Another Homeschool Leader Scandal - TOS

[Lavandula]

I reread the article and it was a 6 year old and a teenager. In what situation would you not call the police, besides the teenager having a mental issue? Even if the teenager isn't doing it for sexual gratification it is abuse. Even if the 6 year old can't fully comprehend what happened then, it is abuse. I can't think of a situation where I could call any sexual touching between a high schooler and a 1st grader experimentation and brush it off as okay.  As long as we're talking about kids with no developmental issues, teenager generally does imply high school unless the child was 13, and even then they're probably near the end of 8th grade. I think it's quite fair to assume any teenager touching a child that young knows better.

[Laurie4b]

When I responded to the molestation question, I certainly wasn't thinking of any kid just experimenting sexually. Around here at least, 12 is 7th grade. I strongly believe the majority (of course there are exceptions) of 7th graders are mature enough not to touch a 5th grader sexually. I played doctor too. But I was in elementary school, and it was with people my age. I cringe thinking back on it, but I don't feel it was forced or coerced. I'd be inclined to think any touching between a 7th grader and an elementary schooler is coerced. A 7th grader is a child, most definitely. But generally they are on a very different level than a 5th grader. My husband now is a few years older and of course it doesn't seem strange at all. But I do remember crushes when I was younger.. Back then even a kid a grade ahead of or below me seemed a world apart. Maybe I'm basing this too heavily off personal experience, but I just think people aren't fully considering how far apart most 12 and 10 year olds really are. It's only 2 years, yes, but there is a very big difference in my eyes. 

 

I'll relink the professional article I linked above http://focus.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=53036. This information is very consistent with when I was in mental health practice and in cases I've known of since then, hasn't changed. Quoting "Child molestation is not a medical diagnosis and is not necessarily a term synonymous with pedophilia (5, 7, 15, 17, 26). A child molester is loosely defined as any individual who touches a child to obtain sexual gratification with the specifier that the offender is at least 4 to 5 years older than the child (15, 26). The age qualifier is added to eliminate developmentally normal childhood sex play (eg, two 8-year-olds "playing doctor") (26)."

 

The 5 year age span is  too wide, imo, but it is cited as above in the professional literature. A 2 year age span, unless there are idiosyncratic issues, is a very normal age span for sexual contact.

 

Maybe you are right that you are basing your reaction on your own experience.

 

It's hard to make a strong general case for  differentiation between a 10 and 12 year old developmentally, certainly difficult to support your bolded statement. Physically, there is a wide range of development. It is not uncommon for a 5th grade girl to have entered puberty and have her period, yet many 7th grade girls do not have their periods and are still prepubescent. The same is true for boys. http://www.webmd.com/children/news/20121020/earlier-puberty-age-9-10-average-us-boy  Cognitively, most 5th-7th graders have a have moved into the logic state with abstract thinking skills. Both 10 and 12 year olds are considered "tweens" in our culture socially, though of course social development will vary as well. Whether a child has older siblings affects their level of advancement into "teen" type things, for instance, as will other experiences they've had. You can have a very "teen-oriented" 5th grader and a 7th grader still playing with Playmobils or dolls.

 

On a personal anecdote level: My sons are all two years apart. The younger two, particularly, have always been playmates, two peas in a pod, and they and their best friends who are also brothers two years apart have played inseparably for years, including during a time when the younger set were 10 and the older set were 12.  When they played together, it tended to be as a group . I never saw a huge differential between any two of them. I don't think that is at all uncommon. They are/were all peers.

 

This is relevant only to Maize's hypothetical. In the OP, the perpetrator was 14 and the victim was 6. That is well within the professional definition of molestation.

[Lavandula]

I'll relink the professional article I linked above http://focus.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=53036. This information is very consistent with when I was in mental health practice and in cases I've known of since then, hasn't changed. Quoting "Child molestation is not a medical diagnosis and is not necessarily a term synonymous with pedophilia (5, 7, 15, 17, 26). A child molester is loosely defined as any individual who touches a child to obtain sexual gratification with the specifier that the offender is at least 4 to 5 years older than the child (15, 26). The age qualifier is added to eliminate developmentally normal childhood sex play (eg, two 8-year-olds "playing doctor") (26)."

 

The 5 year age span is  too wide, imo, but it is cited as above in the professional literature. A 2 year age span, unless there are idiosyncratic issues, is a very normal age span for sexual contact.

 

Maybe you are right that you are basing your reaction on your own experience.

 

It's hard to make a strong general case for  differentiation between a 10 and 12 year old developmentally, certainly difficult to support your bolded statement. Physically, there is a wide range of development. It is not uncommon for a 5th grade girl to have entered puberty and have her period, yet many 7th grade girls do not have their periods and are still prepubescent. The same is true for boys. http://www.webmd.com/children/news/20121020/earlier-puberty-age-9-10-average-us-boy  Cognitively, most 5th-7th graders have a have moved into the logic state with abstract thinking skills. Both 10 and 12 year olds are considered "tweens" in our culture socially, though of course social development will vary as well. Whether a child has older siblings affects their level of advancement into "teen" type things, for instance, as will other experiences they've had. You can have a very "teen-oriented" 5th grader and a 7th grader still playing with Playmobils or dolls.

 

On a personal anecdote level: My sons are all two years apart. The younger two, particularly, have always been playmates, two peas in a pod, and they and their best friends who are also brothers two years apart have played inseparably for years, including during a time when the younger set were 10 and the older set were 12.  When they played together, it tended to be as a group . I never saw a huge differential between any two of them. I don't think that is at all uncommon. They are/were all peers.

I don't see why you felt it was needed to bold part of my sentence, leaving a few words out. Very important words - I said I'd be inclined to think that. I didn't say it's a fact or it is always true.  I'm not trying to say everything I personally believe is right, but I will stand by what I said. There are of course exceptions. But I believe if you go to a middle school you will find the majority of them do know that they cannot just touch people like that.

[Dory]

So how about with a situation that isn't hypothetical, but that I really know happened. If a mom walks in to find a 7yo boy playing 'doctor' with a 2yo girl and the girl is very upset, should she do anything? How about when the two of them are now 15 and 10? Should anything happen yet? At what point is it not a curious boy? At what point is this seriously damaging enough to the victim that something needs to be done?

 

And at what age of the offender, would police end up involved?

[happyWImom]

I agree.  I'm also not worried about what someone posts on a blog or types on a website.  I hope "standing up" means filing a police report and law enforcement investigating it and bringing it to court.

 

I have a pastor who has said to someone who came to him for counseling about his "sin issue" (abusing his wife) "Well brother, I'll pray for you and visit you in prison.  Now I'm calling the police."

 

We had a situation where a registered sex offender was out on parole and wanted to attend services.  The same pastor agreed to let him attend if he showed up with his mother as an escort who never left him alone or if she couldn't, he could arrange for a deacon to escort him while on the property, he couldn't use the restroom (he didn't live far away so it wasn't a problem) he had to come in at the beginning of the service and leave immediately after (no milling around before or after services) and he could only start attending after all the parents had been called to a meeting and shown his picture and have the situation explained to them.  That's how a church handles that situation responsibly.

We had a similar situation.  Members are also required to attend a "Child Safety Training for Abuse Prevention" class if they are in any way interacting with the kids-teaching, chaperoning, working in the nursery, etc....  No one is allowed to take a child to the bathroom unless another adult is present, all classrooms are to either have a window to the hallway or doors are to be left open.  From what I've heard from friends who attend different churches, this is the norm.  I guess I'm totally flabbergasted at the idea of ministers and church members trying to "keep things quiet" or "protect the abuser".  I've not done any internet searches to find out how widespread this is, but to blame the "church" or "Christians" in a blanket statement is pretty harsh.  Why do we seem to always attack a group when something awful happens?  Does everyone have to be lumped into some sort of group???

[Brilliant]

We had a similar situation.  Members are also required to attend a "Child Safety Training for Abuse Prevention" class if they are in any way interacting with the kids-teaching, chaperoning, working in the nursery, etc....  No one is allowed to take a child to the bathroom unless another adult is present, all classrooms are to either have a window to the hallway or doors are to be left open.  From what I've heard from friends who attend different churches, this is the norm.  I guess I'm totally flabbergasted at the idea of ministers and church members trying to "keep things quiet" or "protect the abuser".  I've not done any internet searches to find out how widespread this is, but to blame the "church" or "Christians" in a blanket statement is pretty harsh.  Why do we seem to always attack a group when something awful happens?  Does everyone have to be lumped into some sort of group???

 

I agree.  I think here we are talking about conservative Christian homeschoolers, because that's the case at hand.  But anybody reading this thread without any context could conclude that sexual abuse of children solely happens in Christian organizations!  I like what maize had to say about that:

 

I think a tendency to sweep things under the rug exists in most if not all organizations. Universities, sports programs, scouting programs, and the military are just a few of the places I can think of where similar problems have been uncovered in recent years.

 

Of course sexual abuse happens in neighborhoods, families, etc.   In looking at the Megan's law offenders in my city - I don't have all the background but it looks like many of them abused family members, neighbors, etc. 

[happyWImom]

I guess the bottom line here is this (to me, anyway):  "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor."-Desmond Tutu  

[Dory]

We had a similar situation.  Members are also required to attend a "Child Safety Training for Abuse Prevention" class if they are in any way interacting with the kids-teaching, chaperoning, working in the nursery, etc....  No one is allowed to take a child to the bathroom unless another adult is present, all classrooms are to either have a window to the hallway or doors are to be left open.  From what I've heard from friends who attend different churches, this is the norm.  I guess I'm totally flabbergasted at the idea of ministers and church members trying to "keep things quiet" or "protect the abuser".  I've not done any internet searches to find out how widespread this is, but to blame the "church" or "Christians" in a blanket statement is pretty harsh.  Why do we seem to always attack a group when something awful happens?  Does everyone have to be lumped into some sort of group???

 

Groups, of any affiliation tend to be a little more prone to this sort of thing. It because because people slowly depend on that inclusion. The sense of belonging. They don't know what to do outside of the group because their lives get wrapped around the group. Then when something happens to threaten that, it's easier to push it under a rug then to deal with it.

[SadieMarie]

When I responded to the molestation question, I certainly wasn't thinking of any kid just experimenting sexually. Around here at least, 12 is 7th grade. I strongly believe the majority (of course there are exceptions) of 7th graders are mature enough not to touch a 5th grader sexually. I played doctor too. But I was in elementary school, and it was with people my age. I cringe thinking back on it, but I don't feel it was forced or coerced. I'd be inclined to think any touching between a 7th grader and an elementary schooler is coerced. A 7th grader is a child, most definitely. But generally they are on a very different level than a 5th grader. My husband now is a few years older and of course it doesn't seem strange at all. But I do remember crushes when I was younger.. Back then even a kid a grade ahead of or below me seemed a world apart. Maybe I'm basing this too heavily off personal experience, but I just think people aren't fully considering how far apart most 12 and 10 year olds really are. It's only 2 years, yes, but there is a very big difference in my eyes.

A two year age difference could involve coercion or not. It depends on the kids. A teen and a six year old is beyond that gray area.

[Lavandula]

A two year age difference could involve coercion or not. It depends on the kids. A teen and a six year old is beyond that gray area.

As I said, I believe it's more than just the years - in that situation, it's a bigger difference in my eyes. I never said a teen and a six year old isn't beyond that. In fact, I said there's no way I wouldn't call the police in that situation.

[poppy]

Wow, I thought 'it's not rape unless it's violent' was an outdated concept.

[Lavandula]

Wow, I thought 'it's not rape unless it's violent' was an outdated concept.

Oh, it's definitely not. Age aside, it's still a prevalent idea. There was some poll I saw about whether young men (college or high school I believe) thought it was okay to force/pressure a girl to have sex if you buy her dinner first. The majority said it was okay. It's quite disturbing. 

[Laurie4b]

So how about with a situation that isn't hypothetical, but that I really know happened. If a mom walks in to find a 7yo boy playing 'doctor' with a 2yo girl and the girl is very upset, should she do anything? Absolutely.

 

You'd need to define playing doctor. Most ot the time it involves looking at private parts; sometimes, it also involves some touching.

 

What exactly happened and how the 2 year old experienced it determines what exactly would be helpful to do. If you think about it, most 2 year olds are not potty-trained and so have their private parts rather vigorously wiped when they have a dirty diaper. Some 2 year olds do not like to have their diaper changed or don't want it changed *right now* when Mom or Dad decides it's time. They also don't have  a concept of their private parts being something to be hidden, etc.

 

It might be helpful to think of an adult situation in which the framework in the mind of a woman determines the effect ot the behavior in order to better understand what I'm saying about the frame of reference of a 2 year old. ( It is not excusing any behavior; it's interpreting it so that the adult reaction will be helpful to the 2 year old.) If a drunk girl is digitally penetrated by a male at a party, or if the male inserted foreign objects into her, we'd consider that rape, correct? Yet women routinely allow men to put their fingers and metal objects in their vaginas. Why? Because it's a doctor and she views it as for medical purposes. The assumption is that he is also only doing if for medical purposes. The act doesn't have a sexual meaning in that case. Change the scenario a bit and the woman finds out that this doctor has videotaped exams or that he's made a sexual remark to a friend before or after an exam or tells her after the nurse has left the room how much he enjoyed the experience. A woman could even go to a doctor who is doing those things and not know it. She will not be traumatized even though she was a victim of criminal activity if it was taped.  The actions haven't changed but in each case both the intent of the perpetrator and the grid through which the woman experiences the behavior determine her level of trauma. As adults, we have to be very careful in assessing damage to the child through our own grids. One has to think of the context in a 2 year old's world (general) and listen to the child (specifically for that instance.)

 

So, the 2 year old is upset by what happened. What kind of upset? Like when she doesn't want a diaper changed upset? Like when someone makes her sit in her car seat upset? (remember, we know the reasons we are doing these things. The 2 year old doesn't have our point of view. She's being coerced from her point of view in both scenarios. ) Or a different kind of upset that might mean the 2 year old was hurt? Neither a parental reaction that either sweeps what happened  under the carpet or a reaction which overlays the 2 year old's actual experience with adult emotion and judgment will be helpful to the 2 year old. That is the child that should be attended to first. 

 

Mom should remain calm and dismiss the boy from the room, then provide comfort to the 2 year old and ask what happened. Mom should not ask leading questions about what happened.   Just listen to the 2 year old and provide comfort.

 

When the 2 year old has been comforted and is busy being a 2 year old again in her routine, and Mom has calmed down, she should go talk to the 7 year old and find out what happened. It's really important for mom to remain calm and not to impose her knowledge of sexuality on her 7 year old. If she can't, she shouldn't discuss it further. It is fine to say that it is not okay to do anything to someone that is upsetting them, remembering the 7 year old likely doesn't have a category for sexual. A 7 year old who has been taught private part rules can have it called to his attention that he broke the rules. Therefore, some things will have to happen: he broke trust, so won't be left with the 2 year old to play . I would be very careful about doling out more consequences than that until/unless I'd talked with a professional.

 

Depending on what she learned, and if she wants to be on the safe side, Mom can  make an appts for both the 2 year old and  for the 7 year old, preferrably with different professional  each, to do an evaluation.

 

What a professional can do is first of all, not make the situation worse, which a parent can do without meaning to. The professional can provide an objective assessment of damage to the 2 year old and objective assessment of the 7 year old. They will do it through play with the 2 year old and likely with a combination of play and talking with the 7 year old. It is very possible that the 2 year old is not more upset than she would be if the 7 year old was doing other things like grabbing something from her and not letting her have it back OR than she would be if someone is changing a dirty diaper and she doesn't want it changed. If she is upset in a different way, the professional is in a position to then treat it.  Same thing with the 7 year old. He may or may not need treatment.

 

Something that is likely to need to happen is that he shouldn't be left alone with younger children for some period of time. (Depends on the situation.)He shouldn't be shamed for this, though. Just matter of fact. Shaming is food for many deviant behaviors.

 

This situation described may or may not be particularly significant in the life of either the 2 year old or the 7 year old if handled well. It needs to be assessed. It could be very damaging if the 7 year old has been abused and is passing that down. But there are a lot of much more benigh scenarios.

 

How about when the two of them are now 15 and 10? Should anything happen yet? At what point is it not a curious boy? At what point is this seriously damaging enough to the victim that something needs to be done? 

 

 

 

With a 10 year old and a 15 year old, it becomes much more likely that the 10 year old will feel molested and have those ramifications, though it is still quite possible that the 15 year old is seeking sexual knowledge in a "safer" way than with a peer, rather than being a pedophile or having the profile of a sex offender. Many things will need to be assessed which is why you want a professional doing it for both parties. Is it incest? Has she gone through puberty? How much force was used? etc etc etc. for him. For her, how did she experience it? What did the experience mean to her? Is she carrying shame from it? etc. 

 

It's impossible to give an answer that covers all scenarios other than to say that this needs to be professionally evaluated and treatment should follow based on the assesment.

 

 

And at what age of the offender, would police end up involved? That depends on the laws of the state in which it happened. If state statutes say the perpetrator must be 16, it's not going to involve the police. Likewise if they say for a perpetrator under 16, there has to be more than a 5 year differential. If the state statutes use a different standard, such as a 3 year age spread, then the police will be involved. .

.

[Laurie4b]

I don't see why you felt it was needed to bold part of my sentence, leaving a few words out. Very important words - I said I'd be inclined to think that. I didn't say it's a fact or it is always true.  I'm not trying to say everything I personally believe is right, but I will stand by what I said. There are of course exceptions. But I believe if you go to a middle school you will find the majority of them do know that they cannot just touch people like that.

 

I'm sorry. I meant nothing by leaving the first words out--not even sure I thought about it. I'll go back and change it .

[HS Mom in NC]

Just to be clear, the pastor and church I go to and described upthread with such strict policies and practices about reporting abuse to the legal authorities and putting in practical safeguards is a conservative, fundamentalist, evangelical one.  We're not soft on abuse of any kind. Neither is Scripture.

[happyWImom]

Okay, I personally don't need a bunch of hypotheticals.  We've taught our kids from a very young age-no one should look at or touch your private parts!  (Obviously when diapers, etc... are involved, different story, but you get the idea).  So, when they are young-too young to know about sexual stuff, definite no-no, and when they are at the age when they know things, curious or not, again definite no-no!  I don't think it's okay for my 10, 11, 12 year old to be touching or looking at anyone else or vice versa, because now they are interested in the opposite sex!  I get that they are curious (and yes, I can recall being around kindergarten age & "playing doctor" having a boy friend show me his... ) but there are boundaries.  Shouldn't we be teaching that?  If they are curious, we can educate them the right way, can't we?  I don't want my child to ever have a doubt when it comes to wondering if someone touching them is wrong.  And I don't mean a hug, etc.....

[Dory]

.It's impossible to give an answer that covers all scenarios other than to say that this needs to be professionally evaluated and treatment should follow based on the assesment.

 

I can understand that. That does make sense.

 

As for the two year old though. She was fully potty trained and there was actual damage, so pain and panic type of upset.

[poppy]

So how about with a situation that isn't hypothetical, but that I really know happened. If a mom walks in to find a 7yo boy playing 'doctor' with a 2yo girl and the girl is very upset, should she do anything? How about when the two of them are now 15 and 10? Should anything happen yet? At what point is it not a curious boy? At what point is this seriously damaging enough to the victim that something needs to be done?

 

And at what age of the offender, would police end up involved?

 

It's a crazy world where this is even a question.

[Dory]

It's a crazy world where this is even a question.

 

It is a pretty crazy world.

It wouldn't be a question if it was an adult with that same child one would think, and yet I'm betting many would still ignore it because of the idea of the child being young and diapers get changed anyway and genitals are touched regularly so it's not a big deal.

[Crimson Wife]

Having a BTDT perspective, if children, even younger teens, are involved in sexual inappropriateness with one another, I would certainly pause to evaluate the situation before involving any outside authorities. Kids do things, they experiment sexually....they play "doctor." If it is between kids, then you need to really talk things through and find out what's going on FIRST.

 

Kids who are merely experimenting s*xually don't generally do that with close relatives. And a normal 16 y.o. would be fooling around with someone closer to his/her own age, NOT someone a full decade younger.

[Lavandula]

Yes.. I never would've considered doing that with a relative. I had several siblings, some I was very close to and some I barely talked to. I'm also not against sexual experimentation - I understand the playing doctor, and I understand it again in high school. But with someone younger like that? No. Even the 12 and 10 year old situation makes me uneasy.

[VeritasMama]

Really, really horrible.  I recently told DH that I'm at the point where I rarely tell people in my professional circles that we're homeschooling.  There have been several homeschooling-related scandals locally and then the national ones.  It's better that that part of my life remain in the background.  

 

I'm in the last years of homeschooling, but I feel really sad for those who have many more years ahead.  Because I work in secular education, these incidents are indeed discussed and are not unknown.

 

Parachurch organizations have this weakness, especially when they are run by powerful individuals who have no accountability.  Not that the church is always good about policing itself, but hopefully there are more eyes and sterner hearts that will root out problems.  

 

And I can't imagine how a mother would overlook this sort of thing within her own family when it involved a nephew.  That makes me ill.

 

I don't think we should let scandals put all homeschoolers "in the closet," so to speak. I understand your reluctance to share you are a homeschooler, I am a former teacher and I come from a family of teachers, and their negative ideas towards homeschooling are well known to me. I shrug it off because I know they are forming opinions based on ignorance and stereotypes, which is never a smart or good thing.

 

Homeschooling is not some shameful activity, any more than sending your child to public school. There are good homeschoolers and bad homeschoolers, just as there are teachers at public schools who are found to be abusing children. There are good homeschool communities and not so good communities, just as there are good public schools and not so good public schools.

 

If homeschoolers all behave as if what they are doing is shameful and they feel they must hide it from others, how in the world will we be able to avoid being stereotyped and lumped in with the bad ones?

 

You are not abusing your children, you are providing them with the best education you can. Hold your head up high and own your decisions, don't care about other people's judgement.

 

[Laurie4b]

I can understand that. That does make sense.

 

As for the two year old though. She was fully potty trained and there was actual damage, so pain and panic type of upset.

 

I am so sorry. A two year old with pain and damage and without language to adequately process is truly tragic.  I hope that she received immediate comfort and got excellent clinical treatment. It's so hard though when they are preverbal. I hope the 7 year old got treatment, too. Anything that caused damage is well beyond what I've ever heard referred to as "playing doctor." In that scenario, I would be very suspicious that the 7 year old was a victim of sexual abuse himself and that it was a case of passing it down.

[Aura]

Kids who are merely experimenting s*xually don't generally do that with close relatives. I'm honestly surprised at this statement. Is this based on some statistic or something? Because while I don't know about "generally," my experience is that kids most certainly DO experiment w/ close relatives.  And a normal 16 y.o. would be fooling around with someone closer to his/her own age, NOT someone a full decade younger. Yes, I agree absolutely.

 

Just to be clear, when kids are involved, and as I stated earlier, I'm thinking younger than 16, the situation might not *necessarily* mean that one would automatically go to the police FIRST. Not that the police might not be involved at all, but that in some situations counselling and appropriate actions by the parents might be what is needed, not being arrested....and yes, even 12 year olds can be arrested. 

 

In the TOS situation, without more information, I can't condemn the parents for not automatically going to the police. If it was an immature 14 year old and the 6 year old didn't seem too upset and there didn't seem to be any indication of pain or trauma, I can see the parents thinking that counselling and dealing with the situation with the adults involved would be better in the long run. I don't know all the details, so I'm not going to jump on them and say, "You should have gone straight to the police," without knowing more. 

[ktgrok]

Just to be clear, when kids are involved, and as I stated earlier, I'm thinking younger than 16, the situation might not *necessarily* mean that one would automatically go to the police FIRST. Not that the police might not be involved at all, but that in some situations counselling and appropriate actions by the parents might be what is needed, not being arrested....and yes, even 12 year olds can be arrested. 

 

In the TOS situation, without more information, I can't condemn the parents for not automatically going to the police. If it was an immature 14 year old and the 6 year old didn't seem too upset and there didn't seem to be any indication of pain or trauma, I can see the parents thinking that counselling and dealing with the situation with the adults involved would be better in the long run. I don't know all the details, so I'm not going to jump on them and say, "You should have gone straight to the police," without knowing more. 

 

the thing is, I can't imagine there WAS counseling, because the therapist would be required to report it to the police. 

[Laurie4b]

It is a pretty crazy world.

It wouldn't be a question if it was an adult with that same child one would think, and yet I'm betting many would still ignore it because of the idea of the child being young and diapers get changed anyway and genitals are touched regularly so it's not a big deal.

 

You know, when I said that about the diapers being changed as it impacted the child's perception of what happened, I was talking about evaluating damage to the child, not passing conclusions on the act itself. I actually had an in-depth conversation with a nationally recognized expert on child trauma regarding a case of genital touching (not damage) of a toddler that occurred during a diaper change and that was his perspective.  Most specially trained therapists are going to be coming at it from that same perspective: how did the child perceive it? That guides the  treatment of the child who is the victim; it says nothing about what to do about the perpetrator.

 

So a parent who finds out a sitter has done something may be relieved to find out from an assessment that her child  is unlikely to be affected longterm, but she may still fire the sitter, tell the sitter's parents, and call the police.

[Dory]

nm

[maize]

NM

[Dory]

nm

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I don't disagree with many of your points and sexual abuse needs to be reported and dealt with properly and swiftly.

 

My point was that we as bystanders who *do not* know the situation or individuals involved do not have enough information to make conclusions. We are not in a position where judging or supposing details and insinuations is wise. This just be handled by the authorities, congregations, and families involved.

 

I agree abuse accusations should be taken seriously and dealt with. Who here, on this site right now, is close enough or authoritative enough to manage these accusations rightly? Who here has the context and both sides? Who sits in judgment and metes out, authoritatively, the justice due a victim of this crime? Temperance and prudence - not emotional appeals and believing every accusation as tantamount to a crime without actual due process - is wisdom. Scripture, as always, is the best guide. The responsibilities of those directly involved in this are grave indeed, and we should all be sober minded and willing to pursue justice for the afflicted if we encounter claims of abuse. Truth, punishment, and reparations should be made as fits a given situation.

 

But we're NOT directly involved, we don't have all the information, and this accusation is not a new one. While it is prudent to evaluate how we should all handle abuse if we encounter it, it is foolish to needlessly slander someone's reputation in something we are not directly involved in and where no court has ruled. I think scripture is pretty clear that is slander and gossip.

 

I agree very much with the statements in the article that the individuals *involved* in this case have every right to speak out about this and that doing so and pursuing justice is their right. But I'm not sure parroting it and passing judgment in the court of public opinion is the correct response of a distant and uninvolved reader, either.

 

Ephesians 4:15-16 ESV

Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.

 

Proverbs 10:19 ESV

When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent.

 

Proverbs 18:17 ESV

The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

 

The fact that the scumballs involved did their best to keep victims from moving forward with their complaints condemns them in my eyes automatically.

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

One. I agree this is not a conviction. This isn't even a police report. I can't think why the hell I'd go to mediation of any damn kind if I KNEW my son was sexually molested?! It sounds like what this is is someone threatening with a lawyer and settling before it ever got to police so it wouldn't get to police. So while I'm willing to believe her and wouldn't be surprised, it is unjust to convict these people on her years later mediated with a lawyer blog post. They have the right to defend themselves. Does anyone have links of info on them doing so?

 

I think the key is these people aren't christians. Yeah yeah I know what they call themselves and I've gone down that road before. They could call themselves flamingos and it doesn't mean it's true. They are are liars and wolves in sheep cloth and they leave a trail of broken hearts and souls in their wake. And yes, I believe they will answer for it. What's more, I think will they will suffer double for the profanity of doing it in God's name.

 

I'm sure this happens in other home school groups too. Just like it happens in all kinds of schools.

 

Doesn't excuse it.

 

But I'm not going to condemn education bc of the few who distort it purpose to meet their own sick goals.

 

I have no clue, but the church you support used this tactic for years to protect pedophile priests and is still covering up the details of what went on all of those years.  I am not sure why you are surprised the same tactic was used elsewhere.