other people have been civil cases.

  criminal law

  In criminal law, a guilty defendant is punished by either (1) incarceration in a jail or prison, (2) fine paid to the government, or, in exceptional cases, (3) execution of the defendant: the death penalty. Crimes are divided into two broad classes: felonies have a maximum possible sentence of more than one year incarceration,misdemeanors have a maximum possible sentence of less than one year incarceration.

  civil law

  In contrast, a defendant in civil litigation is never incarcerated and never executed. In general, a losing defendant in civil litigation only reimburses the plaintiff for losses caused by the defendant's behavior.
  
  So-called punitive damages are never awarded in a civil case under contract law. In a civil case under tort law, there is a possibility of punitive damages, if the defendant's conduct is egregious and had either (1) a malicious intent (i.e., desire to cause harm), (2) gross negligence (i.e., conscious indifference), or (3) a willful disregard for the rights of others. The use of punitive damages makes a public example of the defendant and supposedly deters future wrongful conduct by others. Punitive damages are particularly important in torts involving dignitary harms (e.g., invasion of privacy) and civil rights, where the actual monetary injury to plaintiff(s) may be small.
  
  One can purchase insurance that will pay damages and attorney's fees for tort claims. Such insurance coverage is a standard part of homeowner's insurance policies, automobile insurance, and insurance for businesses. In contrast, it is not possible for a defendant to purchase insurance to pay for his/her criminal acts.
  
  While a court can order a defendant to pay damages, the plaintiff may receive nothing if the defendant has no assets and no insurance, or if the defendant is skillful in concealing assets. In this way, large awards for plaintiffs in tort cases are often an illusion.
• 

  Phizzy

  Thanks for posting this encouraging info Sizemik, the ripples of this will go far.

  Just an aside, I do not understand why "if recieved during confession" is necessarily exempt, the Priest -Penitent confidentiality is not protected by Law in England, and I would have thought the same was true in Oz. A crime discovered during confession should be reported.
• 

  cedars

  Brilliant news. It's especially gratifying to think that Steven Unthanks's tireless work may have contributed to this development.

  Cedars
• 

  sizemik

  A crime discovered during confession should be reported. . . . Phizzy

  I agree entirely . . . . A religious confession is solely for the benefit of the confessor. I can't see any sound moral reason for putting the pedophiles spiritual well-being ahead of a child's physical and mental well-being . . . not to mention all other children put at risk. Crazy. A change here is well overdue. UK law still sets a strong precedent despite the variations. I think I'll write on that theme.