((((Path)))), ((((Bill)))) (heck -- even ((((Marvin)))) (whom I hardly know),
Gentlemen, I have a great deal of respect for all of you.
Bill, I must agree with Path that your responses (or refusuals to respond) and insults are unfair and unworthy of you and your cause! I am dismayed, because I know your heart. Please trust me that Path is not a WT apologist. He is a very bright, sincere, thinking individual who brings a fresh perspective to how best to reform WT policy. Because his perspective does not agree 100% with yours (at least not yet, and maybe never if you continue to alienate him and others who have questions like his) is no reason to insult or refuse to communicate with him. And I also agree with Marvin that debating this in public on this forum is quite valuable -- more valuable than you clarifying your position in private via telephone.
Path, as Dung mentioned above, when Bill is at the end of his hotline he may never get the last name of his abused caller, let alone personal information about the alleged abuser. How would you expect him to report? However, Bill the elder had enough integrity on this issue to report the alleged abuser to the police when the child victim was known personally to him and to step down because he could not conscientiously follow WT directives on this point. This is admirable. Admirable, too, is his wanting to protect the children victims of abuse in all events. To protect possible future victims. To even, when you think about it, protect the WT from its own wicked/stupid policies.
Marvin (and Joel?),
We all know that the WT Society in practice has NOT encouraged victims of child abuse/incest/rape, etc., to go to secular authorities. (In some cases, the Society even wrongs the victims by disfellowshipping them.) This is just wrong, wrong, wrong. A CRIME has been committed.
If the WT Society would use its considerable influence over its [brainwashed] members to actually write an article in the KM to ALL publishers that any victims of a sexual crime of any sort should DEFINITELY and IMMEDIATELY report the crime to the police, allow the police to gather evidence, and get whatever treatment -- medical or psychiatric is necessary to begin the healing process IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER -- even if the perpetrator should be a family member or member of the congregation, enormous good would result.
If the matter did concern incest or abuse by another JW, and the Society STRONGLY RECOMMENDED the publisher to contact the elders with the information AFTER contacting Child Protective Service and/or the police so that intra-Society discipline could commence as the loving shepherds protected the flock, what an enormous burden would be lifted off the 'Friends'' shoulders.
I think this is what Bill and his supporters (of whom I am one) would like to see done. FIRST.
THEN, the Society could also review whether or not the "two witness" rule as they have interpreted/applied it is actually Scriptural or whether they might find a way to acknowledge that "two witnesses" are unlikely in child abuse or rape cases. (Or they might train the elders in the Foster Method -- used by the FBI and other law enforcement agencies -- to learn how to "read" body language as they interview the victims and the accused and "respond" in a way that draws the actual truth out of them.)
I think the question Path and Marvin brought up deserves a polite, well-thought out response. Paraphrasing here: What to do if an abused child comes to you, an adult federally required to report, and reports having been abused, but is afraid and/or unwilling to go to the authorities? What to do? It is a legitimate quandry.
Personally, I think I would keep the confidence while at the same time gently explaining why it would be best to involve the authorities. I would want to keep the dialogue open. I would want to at least involve the child's parents -- or one of them if one was the abuser. Also, a lot of my response would have to do with the child's age. If s/he were, say, five years old and was afraid to go to the police because of threats by the abuser, I would likely report so that the child could be removed. If the child were actually an adolescent and didn't WANT to go to the police because of shame and fear of publicity, I would likely recommend counseling and trying to find a way to remove the child from the home short of involving Child Protective Services (at least for the moment). If I felt the child was in immediate danger of being abused again, however, and the child still didn't want me to report, I would likely make the difficult decision to involve the law -- and I would explain to the child that I was required by law to report and felt as a responsible adult [and a Christian] I must obey that law which was designed to protect the child from further harm. Sometimes principle has to have sway over personal feelings.
Finally, I say,
Dung?
Great idea! I am going to find out what the law is in my state by this time tomorrow! And then I'll start a new thread if nobody else has by then.
Love to (((((((((all you wonderful j-w.com posters))))))))))
outnfree
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts -- John Wooden
