leaving_quitely, I agree with most of what you said. However, when it comes to an unproven allegation, I don't think the elders should inform the family heads of the name of the individual that was accused. They should simply inform them that a member of the congregation has been accused of pedophilia and that as a precaution they're telling all parents to not leave their children alone with ANY adults in the congregation, no matter how trustworthy they think they are - no elders, no ministerial servants, no pioneers, no one! and they must accompany them to the bathroom.
Furthermore, when informing the parents the elders should take the opportunity to ask the parents if their child has ever said anything to them about the behavior of any member of the congregation regarding them touching the child inappropriately. You see, it may be that the accused touched another child but when the child told the parent, the parent brushed it off as a misunderstanding. By not telling the parents the name of the accused, it ensures that if the accused did in fact touch another child, then the parent or child giving that same name would constitute an unbiased corroboration - unbiased by the knowledge of the identity of the accused in the current case - that the accused is indeed a pedophile.
It would also serve to protect the reputation of the accused from any stigma should it later turn out that the accusation was untrue, because sometimes the stigma can continue on the accused even after he was shown to be innocent.