IN the 2-15-02 Body of Elders letter a paragraph is dedicated to child abuse issues. Many have claimed this an adjustment for the better with regard to WT Policy. Sadly this could not be further from the truth. Please review first the complete paragraph:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Remainder regarding the handling of cases of child abuse: (1)As directed by the July 1, 1989, letter to all Bodies of Elders, you should immediately call the Legal Department for direction if you learn of a case of child abuse. Child abuse would include sexual abuse, self-evident physical abuse, and extreme neglect involving a minor. (2) If the alleged victim is now an adult but was a minor at the time of the abuse, please call the Legal Department. (3) If you become aware of a past case of child abuse and you are not certain whether the elders involved at the time called the Legal Department for direction, please call the Legal Department for assistance as soon as possible. (4) Child abuse is a crime. Never suggest to anyone that they should not report an allegation to the police or other authorities. If you are asked, make it clear that whether to report the matter to the authorities or not is a personal decision for each individual to make and that there are no congregation sanctions for either decision. That is, no elder would criticize anyone who reports an allegation to the authorities.
------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a breakdown of direct quotes from the 2-15-02 BOE letter that reviewed what was stated at the 2001 Kingdom Ministry School to all elders. I invite you to review carefully the comments of this letter regarding how matters of child molestation are handled:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Remainder regarding the handling of cases of child abuse: (1) As directed by the July 1, 1989, letter to all Bodies of Elders, you should immediately call the Legal Department for direction if you learn of a case of child abuse.
------------------------------------------------------------------
The reference to the 89 BOE letter is significant in that it firmly establishes that the 89 letter is still valid and referred to when considering child molestation issues. This creates a history of WT policy that at least dates back to 1989 on how matters relating to child molestation are to be handled. The 1989 letter at no time suggested that the police are to be contacted when child molestation occurs. This simple fact shows the foundation of WT policy that in fact discourages victims from seeking “outside” assistance when the crime of child molestation occurs. Instead elders are required to contact WT Legal for instruction. Why do you need to call a religious institution when a crime has been committed? If so, then why not do this for rape, murder, bank robbery, etc. No directives are given in that regard. Wt Legal has one simple function, to protect WT interests legally. The interests of the child come second to that prime directive.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Child abuse would include sexual abuse, self-evident physical abuse, and extreme neglect involving a minor.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
It is interesting the definitions were finally given to what child abuse includes, yet how by these definitions the bar is raised to make it more difficult to prove. How would you define “self-evident physical abuse”? Bone sticking out of the skin? Black and blue marks all over the body? How often is this evident at a meeting or in field service where elders are present to make these assessments? At the same time if less proof were available what course would elders take? What about the testimony of a child if they were being beaten on a regular basis? What if two witnesses testified to this fact but they were children? Would they be considered “credible” witnesses? With the same examination, how would you define “extreme neglect”? When the child has starved to death? What if a child was to freeze to death in the dead of winter due to lack of clothing? It is much to be compared to the WT definition of “malicious lie”, that means a person has to prove the lie was malicious before it becomes a judicial offense. The result of this new definition for lying resulted in a 99% reduction in DF with lying as the offense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The comments above categorically put child abuse in the same category as “malicious lying”, the result is it being close to impossible to establish a basis for the elders to get involved when abuse issues arise.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) If the alleged victim is now an adult but was a minor at the time of the abuse, please call the Legal Department.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This statement is the result of the statue of limitations being extended in some States. This can create a legal problem for Wt if the elders determine no basis for congregational action yet the “adult” victim decides to press charges. The elder, CO, DO, or GB member who is charged could face a difficult situation as he has to offer a deposition regarding abuse. Thus with WT Legal informed they of course can move to protect WT “interests”. If an elder calls WT Legal with this information he will never be instructed to suggest they report the crime to proper authorities, as I was instructed in a similar situation, “They are going to have to make their own decision in that regard, you brothers stay out of it.” The State in which I reside has no statue of limitations for child molestation, yet my local molester remains a free man.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) If you become aware of a past case of child abuse and you are not certain whether the elders involved at the time called the Legal Department for direction, please call the Legal Department for assistance as soon as possible.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This clearly shows that their may exist many cases that were mishandled in the past. The acknowledgement of this in this statement five years after the 1997 letter to BOE required this to be reported has to make one wonder just how many cases yet remain unreported to WT Legal.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) Child abuse is a crime. Never suggest to anyone that they should not report an allegation to the police or other authorities.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The first sentence makes a good first statement. Yet why did the second statement need to be made? Could it be in the past 20-30 years that often just THAT was suggested? As multiple cases indicate many brothers and sisters have been threatened with DF if they reported the crime. In some cases a few actually were DF when they reported the crime for not following “theocratic order”. This comment is a clear acknowledgement of internal WT policy that has finally been placed in print after so many years of only being verbalized by Service Department when directly asked. If the elders did not call Service Department they could then call their own shots as they shot from the hip with full backing from WT Legal and Service.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are asked, make it clear that whether to report the matter to the authorities or not is a personal decision for each individual to make and that there are no congregation sanctions for either decision.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Child molestation is a crime in every single State of this country. While elders can use the legal loophole of “ecclesial privilege” to exempt themselves from reporting, here we see direct policy to give parents no sanction within the congregation if they choose to not cooperate with the “superior authorities”. What is the doctrine of Jehovah’s Witnesses when defining the basis of not obeying the “superior authorities”? Only if the action conflicts with God’s Law. Does not reporting a child molester to the authorities violate God’s Law in any way? If you refer back to the 1962 WT article that is a pivotal foundation article defining the adjustment of JW doctrine regarding the “superior authorities” that is still used as a reference today, you will note this comment:
*** w62 11/15 693 The Benefits of Subjection to Authorities ***
9 Worldly authorities render a judgment and punish persons, whether they are inside the congregation or outside, if they violate the laws of decency and good order. The violators have no right to complain at such punishment, as Paul showed by his words before Caesar’s judgment seat. (Acts 25:11) Hence the Christian congregation cannot protect any of its members if they steal, smuggle, commit bigamy, murder, libel, defraud, and so forth. The congregation must release such guilty members to punishment by worldly authorities. Since the guilty break the laws of the land and thus oppose the “authority,” they are taking a stand against God’s arrangement.
10 The Christian congregation has no orders from God and has no right to protect such opposers and lawbreakers from the due punishment by the “authority” of the land. We cannot hinder, oppose or condemn the execution of the krima or judgment by aiding or shielding lawbreakers. To do so would put the Christian congregation also in opposition to God’s arrangement. Besides letting the krima or “judgment” take its course upon offending members who bring reproach upon God’s people, the congregation may disfellowship such lawbreakers. The congregation does not want to deserve a krima or “judgment” with the lawbreakers by siding or cooperating with them and opposing the worldly “authority.” It also wants no reproach.
So according to this article what basis could any brother or sister find to not report the crime of child molestation to the police? If they choose to not do so the article points out they bring reproach on the congregation and Jehovah. Yet with the writing of the 2-15-02 BOE letter we have a new directive that completely contradicts the 62 WT and states if you reproach God and the congregation by not reporting a crime, you still remain an example to the congregation and face no “sanction”.
The original WT policy toward the “superior authorities” is now at conflict with WT BOE letter policy regarding the crime of child molestation. By way of comparison, what if a brother or sister committed murder of a fellow witness? If you were an elder who witnessed the crime, knowing you as the only witness would allow a murder to go free and kill others if not reported could you not report it and remain an elder in the congregation? If not then why would the organization apply a different rule for the crime of child molestation? The doctrine of Jehovah’s Witnesses toward the “superior authorities” has stood since 1962, why is it now being changed to overlook the crime of child molestation? It appears the “pedophile paradise” is alive and well with Service Department and WT Legal endorsement.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
That is, no elder would criticize anyone who reports an allegation to the authorities.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would this comment need to be restated twice? Could it be because that is exactly what has happened for the last thirty years and finally now WT has had to come clean and put it in writing before their pants were sued off for letting this remain an unstated policy? The victims know this to be true, as many were treated as DF for trying to speak out about their molestation and in some cases were.
So while some elders may tout this letter as a grand address of the child molestation policy, as you can see it is nothing but a restatement of basic WT policy with the addition of a direct contradiction of past policy regarding the “superior authorities” in which those who obstruct justice are now viewed as examples in the congregation. Once again Jehovah’s Witnesses are trained to be more afraid of hurting pedophiles than hurting children. This letter is an insult to children and any victims of a JW molestation. It is at best a far larger step in the wrong direction than what the shallow minded who wave this letter as the right course for WT policy purport it to be.