"But I think your post paints a misleading picture of elders in general. Many here were elders for several years and in those years they served, many actually cared for the members of their congregation. Too paint them all as you have doesn't seem right."
I agree with Pathofthorns, that not all elders are like that. True.
But the problem is that the "dynamic", "zealous" elders "taking the lead" in the congregations do have a higher percentage that are like that.
I know this from the three congregations that I have been with. In each the elders taking the lead were known for there insensitive remarks, for there shepherding that would leave sisters and also brothers in tears, for there consistant lack of empathy, for there suggestions, backed up by WT articles, to sisters in divided homes that left them deeply distressed and demoralised.
I can say, fortunately, that I never served on a judicial committee dealing with a young abused sister, but I remember the very first committee I was on, where a mature sister was confessing adultery from years before, and how the "dynamic", "zealous" chairmen elder reduced her to a state of sobbing distress, with his probing repetitious questioning.
So I know without doubt that the scenario described by Crawdad2 has happened and is still happening, more often than a general cross section of elders would lead you to believe, because IMO it tends to be the more "zealous" extreme elders "taking the lead" that carry out the majority of the shepherding and judicial tasks.
And then these same elders then encourage like-minded brothers to "reach-out" and recommend them for appointment, so reinforcing their own position and the overall attitude of the elder body. Which leads to, as Crawdad2 stated, more of the genuinely caring elders stepping down.