Michigan Court of Appeals rules in favor of minister who didn't report suspected child abuse

by Sol Reform 7 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  Sol Reform

  http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/08/ionia_pastors_conversation_wit.html

  Ionia pastor's conversation with parishioner privileged, confidential, appeals court saysPrint By John Agar | [email protected] Follow on Twitter on August 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM
  
  An appeals panel sides with an Ionia pastor accused of violating mandatory reporting law.File photo

  GRAND RAPIDS, MI - The state Court of Appeals said that a conversation between a pastor and parishioner - in which a woman shared concerns her husband abused her girls - was confidential and privileged.

  The opinion upholds lower court findings that the Rev. John Prominski, senior pastor at Resurrection Life Church of Ionia, did not violate mandatory reporting rules for child abuse.

  The woman sought advice from Prominski after her husband had the girls touch themselves. Prominski counseled the husband for three months. The husband denied any improprieties.
  The family eventually left the area and the church.

  Two years later, the woman woke to her daughter's screams.
  "(The husband) was in her room and I asked her what happened? And she said, 'I hate you, I hate you ... don't ever touch me again.' ... I asked her what happened? And she said that he was touching her."

  She again sought Prominski's advice. He told her to go to police, or he would. He confirmed that she contacted police.
  Ionia County prosecutors filed charges against the stepfather for sexual assault. They also charged Prominski for failure to report child abuse, a misdemeanor, for failing to report the 2009 allegation.

  An Ionia County District judge, in dismissing the charge, determined the conversation between the parishioner and pastor to be privileged, and exempt from mandatory report requirements.
  A Circuit Court judge affirmed.
  The appeals panel heard arguments in June.

  The law provides: "Any communications between attorneys and their clients, between members of the clergy and the members of their respective churches, and between physicians and their patients are hereby declared to be privileged and confidential when those communications were necessary to enable the attorneys, members of the clergy, or physicians to serve as such attorney, member of the clergy, or physician."

  "The issue is whether the mother communicated with defendant 'in his professional character in a confession or similarly confidential communication,'" the panel wrote.
  Prosecutors argued that parishioners' conversations are privileged only regarding their own actions.
  The appeals panel said the woman was only seeking advice.

  "Indeed, the entire purpose of her consultation with defendant was to make the decision whether she should report it and, apparently, she made the decision (in 2009) not to report the behavior, and instead, rely on her husband seeking counseling and reforming his behavior."
  The woman intended to keep the conversations with her pastor private, the courts ruled.

  Attorney Bruce Block, who represents Prominski, said religious leaders have had strong interest in the case.

  The appeals panel was comprised of justices Stephen Borrello, David Sawyer and Deborah Servitto.

  The stepfather pleaded no contest to second-degree criminal-sexual conduct, records showed.
• 

  jamiebowers

  The main difference between this case and the Watch Tower is that jws confess to a group of men within an organization that claims to have no clergy. Once a jw confesses to the elders, the WT Society is contacted. Courts have ruled in the past that there is no confidentiality in cases such as these. Google Gilbert Simental, and read the articles about the court's decision about his confession to the elders. The elders were forced to testify about the confession under threat of prosecution.
• 

  Band on the Run

  I started to research clergy/pentinent privilege during the Conti love fest. It seemed to violate freedom of religion as applied to the Witnesses. Time did not permit me to fully research the issue. The Witnesses claim they have no clergy. Confession is mocked. Yet they wish to assert it. Privilege is linked to one person sessions in a professional capacity. Elders are a group. Compared to evil Christendom, they have NO training in counseling.Their theology is not one of penance. Rather, it is retribution by a Jehovah throwing a temper tantrum at the earth and humans that he declared good.

  With the exception of attorney-client privilege, privilege is under assault. The modern trend is to allow as much evidence as possible. Some of these privileges once played a vital role in society but no longer do. Perhaps some need to be trimmed by a large margin. Privilege is an exception to normal, routine law.

  I wonder if civil law countries, such as Europe, retain privilege. Clergy/pentinent privilege will be protected. The WT lawyers should know all the details of priest/pentinent privilege. They have obvious weaknesses. I am looking forward to reading the First Amendment arguments in the Conti case. Perhaps I am wrong but Simons lucked out on judges.

  The article listed in the op is not a great site for legal news or analysis. Reading the trial court reported case and the appeals court reported case would be much better. Also, is this an intermediate appeals court or the highest appellate court in Michigan?

  I have a hunch that the facts are unusual. No judge is going to rule against the Witnesses based on their doctrine. Every church or organization also have child abuse cases. It might make sense to not target the WT in such an obvious manner and make alliances with members of other religions. There are many orgs. that deal with child abuse across the religious spectrum.
• 

  Phizzy

  The priest/penitent confidentiality situation does not apply here in the U.K

  What I fail to understand is why the Prosecution did not ask the minister in this case how reporting the first suspicion to the police or appropriate authorities would have stopped him being able to do his job as a clergyman. Of course it would have nad to have been with the permission of the mother, I suppose.

  I really admire an Elder I used to attend the K.H with. Many years ago it came to the attention of the BOE that there was probably a case of sexual abuse of a daughter by her father. No facts had been firmly established at this point, and the mother was "undecided" as to what action to take, hence she asked the Elders.

  The Bro I admire simply stood up in the Elders meeting and said "I don't know what you brothers are going to do, but I am going to the Police with this, right now".

  That man had a good moral attitude. I do not think the Pastor in the above account did, or all those JW Elders who toook no action in so many cases.

  Surely, the welfare of the abused is paramount.

  The WT cannot claim confidentiality, as that has been broken by the Elders telephoning H.Q Legal for advice.
• 

  Band on the Run

  There is NO priest/pentinent privilege in Great Britain? Not even for the C of E? Well, I am shocked. If true, this is a teaching moment on how much Americans of all kinds value freedom of religion.

  The answer to your question is obvious. The person sought his services as a minister/priest. This was a spiritual discussion. They did not discuss fashion trends, or sports scores. Privacy was expected. Confidentiality was important. I would not want my conversations with my local priest broadcast all over the place. When privilege developed at common law in England, the judges were very conscious that there would be abuse of the doctrine. They valued privacy and spirituality so much that they decided to carve out exceptions.

  When the privilege developed, government did nothing but collect taxes. Churches ran hospitals, orphanages, helped poor people. The people hated the church hypocrisy but they loved the genuine part of the church. Hardly anyone could read so the priests read important letters for the people. They hated Rome but loved the lowly priests and friars. I only understand a bit from reading history.

  Almost everyone knew that the priests were secretly married. It did not bother them. They loved married priests with illegitimate children. The "married" priest could understand family problems. Many popes have not so secret children that they adored and promoted. I don't think today's Roman Catholics would like the situation. Cardinal Wolsey on the Tudors and Pope Alexander on the Borgias are two examples.

  Is America the only place that still has privilege for clergy?
• 

  Phizzy

  I should imagine that many countries who have remained predominantly Catholic may retain Priest/Penitent confidentiality enshrined in their Law.

  With other Protestant countries like the U.K, I would not be surprised if they have abandoned such a thing. Here in the U.K the law respects confidentiality in general of course, but not when a crime has been committed.

  As I said above, if you as aMinister/Pastor really have high moral values you will put the welfare of the vulnerable above any nit-picking details as to what is or is not required legally.

  Of course, the JW's simply put the "Organization" above the law, and before any care or love for victims of abuse.
• 

  Violia

  The jws have used both defenses, they are clergy- they are not. Whatever works at the time.
• 

  JWdaughter

  From what I understood, the pastor, who seemed conscientious, did not believe that he had a firm accusation, just someone who was wondering if she had enough info to report. Apparently, at that time, no one thought there was a firm accusation. The minute he had such information, he DID report it. Still, they prosecuted him (wish they would go at the JWs more!)

  Michigan has some interesting laws in this area between reporting, testifying, etc. They are worth noting as they are not the standard and tend to be challenged more-I think they are perhaps a little confusing to the 'reporters'. Almost all the cases that don't involve JWs seem to come out of Michigan(or I just keep seeing them there)