ThenNow

I do believe the accused have the right to face their accuser(s) and defend themselves. When dead, that's obviously impossible. Here is something you may or may not find interesting or relevant. This is a theoretical framework hatched in my little brain, based on studying psychology, Complex PTSD derived from long-term child sexual abuse and some elements of the law. See what you think. Statutes of limitations are critical to ensure stale claims/allegations aren't brought to court after witnesses are dead, documents shredded, memories faded, physical evidence tampered with, crime scene contaminated, and the like. In the case of murder, we consider the crime so heinous that we impose no such limitations. We consider the possibility that one human being willingly and maliciously took the life of another is sufficient basis to overcome all of the objections summed up in the notion that too much time has passed. In 1991, Leonard Shengold published his important book, "Soul Murder." To distill, he posits that child sexual abuse, and other severe abuses, result in "psychic and spiritual annihilation." As I consider statutes of limitations on bringing claims and prosecutions for child sexual abuse, when I equate those acts with "soul murder," I feel completely justified in calling for lifting those limitations. Although I am obviously alive and able to think and function, if you knew my story you wouldn't completely dismiss out of hand the comparison of these two crimes. My story is by no means the worst. Not by far. I'm not too proud to say that an objective person could look at periods of my life and use the word "annihilated" to describe what they see. Taking the theory a step further, if the abuser is equated to a "soul murderer," those who participate in, facilitate, hide, obfuscate or even fail to report the crime are, in fact and by law, accessories to that crime, to one degree or another. Enter other adults who tacitly consent or passively condone such acts, like Local Councils, Chartering Organizations and BSA National. Under my theory, they are accessories before and/or after the fact. They are not only a convenient target with money, they have some measure of responsibility. HOWEVER, I agree that times have changed and we know SO much more about the behavior of predators, the need to train and protect kids, monitor and qualify leaders, and all that's being done in Scouting and other youth organizations. I merely share this to lend my perspective on how the BSA situation might be seen through a different, and perhaps new, lens.

The only element of accountability being discussed is public disclosure of the names of abusers. I think that's the only thing the Court could order as part of the settlement. I know some survivor claimants and/or attorneys have that goal. As I mentioned, I don't like it for two reasons: (1) if my state creates a look back window by enacting the Victims Rights Act, I want to be able to surprise my abusers with a lawsuit and criminal prosecution; and (2) it doesn't seem right to accuse people publicly after anything less than a proper legal investigation of the allegations. As I mention elsewhere, this is claim validation and corroboration process is unlikely to involve anything close. For survivors or especially attorneys who are seeking public humiliation of these men and, more likely than not additional clients, they can use the Court to effectively defame and publicly convict people with impunity. That has bad public policy and immorality written all over it, in my view.

Claim validation is going to be incredibly complicated with the vast number on file with the Court. If I were cynical, I'd say that was part of the reason one group has gathered so many clients; to choke the system and force an allocation of the Trust by simple division. That creates a scenario where potentially specious claims get validated by virtue of an inability to challenge them. Time just doesn't permit it, if the BSA is going to stop bleeding money to pay lawyers already tapping the estate at every turn. Love them or hate them, the insurance company's lawyers will probably be the most aggressive in attacking that wholesale acceptance of claims. BSA, as well, but maybe less so. Ideally and properly, and this is why Troop and LC rolls have been sought by the insurance companies and Tort Claimants Committee, there should be a factual investigation to determine if the people and places included in a claim were where they are said to have been at the times alleged. That would be a step one. Establishing higher level detail and/or corroboration of the allegations of abuse will be tricky. Also, as I understand it, the level of proof required is only the “by a preponderance of the evidence" standard, as in more likely than not to have happened. Once the basic circumstantial facts of people, places and things are confirmed, the rest will be difficult to dispute or disprove. The Official Sexual Abuse Survivor Claim Form requests information on the LC, Chartering Organization, other leaders in the Troop or LC, and, etc. I've been told some men don't remember so much as the adult's name. Some have a nickname or nothing at all for detail, not even the name of the place where the Troop met. That's not much to go on. Since there are so many claims, I imagine confirming basic facts will be done as best they can and quickly. As to corroboration, that rises to a level of investigation and interviewing they will not take, in my opinion. In my case, they have enough information to indict, prosecute, and convict several people, calling witnesses all day long if this were a criminal case. Assuming they satisfy a threshold level of factual context, when it finally comes to determining the 'value' of each abuse claim, which is the unfortunate bottom line here being solely about allocated pennies, the Authorized Reviewer(s) will be given a TBD agreed upon metric or grading scale by which to measure and rank the claim. Factors to be weighed include: the fragility/susceptibility of the claimant to damage from abuse; the presence and manner of grooming; the intensity and duration of the abuse; if others were involved in the abuse acts; did the abuser use pornography, take photos or make videos; was there threat of force, violence, stated or implied ramifications for refusal or disclosure; was there special treatment and inducement/rewards; and what were the impacts of the abuse on the claimant's life in multiple areas, including physical, psychological, financial, relational, sexual, educational and professional. There are numerous excellent examples of what the grading and ranking methods look like, particularly from some of the Roman Catholic Church and USA Gymnastics cases. How is all this going to be legitimately verified and established? I don't know. It is a high mountain of claims to trek and lots of data to mine (or not). Again, if the choke point was created both as a means of making more money and to overwhelm the system, it may well work. At the end of the day, the mediators could recommend they slice the pie through a default, “Everyone gets an equal piece because we don't know who deserves more or less." That will be another travesty of the situation. I believe there are lawyers who would strongly object to that, but when negotiations start happening and payday is in sight, the level of compromise that can be sold to a client is about the persuasive skills of the attorneys, the inclination of the deep pockets to settle and the desire of the client/claimants to be done with it and get something. That said, I think the Coalition of Abused Scouts for Justice is the 800 pound gorilla in the mediation room, wielding the largest client list and, thus, enormous power to accept or refuse a proposed Plan of Reorganization.

Indeed. However, large number of current Chapter 11 claimants live in states that have not yet adopted the Victims Rights Act. Without that statutory change, allowing a 'look back' suspension of retrospective statutes of limitations that currently bar such actions, whether civil or criminal, they have no legal recourse. Under the VRA, survivors would be able to pursue claims against their abuser, as well as any Local Councils and Chartering Organizations that do not participate in funding the Victims' Compensation Trust to gain future protection and release of past claims.

You are exactly on point. It seems people don't think much about that, instead focusing on the other two. It is an absolutely critical piece. Further, deterence by virtue of locking the doors and being on high alert isn't completely effective without repercussions. If someone does manage to pass through undetected and commit a crime of abuse, it must be met with the other side of deterence - grave consequences. There is a reason you see surveillance cameras next to statements to the effect that, "Violators will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law." From my reading of massive amounts of data and history, down to reading 50 year-old individual reports from parents to Scout Leaders to Troops to Local Councils and then to local police, the failure to prosecute was equally as destructive as was inadequate vetting and training. Vetting only goes so far if someone has not been caught or credibly accused before they apply. Knowing that previous perpetrators have been aggressively prosecuted, sued and publicly disclosed, is a powerful weapon in combatting child abuse. Is it enough on its own? No. Is a multi-pronged approach to background check, train, enforce rigorous requirements of 2 adults person, and etc., coupled with prosecution a worthy adversary against would be perpetrators? Absolutely. A complete program to protect and deter has to include prosecution and public disclosure. And, it has to be swift and decisive. That requires empowering kids and youth to know what is right, wrong and how to have a voice. No easy task. In fact, it may be the most difficult thing in the moment, especially knowing that boys abused by men often don't report for years after the abuse. Over-reporting and false accusations are possible, but less likely in the context of child sexual abuse than other crimes. (Per the data I've reviewed.) If I were in charge, I would include in the training process a summary of law enforcement and legal processes in the case of an accusation. Leaders should know what is involved, as should parents, to my thinking. Because most people 'know' what they know about law and the judicial system from what they see on television, it is neither accurate nor helpful in a real world situation. In fact, it's counterproductive.

Excellent point.

We can agree to disagree. From a purely objective - add motive to opportunity and access - assessment, no other organization I can think of has as many vulnerabilities as Scouting. Yes, others "had similar issues," but you would have to combine multiple other youth activities to come up with one year's worth of Scouting. To qualify, this is only my personal experience with Scouting, other youth activities as a child/youth and as a parent. I can only share from what I know and what I've considered, so always open to being wrong. I try to avoid falling into my dad's "often wrong, but never in doubt," category, but I'm probably not as successful as I should be.

I unequivocally agree. Unfortunately, it is, therefore, the perfect cover for those who have impure motives. It is not only easily explained and justified, but noble. As we all know, or perhaps don't, these people are extremely patient, skillful, instinctual, strategic, and tactical.

Having grown up Catholic (directly across the street from the Cathedral), involved in music, theater and sports, I can offer my view. I also have degrees in sociology and psychology and have considered the question, both on my own and as spurred by the topic interwoven throughout the forum. After considering it for a while, Scouting is unique even amid other many other vulnerable activities involving adults and children, before the late 1980's. It occupies different category because of the sheer range of activities that create opportunity. We had/have swimming, overnight camping, hiking, myriad merit badges, boating, fishing, shooting, wilderness excursions, skill awards and on and on. Add to those contexts and opportunities wicked motive, and you have a very bad scenario. Compare that with focused activities like those I mentioned. Priests have limited proximity and opportunity, though many created new contexts. Most extracurriculars are in group settings and, again, with fewer opportunities in remote locations apart from both adults and, in many cases, other children. Again, predators find ways and means. Private lessons. Staying late after practice, and etc. That's what they do. I do think Scouting had an enormous vulnerability and was, therefore, extremely 'attractive' to sexual predators. In the case of my Scout Master, he basically showed up and became an Assistant and soon SM. Just ten years older than me, he was 20 when I joined. He was married, with no kids. What was he doing there? Who vetted him? Why was he there other than to be around boys? Was he a Scout? To my knowledge, none of the parents knew him. Obviously, he passed through some gate, but which and with what degree of rigor I don't know. Having said all that, it was a very different time, without question. To the point, decades after the fact I became aware that at least one adult had an inkling, but did nothing but made sure his boy was protected. As to the attorneys, they will certainly make a great deal of money. If the Victims' Compensation Trust is funded with $2B, they will be splitting in the range of $700M. The self-proclaimed, Coalition of Abused Scouts for Justice, claims to have tens of thousands of members. Everyone knows it's really a group of attorneys aggregating their claims and they are the actual coalition, but whatever. If they control 2/3 of the claims, you can do the arithmetic. Honestly, I don't like to think about it. However, I know some of the attorneys who represent claimants and they are excellent people and great counsel.

You're welcome. I don't know if it adds perspective or helps the discussion in any way.

I believe you're talking about therapists encouraging survivors to disclose the abuse they suffered, as a way to shed light on the past, seek a degree of recompense and gain a measure of closure in the doing of both. If so, that's correct from my experience. Unfortunately, for many in this context, the Chapter 11 is the court of 'last and exclusive resort', bringing large numbers to the table asking for their due. Related to closure and addressing another issue raised above, one of the great inequities here is the inability to include the abusers/perpetrators in this process. It's a bankruptcy proceeding and not a civil lawsuit, so that can't be done. The vast majority of living perpetrators are in or near retirement, unscathed by the massive battle of competing interests that's raging. Men struggle for equitable compensation, acknowledgement and healing. An iconic American institution fights for its life. Insurance companies go on offense to protect their assets out of self-preservation, trying to limit their cash bleed. Local Councils are compelled to enter the fray to secure future protection and certainty by paying to dissipate the cloud of future lawsuits. And, attorneys amass further fortunes and build their brands on the backs of trauma and hyperbolic gamesmanship to the detriment of both primary parties. The bad actors themselves lurk in smoke and shadow. For my part, I never wanted anything other than to make my Scout Master, and those complicit with his behavior, pay. (The Scout Executive was at least giving tactic consent, perhaps more.) I only considered the role of corporate and the Local Council when the Chapter 11 was announced and I had an opportunity to be heard and seek quantifiable relief. My abuse took place in a so-called closed state, one that has not yet seen an iteration of the Victims Rights Act codified. With no 'look back window', a Sexual Abuse Survivor Claim against the Victims Compensation Trust was the only way forward. Taking it one step further, many on the Tort Claimants' Committee are said to want the names of the accused made public. I'm really not sure if that's the men or the attorneys talking, since the latter would directly benefit, especially if they hold press conferences to make the disclosures, as was done in NY. Personally, I prefer my abuser remain blissfully ignorant, thinking he again escaped without a scratch. Then, if a look back window is made available to me, I will come with force. As to those who fear Scouting may be irredeemably and systemically compromised, I think that may be falling victim to the trend toward coddled group-think and unfounded, broad brush guilt by association. I very well could be wrong. As I view it from my experience, training and professional lens, the organizational and programmatic structure of Scouting did, in fact, create very fertile ground to attract, cultivate and permit sexual predators to abuse boys. There is no question that is true. Was it more insidious and evil? Is it still? I don't know, but I don't think so. If it had been, there wouldn't have been so many pockets of innocence that existed throughout Scouting, as many of you experienced. If it is infected to the core - cancer living in in the bones - I pray God ensures it doesn't emerge from this. Also, just because Tim Kosnoff and Jeff Van Arsdale tell you they have eight and fourteen year-old clients doesn't mean the overwhelming majority of claimants are other than over 50. I would like to see a chart of the dates of incidence. I'm guessing it drops precipitously after the late 1980's. That's my personal guess, having not looked at any data. Bottom line? It's mess. Therefore, God, please help us. In your grace and mercy, please grant all involved wisdom, insight, direction and justice, as You see fit. Keep evil plans from prevailing and selfish actors from reaping great reward at the expense of the afflicted. Protect the innocent. Care for the needy. Punish the guilty. Elevate the righteous. Bring beauty from ashes... Ok. I'll stop now.

Also, I appreciate your sympathy. Yes, I have been in therapy and various treatment modalities for about 20 years. Things went south when our oldest son asked to join Scouts.

You're welcome. I sincerely hope neither my comments nor presence will inhibit the conversation. If so, I apologize.

This is a general post, my first on the forum. I have read this thread from the beginning. If you have access, of which I'm unsure as a newbie, you can see my background. I'm both a former high-achieving Scout and Sexual Abuse Survivor Claimant in the Chapter 11. I have many thoughts on this matter overall. Most notably, the potential for Scouting to survive and how the case has evolved, especially as it concerns the incredible - and I use the word advisedly and specifically - number of claims. Like many of you and others I know, my expectation was to see a maximum number of 5,000-10,000 claims, with ten being an unlikely high end. In retrospect, I admit that was probably unreasonably low number given the situation and opportunity it presented. I am one of the 'boys' whose experience was egregious, long-term, varied in the nature of abuse, involved other boys and had devastating life impacts. As of the writing of this post, I am still trying to recover. It's a daily effort. My family has suffered in ways I try not to contemplate. I have two grown boys and it's not infrequent that I weep when looking back over how I failed them, largely as result of my own frailty stemming from the abuse. Having said that, I am grieved at the way attorneys have swooped into this difficult process, 'gill netting' stables of possible claimants which, in my personal and professional assessment, almost certainly contain many specious or absurdly minute claims. I saw one media story where a man discussed his life trauma after a childhood Scout leader, "put his hand on my leg in a suggestive way." Good grief. For those of us with easily verified and highly credible claims, this dilution of the eventual Victims Compensation Trust feels like a repeat of what happened to us - abuse by those who should be taking great care to protect us. Through the greed and opportunism of supposed advocates, many will suffer. I include the BSA in that, as I still look fondly on my involvement with Scouting, which many who know me cannot, and never will, understand. The net practical result of where we are now is a choke point bottleneck. There is no way the Authorized Reviewer will be able to review, verify, assess and quantify damages for this number of claims. Again, in my personal and professional assessment, this becomes a try to slice the kitty and parse out the pennies. I believe it was the goal of one group of claim aggregators and attorneys to create this scenario. The increase of the kitty, forced by the large number of claims, will most likely yield the largest benefit to attorneys, including those representing the BSA, claimants, insurance companies and the various committees. Some are and will continue to amass enormous piles of hourly fees, while the claimant attorneys receive 40+/-% of the awards coming to their stable of men. For me, this is disheartening and discouraging, having hoped for the "equitable compensation" promised as one of the two goals of this reorganization. As it stands, I fear neither goal will be achieved. I am holding out hope that my family will receive a fair measure of compensation for financial devastation caused, not to mention the psychological, physical and emotional wreckage. I'm open to questions. Or, feel free to allow my thoughts stand as a single post adding a new voice and perspective. Forgive any typos or the like. This was hard to write. Thanks, guys.