Saving the good name of ....

[Eamonn 61]

Seems that saving the good name of churches, organizations and some public people used to be the way to go.

I think it's fair to say that it happened in the R.C.Church, Penn State and now the BSA.

Used to be that the media in the UK was OK with turning a blind eye to some of the things the royal family used to get up to.

Earlier this year inmates at a State Correctional facility accused the staff members of abuse. Very soon after the Superintendent and his two deputies were let go (Fired.) While there is still an ongoing investigation, it's starting to look like some of the allegations are just not true. Sadly it does also look like some are true.

Most of the people I know who don't work in corrections have no idea what really happens on the "Inside."

At the facility where I work, most areas are covered by CATV and there are cameras all over the place. When they first started to install them, I wasn't that keen on the idea. My thinking that they were more about catching staff members not doing their job than any idea of protecting staff from being abused and protecting staff from being accused from allegations of abuse. Needless to say my view has changed.

I really couldn't care less what the royal family does. If they are silly enough to do stuff and get caught doing it? Then that's up to them.

The R.C. Church has taken a very big hit.

People have lost trust in the church and I think that a good many will never ever feel that they can trust the church again.

Penn State? Will move on but the black mark, the stain of the cover up is going to be there for a very long time.

I watched the CBS evening news last night and my feeling was that the BSA got off very lightly.

Still in light of what's happened, I'm willing to bet that more cases of abuse will come along and millions of dollars will be awarded. -Maybe I'm wrong?

I suppose if I were a parent and I knew nothing about Scouts and Scouting, I very well might not want my kid to join a organization where he might be at risk.

The damage has been done and I don't think that there is any way of undoing it.

Covering things up is never a good idea. Once you start on that path, there is no good that ever comes from it.

While organizations and churches very well might have a good name? I also have a good name, one that I'm never going to put at risk in order to protect a church or an organization.

I tend to think that when it comes to what we have in YP works fine.

I worry if we add a lot more it will become a complicated mess that no one understands.

I also think that we could do more to train the youth that we serve so as they are better equipped to recognize and manage any perverts that might be out there.

Ea.

[eisely 13]

Well said Eamonn. As has been noted in other threads over the years this forum has been in business, having YP in place will not prevent all abuse. But I agree that having YP in place makes abuse less likely. Eamonn's point about better training for youth about reporting would be a worthwhile improvement.

 

I watch every little national news on TV anymore so I missed how the networks are treating this. Nevertheless, I too get the impression that BSA is getting off somewhat lightly. Part of this may be explained by the controversy over Ryan Andresen. The petitions were delivered on the same day that the abuse files were released. Rightly or not, these things tend to offset one another in the minds of a great many people. That may explain why the media gave this a fairly gentle treatment.

[DeanRx 69]

I don't think the BSA is getting off lightly.

 

1) The BSA has already paid out what, 15.8 million in one of the cases... the release of the files will no doubt lead to follow on lawsuits and the precedent has been set. Many lawyers will make their living off the BSA in the years to come. Much like Mesothelioma suits, once the data pool is there and the first verdict sets the tone, the wolves will feed.

 

2) While the BSA fought long and hard to not allow the release of the files (you can debate the wisdom in that ad nauseum in another thread) - they at LEAST had files and EVERY adult in the files was kicked OUT and not allowed to re-offend. A couple might have slipped back in by moving councils, etc.. but for the most part the files did a good job of keeping pervs out once they were ID'd. Now, the BSA could have done more to turn these guys in to the police, but it was a different time and I don't think we can sit in judgement with today's standards on what took place 10, 20, or 30 years ago... different times / different societal standards.

 

The RC and Penn State - BOTH have been documented to KNOW they had an abuser in their ranks and not only did they not alert authorities, BUT they KEPT the person(s) around and allowed them to molest more youth!!! In the case of the RC - there are documented cases where priests KNOWN to have molested were moved to a new diocese and placed in a position of a youth pastor or in charge of a Catholic School !! Big difference between kicking someone out and trying to keep them out, but not calling the cops AND just moving the person around and letting them keep interacting with youth.

 

3) The majority of the reports PEAK in the late 1980's and then supposedly decrease. This occurs at the same time YPG, 2-deep, no one-on-one and background checks were instituted. BSA screwed up by not calling the cops, BUT as an organization they did LEARN and change their policies based on the data they had collected (which I believe would be a secondary reason to keep the files, after keeping offenders out of the leadership ranks).

 

4) BSA has agreed and welcomed a congressional audit to asses whether or not the improved policies have actually curtailed abuse in the 1990-2000's.... They AGREE with the plaintifs lawyers that this is a good thing to do.

 

In my book, BSA could (and probably should) have done better with reporting to the police. However, they at LEAST attempted to do the right thing and thier policies progressed as their data points showed that they needed to do something. That's more than can be said for BOTH the RC and Penn State.

 

Finally, the BSA (at least not to my knowledge) liquidated their funds and hurriedly built Capital Improvements (as the RC did) when a big $$ lawsuit was being handed down in order to show the organization to be cash poor, thus limiting awards to the abused. RC did that all over the country, including the parrish down the street from me here in San Diego. Getting sued, big payout looming, hurry and build a new building b/c the court stated that PROPERTY could not be taken, only liquid assets in the awarded $$ - thus avoid PAYING the full amount to the plantiff when they won the suit!!

 

Overall - given the terrible circumstances - BSA did the best they thought possible at the time and are standing up and taking responsibility at this point. RC and Penn State are still ducking responsibility.

 

Dean

[RememberSchiff 3683]

Usually with a fiasco of this size, a management shake-up soon follows as a first step towards corporate recovery.

 

The Catholic Church reassigned Cardinals who looked the other way and were facing imminent legal action. Cardinal Bernard Law went from Boston to the Vatican, out of reach for the Boston DA and Mass AG.

 

Penn State fired not only Paterno and (eventually) assistant coach Mike McQueary, but university president Spanier as well.

 

Our CO is feeling the negative, some of the church elders feel sponsoring their own church youth group would be better. Better as is serving more youth and having less controversy. Two of these elders are Eagle Scouts. So locally, we SM and ASM's may get pink slips too

 

My $0.02,

[qwazse 4345]

For the love of God, RS, don't let your church fall for that delusion!

Guess where predators gravitate since the BSA has had YPG in force for three decades?

That's right, go-it-alone youth groups.

Guess How many churches have a national registry of "do not hires" for the ones who weren't convicted? How many cross denominational boundaries?

 

Guess whose model churches follow to keep their youth safe? That's right BSAs.

 

Granted your church should have a youth group for the kids who aren't suited for scouting. Add criminal background checks into the budget. Get someone who's good at the religion thing. Have them cooperate with your boys for every outdoor experience.

 

Just don't have them throw the baby out with the bath water.

[packsaddle 753]

The full impact of all this is still coming I think. But this CO sounds similar to the one RememberSchiff mentions. There have always been long-standing questions and concerns about being the CO for a BSA unit, questions that so far we've gotten past because of the unit's success and outreach. But this is going to make those voices louder and more difficult to defend against. Why?

The answer is not only the YP stuff that is looking pretty negative right now, but also the reaction to this idea, expressed just now by quazse, "...kids who aren't suited for scouting...", the long-standing criticism that the CO youth program should be for all CO youth, not just a few select ones. The combination of the discriminatory nature of the unit combined with the facts and appearances from this new publicity...I'm not looking forward to either the new wave of criticism OR having to figure out how to defend against it. It makes me tired just thinking about it.

 

If the CO decides to merely 'port' the current unit leadership (which seems to have their confidence with regard to YP) into a non-BSA program modeled after the previous one but on an inclusive basis, I'm going to find it difficult to make an argument against it. But in the meantime I'll wait and see what develops.

[RememberSchiff 3683]

You may find this hard to believe, the diocese current YP has taken parts of the BSA YP and made it more adult level (the online course includes recorded victim interviews, crime photos) and victim focused - trauma care and recovery, suicide prevention, helping the victim stay if not in the church with God, etc. By comparison, the BSA online course is a cartoon.

 

The diocese may soon require photo ID's with fingerprinting, at volunteer expense, as well.

 

Either we do better or something better will take our place.

 

Another $0.02,

[qwazse 4345]

Didn't realize your CO was a Roman Catholic Church. Yes, they have beefed up their program.

[AZMike 173]

DeanRx: "Overall - given the terrible circumstances - BSA did the best they thought possible at the time and are standing up and taking responsibility at this point. RC and Penn State are still ducking responsibility."

 

I can't speak for Penn State, but the Catholic Church has required youth safety training for ALL that have contact with children (laity and clergy).

 

While men with same-sex attraction were allowed into the priesthood in some seminaries in the 1960s through 1980s, they are now longer allowed into Holy Orders (which makes sense - if you want to reduce the rate of abuse of young males (the overwhelming problem in the Church) by homosexual acts, then you reduce the number of those who have the desire to have sex with males. That may hurt some activists with political agendas, but holy orders is not a "right."

 

The Church now does annual audits on the status of reports of abuse, which have fallen down to next to none.

 

Denominations that have not taken such actions are seeing the rate of abuse skyrocket, according to the insurance companies.

 

The rate of sexual abuse of children remains high in the education and health care industries, as does the level of organizational cover-up.

 

NO organization has been unscathed by the epidemic of child abuse. The media itself is hardly exempt, as the recent scandal regarding the BBC's cover-up of sexual abuse shows: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/revealed-newsnight-emails-that-accuse-bbc-of-jimmy-savile-coverup-8218971.html

[BadenP 93]

Eamonn and Schiff

 

Both of your posts are exquistly crafted and plainly stated. Bravo!