MANHATTAN (CN) – At a tense hearing Thursday, an attorney for Yeshiva University drew the ire of appellate judges by claiming that the clock of the statute of limitations started ticking the moment that rabbis allegedly victimized their high school students.
Thirty-four former students of the Yeshiva University High School for Boys sued the university, its directors and administrations in New York in 2013 for $380 million, for the “horrific abuse” they said they endured between 1968 and 1998.
Now in their late 30s and early 60s, the former students claim that the school knew about the assaults and did nothing to stop them.
Rabbi George Finkelstein “preyed on the children of Holocaust survivors,” and Rabbi Macy Gordon sodomized a 16-year-old boy with a toothbrush, according to allegations of the graphic , 148-page complaint.
Before their case came to trial, U.S. District Judge John Koeltl dismissed the lawsuit because he found that the statute of limitations had elapsed.
All three appellate judges pressed the former students’ attorney Kevin Mulhearn about why his clients did not bring their lawsuit as soon they saw that the school had not acted upon their complaints.
At first, the judges seemed to agree that the former students were “on notice” the moment they believed that the school had stonewalled their complaints.
U.S. Circuit Judge Guido Calibrasi repeated almost mournfully at one point: “Nothing was done, and nothing was done and nothing was done.”
The students claim that their notice began when the Jewish Daily Forward published its investigation into the allegations against the Yeshiva in 2012.
Before that time, Mulhearn said, “The administration gave every indication that they did not know about it.”
Mulhearn said that the fact that Yeshiva University honored Finkelstein at a tribute dinner in 1995 supports this point.
Karen Bitar, representing the school for Greenberg Traurig, countered that Rabbi Finkelstein’s alleged abuse had a reputation as one of the “best kept secrets” of the school.
“I say that with a little bit of sarcasm,” she said.
The judges appeared to be taken aback when Bitar said: “Once there is the abuse, it is incumbent on the plaintiff to investigate.”
Calabresi, bristling, said: “Impossible!”
Calabresi compared that position to expecting the victim of a car accident to probe whether the other vehicle had a structural defect in order to sue its manufacturer.
Judge Reena Raggi, too, appeared surprised by Bitar’s contention.
“You may want to listen to the argument you’re making,” she said.
Not backing down, Bitar said that the former Yeshiva students “sat on their rights between 20 and 40 years.”
Raggi blasted her for “stubbornly arguing that the time of accrual is the time of assault.”
Apparently agreeing, Calabresi remarked, “You’re doing something very dangerous.”
The judge added that courts will want to act on the “appalling” acts alleged against the rabbis and the school unless she proves the complaint was filed too late.
When Bitar said that Judge Koeltl made the same finding, Calabresi replied that his ruling adopted a different reasoning.
“Judge Koeltl knew what he was doing,” Calabresi said. “I’m asking you if you know what you are doing.”
After more sustained grilling, Bitar stepped down, and Mulhearn began his rebuttal arguments to a warmer reception than when he started.
Raggi told him: “Your situation is a little bit better than when you sat down.”
Still, she warned him, “It’s not whether your adversary’s counsel is wrong. It’s whether Judge Koeltl was wrong.”
Mulhearn replied that Koeltl indeed made a mistake by basing his opinion on arguments the Yeshiva never made.
Although the judges reserved decision, Mulhearn said in a telephone interview the hearing that he and his clients are “optimistic” that their case will be revived.
Seven of them attended the hearing, and some brought family members with them.
Mulhearn said that the lead plaintiff, Mordechai Twersky, was not in court because he lives in Israel.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem.
Nulla consequat massa quis enim. Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus. Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim.
The public needs answers about what happened between former Warren County Sheriff Edward Bullock, now 85, and a 37-year-old man who alleges that Bullock sexually abused him when he was 10 and 11, while in the sheriff’s custody.
Circumstantially, many people may already have convicted Bullock in their minds, knowing his predilection for young boys — an open secret in county offices throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. Yet until now, Bullock was never charged with abusing any children. Eventually he was caught in a sting, pleading guilty in 1991 to official misconduct for seeking sexual favors from a state policeman posing as a teenager. He spent nine months in jail, and still receives a public pension of about $1,600 a month.
While the criminal case seeks to address a long-smoldering “smoke-fire” suspicion about a disgraced public official, its outcome holds enormous consequence for a civil lawsuit filed by the alleged victim — and the question of whether Warren County is liable because employees looked the other way and failed to act responsibly when they witnessed Bullock’s behavior and at least the potential for child abuse.
Regardless of the outcome of the criminal case, the county failed to take reasonable measures to protect children in its care. As in the Jerry Sandusky scandal at Penn State, it’s fair to ask why Warren County employees didn’t intervene — to confront Bullock directly, interview boys favored by the sheriff, follow up with parents, set stricter rules for transporting kids, set a trap? The fact that Bullock was an independent elected official with strong political and personal connections may explain why people were reluctant to act; it doesn’t excuse it.
In a three-part series last week, Express-Times staffer Matthew Bultman reported on interviews conducted by a detective working for the plaintiff in the civil case. They shed light on how county employees made light of the sheriff’s behavior with boys, and on an office culture that condoned it:
Despite having a “general knowledge” of the sheriff’s alleged behavior, “no one seemed to care” and it became a running joke, a retired sheriff’s employee said. “Everybody that was involved in the Warren County Courthouse and the surrounding politics knew,” another officer said.
John Polhemus, a freeholder from 1986 to 1992, said he believed it was “common knowledge” among many that “there was a problem.” He said he feared civil lawsuits might be filed against the county and expressed that concern to other freeholders.
Members of the sheriff’s department commented about having to leave their offices when Bullock brought a boy into his office. “Oh, the sheriff’s got a kid in his office now you know, and they’d get like a little smirk or a giggle, or it was just understood kind of throughout the whole courthouse that Sheriff Bullock was interested in boys,” one officer said in an interview.
None of those interviewed reported evidence of improper contact between Bullock and boys in his custody. This case could come down to one person’s word against another’s. Prosecutor Richard Burke says there’s no evidence at this point to warrant criminal charges against anyone other than Bullock.
At the least, the county tolerated an elected official who made no effort to hide his preference for young boys — and by his later admission was grooming some for future relationships. At the worst — well, we’ll see.
Yet no one in county government was concerned enough about what might have been going on to speak up? No one thought the balance of power between a boy-loving sheriff and pre-teen boys caught up in family and legal crises might have dictated another adult in the room?
That’s the mystery here. Why good people didn’t make a stink.
http://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpg00SOL Reformhttp://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpgSOL Reform2014-08-17 18:21:032014-08-31 19:12:44Express-Times Opinion Staff, EDITORIAL: If everyone knew, why didn't anyone confront Ed Bullock?, Lehigh Valley Live
The women came seeking healing. Many of these survivors of the Rwandan genocide had lost family members and some had been raped and infected with HIV. More than a few were struggling just it to make it to another day before they found Solace Ministries.
Sometimes it took a month or a full year before they spoke about their experiences with other survivors. When they did, even if it was only to say a few words before they broke down in tears, other survivors gathered around, embracing one another.
The passage from the Book of Isaiah—“Comfort, comfort my people, says your God”—was the mantra for this ministry. Envisioning a future with a sense of hope was nurtured among a loving community that reinforced their belief in a God who had not abandoned them.
One sermon topic was off limits, however, for the Solace ministers.
“They never, ever, ever preached forgiveness” until a survivor was able to go through a healing process, said Donald Miller, professor of religion and sociology at the University of Southern California. He has visited Rwanda 16 times and conducted more than 260 interviews with widows and orphans of the 1994 genocide.
Research has shown people who scored high on forgiveness scales had significantly lower levels of blood pressure, anxiety and depression, and relatively high self-esteem and life satisfaction.
But forgiveness is also a deeply personal act, one that can harm trauma victims if it is coerced or demanded before they are able to come to terms with their pain and suffering, experts say.
One should not say “the ‘f-word’ to someone” who has recently been traumatized, said Kenneth Pargament, a psychology professor at Bowling Green State University who is a leading scholar in the field of religion and health.
Many people who have survived trauma such as rape or domestic violence often have feelings of self-contempt or self-loathing, as if they must have been somehow responsible for the crimes committed against them.
Asking them to forgive before they are ready can traumatize survivors again, and leave them feeling disconnected and alienated from communities such as churches that can be vital to help them heal, Pargament noted.
In the cases, say, of a battered woman continually returning to her spouse or an abusive cleric who is transferred from congregation to congregation, forgiveness given inappropriately also can endanger the survivors and others.
Consider the recent outrage against NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell for giving Baltimore Ravens’ star Ray Rice just a two-game suspension after he was accused of assaulting his then-fiancé, now wife.
Goodell elicited testimony from the woman in front of Rice and his attorney. He said he took into account Rice’s contrition in making the decision.
To advocates for battered women, Goodell’s words may evoke all-too-similar scenarios to a time when clergy would routinely intervene on behalf of abusive husbands, urging the wife to take her spouse back for the sake of the marriage.
Pope Francis drew mixed reactions recently after he asked for forgiveness for “the grave crimes of clerical sexual abuse” and the sins of church leaders in their response to victims.
David Clohessy of Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests referred to Francis “as a humble, brilliant, unpretentious pope.” But Clohessy said the pontiff must follow through with reforms such as holding bishops accountable and turning records over to civil authorities.
“We endanger boys and girls if we confuse words with deeds,” Clohessy said.
So how can faith communities help trauma survivors on their journey to healing that may one day enable them to reap the benefits of true forgiveness?
Here are three ways suggested by research and those with experience in working with survivors:
1. Support: “The first thing is to surround the people with care and compassion,” said Pargament, editor of the American Psychological Association’s APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion and Spirituality. “Just to listen, that’s a huge gift.”
The need for support became clear to Miller in his research with genocide survivors in Rwanda.
“You have to care. You have to support, and you have to allow survivors to go through a process,” said Miller, author of the upcoming book Healing, Forgiveness and Reconciliation in Post-Genocide Rwanda. “Forgiveness occurs over a long period of time, years, and even then there is a sense that it’s never completed.
2. Educate: Forgiveness education is a critical step churches can take to promote a healthy path to forgiveness, said Robert Enright, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who has been doing research on forgiveness for a quarter of a century.
Such work includes helping people understand that forgiveness is a free gift for the person who was wronged. Forgiveness is not so much for the perpetrator as it is a way for the victim to release themselves from the trauma of the experience, Miller noted.
In a journal article, Chad Magnuson of Liberty University and Enright advocated a comprehensive program that includes forgiveness training for church leaders and regularly integrating discussions about forgiveness into sermons and Bible study programs.
3. Challenge rather than enable transgressors: One study of 1,200 abusive men in the Northwest found that faith communities can be critical in providing the practical and spiritual support to begin to move violent men to a sense of empathy and accountability.
Faith-based intervention also can discredit dangerous theological ideas that the abused must be submissive and provide resources to allow the abusers to envision a different future.
Forgiveness is not about condoning or forgetting the transgression, and may or may not involve some form of reconciliation, noted Enright, co-founder of the International Forgiveness Institute.
Nor may forgiveness be possible until well down the road for people who have experienced severe trauma. A young woman in Rwanda who was beaten and sexually assaulted while her other family members were killed may never be able to forgive.
And no one but the individual who was abused can decide whether to grant forgiveness, Enright said.
“It’s their call when they’re ready.” —David Briggs, theARDA.com
Reprinted with permission of the Association of Religion Data Archives
This article was edited August 14, 2014.
http://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpg00SOL Reformhttp://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpgSOL Reform2014-08-14 17:39:392014-08-17 18:23:55David Briggs, Researchers tell faith communities to let trauma survivors forgive in their own time, Christian Century
A recently televised interview between Matthew Sandusky, the adopted son and victim of Jerry Sandusky of Penn State infamy, and Oprah Winfrey is rekindling the conversation about child sexual abuse. Three years after we learned about Jerry Sandusky’s serial abuse of boys who trusted him, have we done enough to prevent it? Have we done enough to make people aware so that they can respond appropriately? Do all of the organizations, child care programs, schools and churches where we send our children have policies, and more importantly practices, that will prevent the likelihood that a child will be abused on their watch? It is up to us as caring adults to make sure that they do.
In Idaho we have taken up the challenge. Organizations and volunteers throughout the state have been working for several years to educate adults on ways to prevent child sexual abuse and respond appropriately to it when it happens, using a research-based program called Stewards of Children. More than 5,000 Idahoans have been trained statewide. Good but not good enough. Two years ago, in response to Penn State, the Idaho Children’s Trust Fund (ICTF) decided it was time to intensify the effort. Partnering with the Treasure Valley YMCA, ICTF embarked on an effort to train 5 percent of all of the adults in the Treasure Valley. Similar efforts are underway in North Idaho, led by the ICARE program of St. Vincent De Paul; in the Magic Valley, led by CARES at St. Luke’s Regional Medical Center; and in East Idaho through Bright Tomorrows, Bannock Youth Foundation and Help, Inc.
In less than a month our kids head back to school. Ask the teachers and school principals if they have taken the Stewards of Children training. This is not about suspicion. It is about prevention. We don’t think we are going to get into an accident every time we drive, but we still wear our seat belts. We put fences around swimming pools. Most of the time nothing tragic happens, but we take the precautions so that nothing does happen. The vast majority of teachers, counselors and coaches would never abuse our children. Jerry Sandusky is the exception that proves the rule. Invite your school to take the Stewards of Children training. Contact the Idaho Children’s Trust Fund to schedule training. It’s two hours that can make a big difference.
You cannot wait for others to protect kids. You cannot wait for organizations to protect kids. You cannot wait for legislators to protect kids. You – each of you – must make the choice to protect the children in your lives and organizations. How? 1. Learn the facts; 2. Minimize opportunity; 3. Talk about it; 4. Recognize the signs; and 5. React responsibly. The most important message from Matt’s interview with Oprah – the one he hopes everyone will remember – is that prevention must be a priority. Only then can we change our culture and create safer societies – in Idaho and throughout the country – for our kids to grow up free of the trauma of child sexual abuse.
Roger Sherman is the executive director of the Idaho Children’s Trust Fund, which is the state affiliate of Prevent Child Abuse America.
http://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpg00SOL Reformhttp://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpgSOL Reform2014-08-14 17:24:042014-08-17 18:24:00Roger Sherman, Guest Opinion: All adults must take responsibility for protecting our kids, Idaho Statesman
There are two important consequences of a long-awaited ruling last week by a federal judge, Claudia Wilken, in the so-called O’Bannon case. College athletes will almost certainly be better off financially. And the notion that these athletes are pure amateurs — “students first, athletes second” — will be impossible to sustain.
In her 99-page decision, Judge Wilken issued an injunction against a ban on payments to players for the commercial use of their names, images and likenesses, which she said violated antitrust law. She also ruled that college sports’ governing body, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, may not prohibit universities from offering cost-of-living stipends in addition to scholarships.
Judge Wilken’s ruling represents a significant victory for Ed O’Bannon, a former basketball player for the University of California, Los Angeles, and other players like him who until now have been unable to share in the considerable wealth generated by their skill and hard work. Mr. O’Bannon agreed to be the lead plaintiff in a suit arguing that college players had a financial interest in products or advertising that exploited their names and images.
Although the N.C.A.A. is the clear loser here and has already announced plans to appeal, the reach of the decision should not be overstated. Post-O’Bannon, collegiate athletics won’t operate according to free-market principles. Far from it. Players did not win the right to sign endorsement deals. And the N.C.A.A. may cap payments to players at $5,000 per year — comparable to the amount that the N.C.A.A. permits players to receive if they qualify for a Pell grant. Colleges, moreover, may keep these payments in trust until after the players graduate or leave.
In making these compromises, Judge Wilken acceded to what she called the N.C.A.A.’s “legitimate procompetitive goals” — its fear that a totally free market would mostly benefit the richest colleges, which could pay players the most and gain a major recruitment advantage.
The cap will make the post-O’Bannon future less chaotic. Still, it won’t be easy for the N.C.A.A. to adjust to the new order. Over the next months and years, it will have to figure out how to administer a trust fund; determine if the ruling applies to all sports and all divisions, or only some; and learn how to pay certain players without violating Title IX, the law that bans sex discrimination at educational institutions that accept federal funds.
The N.C.A.A. and its member institutions have no one to blame but themselves for any unintended negative consequences. They built a lucrative commercial enterprise that depended in large part on unpaid labor. Now they have to move forward without exploiting the very students they have always purported to protect.
http://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpg00SOL Reformhttp://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpgSOL Reform2014-08-14 02:44:192014-08-14 02:44:29Justice Denied for Abused Children, Editorial Board, New York Times
Adam Klasfeld, Yeshiva’s Sex-Abuse Defense Raises Eyebrows, Courthouse News
/in New York /by SOL Reformhttp://www.courthousenews.com/2014/08/28/70880.htm
Yeshiva’s Sex-Abuse Defense Raises Eyebrows
By ADAM KLASFELD
MANHATTAN (CN) – At a tense hearing Thursday, an attorney for Yeshiva University drew the ire of appellate judges by claiming that the clock of the statute of limitations started ticking the moment that rabbis allegedly victimized their high school students.
Thirty-four former students of the Yeshiva University High School for Boys sued the university, its directors and administrations in New York in 2013 for $380 million, for the “horrific abuse” they said they endured between 1968 and 1998.
Now in their late 30s and early 60s, the former students claim that the school knew about the assaults and did nothing to stop them.
Rabbi George Finkelstein “preyed on the children of Holocaust survivors,” and Rabbi Macy Gordon sodomized a 16-year-old boy with a toothbrush, according to allegations of the graphic , 148-page complaint.
Before their case came to trial, U.S. District Judge John Koeltl dismissed the lawsuit because he found that the statute of limitations had elapsed.
All three appellate judges pressed the former students’ attorney Kevin Mulhearn about why his clients did not bring their lawsuit as soon they saw that the school had not acted upon their complaints.
At first, the judges seemed to agree that the former students were “on notice” the moment they believed that the school had stonewalled their complaints.
U.S. Circuit Judge Guido Calibrasi repeated almost mournfully at one point: “Nothing was done, and nothing was done and nothing was done.”
The students claim that their notice began when the Jewish Daily Forward published its investigation into the allegations against the Yeshiva in 2012.
Before that time, Mulhearn said, “The administration gave every indication that they did not know about it.”
Mulhearn said that the fact that Yeshiva University honored Finkelstein at a tribute dinner in 1995 supports this point.
Karen Bitar, representing the school for Greenberg Traurig, countered that Rabbi Finkelstein’s alleged abuse had a reputation as one of the “best kept secrets” of the school.
“I say that with a little bit of sarcasm,” she said.
The judges appeared to be taken aback when Bitar said: “Once there is the abuse, it is incumbent on the plaintiff to investigate.”
Calabresi, bristling, said: “Impossible!”
Calabresi compared that position to expecting the victim of a car accident to probe whether the other vehicle had a structural defect in order to sue its manufacturer.
Judge Reena Raggi, too, appeared surprised by Bitar’s contention.
“You may want to listen to the argument you’re making,” she said.
Not backing down, Bitar said that the former Yeshiva students “sat on their rights between 20 and 40 years.”
Raggi blasted her for “stubbornly arguing that the time of accrual is the time of assault.”
Apparently agreeing, Calabresi remarked, “You’re doing something very dangerous.”
The judge added that courts will want to act on the “appalling” acts alleged against the rabbis and the school unless she proves the complaint was filed too late.
When Bitar said that Judge Koeltl made the same finding, Calabresi replied that his ruling adopted a different reasoning.
“Judge Koeltl knew what he was doing,” Calabresi said. “I’m asking you if you know what you are doing.”
After more sustained grilling, Bitar stepped down, and Mulhearn began his rebuttal arguments to a warmer reception than when he started.
Raggi told him: “Your situation is a little bit better than when you sat down.”
Still, she warned him, “It’s not whether your adversary’s counsel is wrong. It’s whether Judge Koeltl was wrong.”
Mulhearn replied that Koeltl indeed made a mistake by basing his opinion on arguments the Yeshiva never made.
Although the judges reserved decision, Mulhearn said in a telephone interview the hearing that he and his clients are “optimistic” that their case will be revived.
Seven of them attended the hearing, and some brought family members with them.
Mulhearn said that the lead plaintiff, Mordechai Twersky, was not in court because he lives in Israel.
Link to decision by District Court – http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/08/28/Yeshiva.pdf
A nice entry
/1 Comment/in News /by SOL ReformLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem.
Read more
Express-Times Opinion Staff, EDITORIAL: If everyone knew, why didn’t anyone confront Ed Bullock?, Lehigh Valley Live
/in New Jersey /by SOL ReformExpress-Times Opinion Staff, EDITORIAL: If everyone knew, why didn’t anyone confront Ed Bullock?, Lehigh Valley Live (Aug. 17, 2014, 6:30AM), http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/08/editorial_if_everyone_knew_why.html
The public needs answers about what happened between former Warren County Sheriff Edward Bullock, now 85, and a 37-year-old man who alleges that Bullock sexually abused him when he was 10 and 11, while in the sheriff’s custody.
That question is likely to be answered in a criminal trial yet to be scheduled, or perhaps by a negotiated settlement. Earlier this year Bullock was indicted on charges of aggravated sexual assault and sexual assault. He pleaded not guilty and rejected a plea bargain that would have sent him to prison for seven years.
A criminal prosecution based on 26-year-old evidence and youthful memories is a daunting task — but delayed justice is worth pursing in this case.
Circumstantially, many people may already have convicted Bullock in their minds, knowing his predilection for young boys — an open secret in county offices throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. Yet until now, Bullock was never charged with abusing any children. Eventually he was caught in a sting, pleading guilty in 1991 to official misconduct for seeking sexual favors from a state policeman posing as a teenager. He spent nine months in jail, and still receives a public pension of about $1,600 a month.
While the criminal case seeks to address a long-smoldering “smoke-fire” suspicion about a disgraced public official, its outcome holds enormous consequence for a civil lawsuit filed by the alleged victim — and the question of whether Warren County is liable because employees looked the other way and failed to act responsibly when they witnessed Bullock’s behavior and at least the potential for child abuse.
Regardless of the outcome of the criminal case, the county failed to take reasonable measures to protect children in its care. As in the Jerry Sandusky scandal at Penn State, it’s fair to ask why Warren County employees didn’t intervene — to confront Bullock directly, interview boys favored by the sheriff, follow up with parents, set stricter rules for transporting kids, set a trap? The fact that Bullock was an independent elected official with strong political and personal connections may explain why people were reluctant to act; it doesn’t excuse it.
In a three-part series last week, Express-Times staffer Matthew Bultman reported on interviews conducted by a detective working for the plaintiff in the civil case. They shed light on how county employees made light of the sheriff’s behavior with boys, and on an office culture that condoned it:
None of those interviewed reported evidence of improper contact between Bullock and boys in his custody. This case could come down to one person’s word against another’s. Prosecutor Richard Burke says there’s no evidence at this point to warrant criminal charges against anyone other than Bullock.
At the least, the county tolerated an elected official who made no effort to hide his preference for young boys — and by his later admission was grooming some for future relationships. At the worst — well, we’ll see.
Yet no one in county government was concerned enough about what might have been going on to speak up? No one thought the balance of power between a boy-loving sheriff and pre-teen boys caught up in family and legal crises might have dictated another adult in the room?
That’s the mystery here. Why good people didn’t make a stink.
David Briggs, Researchers tell faith communities to let trauma survivors forgive in their own time, Christian Century
/in Uncategorized /by SOL ReformCitation: David Briggs, Researchers tell faith communities to let trauma survivors forgive in their own time, Christian Century (Aug. 14, 2014), http://www.christiancentury.
The women came seeking healing. Many of these survivors of the Rwandan genocide had lost family members and some had been raped and infected with HIV. More than a few were struggling just it to make it to another day before they found Solace Ministries.
Sometimes it took a month or a full year before they spoke about their experiences with other survivors. When they did, even if it was only to say a few words before they broke down in tears, other survivors gathered around, embracing one another.
The passage from the Book of Isaiah—“Comfort, comfort my people, says your God”—was the mantra for this ministry. Envisioning a future with a sense of hope was nurtured among a loving community that reinforced their belief in a God who had not abandoned them.
One sermon topic was off limits, however, for the Solace ministers.
“They never, ever, ever preached forgiveness” until a survivor was able to go through a healing process, said Donald Miller, professor of religion and sociology at the University of Southern California. He has visited Rwanda 16 times and conducted more than 260 interviews with widows and orphans of the 1994 genocide.
Research has shown people who scored high on forgiveness scales had significantly lower levels of blood pressure, anxiety and depression, and relatively high self-esteem and life satisfaction.
But forgiveness is also a deeply personal act, one that can harm trauma victims if it is coerced or demanded before they are able to come to terms with their pain and suffering, experts say.
One should not say “the ‘f-word’ to someone” who has recently been traumatized, said Kenneth Pargament, a psychology professor at Bowling Green State University who is a leading scholar in the field of religion and health.
Many people who have survived trauma such as rape or domestic violence often have feelings of self-contempt or self-loathing, as if they must have been somehow responsible for the crimes committed against them.
Asking them to forgive before they are ready can traumatize survivors again, and leave them feeling disconnected and alienated from communities such as churches that can be vital to help them heal, Pargament noted.
In the cases, say, of a battered woman continually returning to her spouse or an abusive cleric who is transferred from congregation to congregation, forgiveness given inappropriately also can endanger the survivors and others.
Consider the recent outrage against NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell for giving Baltimore Ravens’ star Ray Rice just a two-game suspension after he was accused of assaulting his then-fiancé, now wife.
Goodell elicited testimony from the woman in front of Rice and his attorney. He said he took into account Rice’s contrition in making the decision.
To advocates for battered women, Goodell’s words may evoke all-too-similar scenarios to a time when clergy would routinely intervene on behalf of abusive husbands, urging the wife to take her spouse back for the sake of the marriage.
Pope Francis drew mixed reactions recently after he asked for forgiveness for “the grave crimes of clerical sexual abuse” and the sins of church leaders in their response to victims.
David Clohessy of Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests referred to Francis “as a humble, brilliant, unpretentious pope.” But Clohessy said the pontiff must follow through with reforms such as holding bishops accountable and turning records over to civil authorities.
“We endanger boys and girls if we confuse words with deeds,” Clohessy said.
So how can faith communities help trauma survivors on their journey to healing that may one day enable them to reap the benefits of true forgiveness?
Here are three ways suggested by research and those with experience in working with survivors:
1. Support: “The first thing is to surround the people with care and compassion,” said Pargament, editor of the American Psychological Association’s APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion and Spirituality. “Just to listen, that’s a huge gift.”
The need for support became clear to Miller in his research with genocide survivors in Rwanda.
“You have to care. You have to support, and you have to allow survivors to go through a process,” said Miller, author of the upcoming book Healing, Forgiveness and Reconciliation in Post-Genocide Rwanda. “Forgiveness occurs over a long period of time, years, and even then there is a sense that it’s never completed.
2. Educate: Forgiveness education is a critical step churches can take to promote a healthy path to forgiveness, said Robert Enright, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who has been doing research on forgiveness for a quarter of a century.
Such work includes helping people understand that forgiveness is a free gift for the person who was wronged. Forgiveness is not so much for the perpetrator as it is a way for the victim to release themselves from the trauma of the experience, Miller noted.
In a journal article, Chad Magnuson of Liberty University and Enright advocated a comprehensive program that includes forgiveness training for church leaders and regularly integrating discussions about forgiveness into sermons and Bible study programs.
3. Challenge rather than enable transgressors: One study of 1,200 abusive men in the Northwest found that faith communities can be critical in providing the practical and spiritual support to begin to move violent men to a sense of empathy and accountability.
Faith-based intervention also can discredit dangerous theological ideas that the abused must be submissive and provide resources to allow the abusers to envision a different future.
Forgiveness is not about condoning or forgetting the transgression, and may or may not involve some form of reconciliation, noted Enright, co-founder of the International Forgiveness Institute.
Nor may forgiveness be possible until well down the road for people who have experienced severe trauma. A young woman in Rwanda who was beaten and sexually assaulted while her other family members were killed may never be able to forgive.
And no one but the individual who was abused can decide whether to grant forgiveness, Enright said.
“It’s their call when they’re ready.” —David Briggs, theARDA.com
Reprinted with permission of the Association of Religion Data Archives
This article was edited August 14, 2014.
Roger Sherman, Guest Opinion: All adults must take responsibility for protecting our kids, Idaho Statesman
/in Idaho /by SOL ReformCitation: Roger Sherman, Guest Opinion: All adults must take responsibility for protecting our kids, Idaho Statesman (Aug. 14, 2014), http://www.idahostatesman.com/2014/08/14/3323932/all-adults-must-take-responsibility.html?sp=/99/106/
A recently televised interview between Matthew Sandusky, the adopted son and victim of Jerry Sandusky of Penn State infamy, and Oprah Winfrey is rekindling the conversation about child sexual abuse. Three years after we learned about Jerry Sandusky’s serial abuse of boys who trusted him, have we done enough to prevent it? Have we done enough to make people aware so that they can respond appropriately? Do all of the organizations, child care programs, schools and churches where we send our children have policies, and more importantly practices, that will prevent the likelihood that a child will be abused on their watch? It is up to us as caring adults to make sure that they do.
In Idaho we have taken up the challenge. Organizations and volunteers throughout the state have been working for several years to educate adults on ways to prevent child sexual abuse and respond appropriately to it when it happens, using a research-based program called Stewards of Children. More than 5,000 Idahoans have been trained statewide. Good but not good enough. Two years ago, in response to Penn State, the Idaho Children’s Trust Fund (ICTF) decided it was time to intensify the effort. Partnering with the Treasure Valley YMCA, ICTF embarked on an effort to train 5 percent of all of the adults in the Treasure Valley. Similar efforts are underway in North Idaho, led by the ICARE program of St. Vincent De Paul; in the Magic Valley, led by CARES at St. Luke’s Regional Medical Center; and in East Idaho through Bright Tomorrows, Bannock Youth Foundation and Help, Inc.
In less than a month our kids head back to school. Ask the teachers and school principals if they have taken the Stewards of Children training. This is not about suspicion. It is about prevention. We don’t think we are going to get into an accident every time we drive, but we still wear our seat belts. We put fences around swimming pools. Most of the time nothing tragic happens, but we take the precautions so that nothing does happen. The vast majority of teachers, counselors and coaches would never abuse our children. Jerry Sandusky is the exception that proves the rule. Invite your school to take the Stewards of Children training. Contact the Idaho Children’s Trust Fund to schedule training. It’s two hours that can make a big difference.
You cannot wait for others to protect kids. You cannot wait for organizations to protect kids. You cannot wait for legislators to protect kids. You – each of you – must make the choice to protect the children in your lives and organizations. How? 1. Learn the facts; 2. Minimize opportunity; 3. Talk about it; 4. Recognize the signs; and 5. React responsibly. The most important message from Matt’s interview with Oprah – the one he hopes everyone will remember – is that prevention must be a priority. Only then can we change our culture and create safer societies – in Idaho and throughout the country – for our kids to grow up free of the trauma of child sexual abuse.
Roger Sherman is the executive director of the Idaho Children’s Trust Fund, which is the state affiliate of Prevent Child Abuse America.
Justice Denied for Abused Children, Editorial Board, New York Times
/in Uncategorized /by SOL Reformhttp://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/08/14/opinion/justice-denied-for-abused-children-.html?_r=3&referrer=
There are two important consequences of a long-awaited ruling last week by a federal judge, Claudia Wilken, in the so-called O’Bannon case. College athletes will almost certainly be better off financially. And the notion that these athletes are pure amateurs — “students first, athletes second” — will be impossible to sustain.
In her 99-page decision, Judge Wilken issued an injunction against a ban on payments to players for the commercial use of their names, images and likenesses, which she said violated antitrust law. She also ruled that college sports’ governing body, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, may not prohibit universities from offering cost-of-living stipends in addition to scholarships.
Judge Wilken’s ruling represents a significant victory for Ed O’Bannon, a former basketball player for the University of California, Los Angeles, and other players like him who until now have been unable to share in the considerable wealth generated by their skill and hard work. Mr. O’Bannon agreed to be the lead plaintiff in a suit arguing that college players had a financial interest in products or advertising that exploited their names and images.
Although the N.C.A.A. is the clear loser here and has already announced plans to appeal, the reach of the decision should not be overstated. Post-O’Bannon, collegiate athletics won’t operate according to free-market principles. Far from it. Players did not win the right to sign endorsement deals. And the N.C.A.A. may cap payments to players at $5,000 per year — comparable to the amount that the N.C.A.A. permits players to receive if they qualify for a Pell grant. Colleges, moreover, may keep these payments in trust until after the players graduate or leave.
In making these compromises, Judge Wilken acceded to what she called the N.C.A.A.’s “legitimate procompetitive goals” — its fear that a totally free market would mostly benefit the richest colleges, which could pay players the most and gain a major recruitment advantage.
The cap will make the post-O’Bannon future less chaotic. Still, it won’t be easy for the N.C.A.A. to adjust to the new order. Over the next months and years, it will have to figure out how to administer a trust fund; determine if the ruling applies to all sports and all divisions, or only some; and learn how to pay certain players without violating Title IX, the law that bans sex discrimination at educational institutions that accept federal funds.
The N.C.A.A. and its member institutions have no one to blame but themselves for any unintended negative consequences. They built a lucrative commercial enterprise that depended in large part on unpaid labor. Now they have to move forward without exploiting the very students they have always purported to protect.
Meet The New York Times’s Editorial Board »