Pedophiles in your congregation??

by ziddina 56 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • misguided
    misguided

    was molested by a Jehovah's Witness brother.....as a very young soul....I was victimized....my childhood damaged.....

    That is appalling, but that is the fault of your abuser, not the congregation.

    I too was molested by 2 Jehovah's Witness brothers - one was an elder. I was victimized....my childhood damaged, too...

    I went to the congregation for help. What help did I get...silence (no word on if anything was ever followed up on), and then silenced (don't tell anyone in the cong. or I could be faced with "discipline" for causing divisions)

    Fast forward a few years...one of these @$$holes abuses my younger sister (10 years younger than me.) It is the congregations fault 100 percent for what happened to my sister. I told them. They chose to keep their reputation than deal with either of these men. My sister had to pay the price.

    That's just one story...there's also the fact that my ex-husband's father had a baby (he was an elder) with my ex-husband's sister (a pioneer). My kids have a cousin who is also their aunt. It's sick. The lengths the organization went to hide this story (Lake Simcoe, Ontario - early 70s) to when in finally came to public knowlege (Ladner, BC apx 1985) is unbelievable.

    The policies of the organization make it the congregations fault. Take your head out of the sand Jordan12, your ignorance is foolish.

  • jordan12
    jordan12
    I too was molested by 2 Jehovah's Witness brothers - one was an elder. I was victimized....my childhood damaged, too...

    I'm as disgusted by child molestation as anyone else. You have every right to be angry. If anything like that happened to my daughter, I'd be furious. And if an elder did that then it's twice as bad because he betrayed his trust.

    I went to the congregation for help. What help did I get...silence (no word on if anything was ever followed up on), and then silenced (don't tell anyone in the cong. or I could be faced with "discipline" for causing divisions)

    If that is actually what happened, then the elders failed to follow the instructions. The letters to elders telling them how to handle these cases have long been on the internet. None of them say that you should have been treated that way. There is certainly no instruction to 'discipline' persons making abuse allegations. And I've never heard of a single person who was disfellowshipped for making an accusation of child molestation. How could they be? There'd need to be two witnesses that the allegation was false.

    Fast forward a few years...one of these @$$holes abuses my younger sister (10 years younger than me.) It is the congregations fault 100 percent for what happened to my sister. I told them. They chose to keep their reputation than deal with either of these men. My sister had to pay the price.

    What happened to your sister is 100% the abuser's fault. He should take responsibility for what he did.

    It isn't your fault (even though you could have reported the matter to the police).

    It isn't the congregation's fault. They have to balance all sorts of legal requirements and principles.

    It's not about keeping their reputation. It's about common sense. The reporting requirements are no different from any other church or professional counselling association. As for the two witnesses, if only one person made an allegation, then it was one person's word against another. Do you want congregations to disfellowship anyone just on one person's say-so? As I've told others, you might think differently if things were the other way round and you or a loved one were falsely accused of child molestation.

    That's just one story...there's also the fact that my ex-husband's father had a baby (he was an elder) with my ex-husband's sister (a pioneer). My kids have a cousin who is also their aunt. It's sick. The lengths the organization went to hide this story (Lake Simcoe, Ontario - early 70s) to when in finally came to public knowlege (Ladner, BC apx 1985) is unbelievable.

    Again, that sort of filthy conduct is appalling. You aren't the only one who is disgusted by it. I am, too, and all Jehovah's Witnesses would be.

    But you're confusing confidentiality with covering up. Members of religious groups go to ministers/priests/pastors/elders to confess their sins on the understanding that what they have done will not be discussed with others. In many places, they have a legal obligation not to divulge what they've been told. (Even more so in the 1970's.)

    The policies of the organization make it the congregations fault. Take your head out of the sand Jordan12, your ignorance is foolish.

    The policies of the organization are excellent and no other church has anything near as good. They include: disfellowshipping of unrepentant wrongdoers, immediate removal of repentant wrongdoers from all positions of responsibility and scrupulous adherence to legal requirements.

    I'm 100% sure the elder you mention was removed, if he was not disfellowshipped.

    If there were problems, then they arose from failure to follow the policies, not from the policies themselves.

  • jordan12
    jordan12
    JORDAN 12- You mentioned that there are currently 700,000 registered sex offenders in the United States . But that doesn't account for many life-long sex offenders who may have NOT had to register before the laws were made years ago that they legally HAVE to register. For some of these sex offenders who were charged 20 to 30 years ago and even served hard prison time - the statue of limitations ran out BEFORE Megan's Law was passed so they weren't legally REQUIRED to register as a sex offender. So how many thousands of THOSE type of offenders are running around unrestrained ??

    Well if there are more than 700,000 sex offenders in the US, then surely that amplifies my point, which was that the incidence of sex offences among Jehovah's Witnesses is much lower than among the public at large.

    A case in point is someone we know on the board tried to expose a former child molesters court records ( which was public access ) to the body of elders in her congregation- she was maligned and scolded by the elders for gossipping and threatened with DFing if she informed JW parents in her congregation about the child molester . What's wrong with this picture ? EVERYTHING.

    People post these stories anonymously. How can I possibly know if it really happened the way they said? There are two sides to every story, and we only get one of them on boards like this.

    What I do know with certainty is what the written instructions say, because they're reproduced verbatim on a number of websites. None of them say a single word about disfellowshipping victims or those who truthfully speak to someone about a person's past. Elders have to explain the reasons for disfellowshipping to Bethel. If they tried to disfellowship someone on those grounds, Bethel would send it back.

    Furthermore, has anyone ever gone on record saying that they were disfellowshipped for that reason? I think not. There is one such allegation on Silentlambs, but legal textbooks give a quite different reason for his disfellowshipping. (http://www.silentlambs.org/VickiBoerPedoparadise-Why.htm, http://www.watchtowerdocuments.com/downloads/1995_Frank_Mott_Trille_v._Steed.pdf [page 7])

    Bottom line is Jehovah's Witnesses and the WT society prefer to protect their own " perceived " outward reputation - than protecting ANY young people in their organization. Peace out, Mr. Flipper

    Bottom line is that opposers are much more interested in using child abuse to discredit Jehovah's Witnesses than they are in helping Jehovah's Witnesses' children. If they really cared about Jehovah's Witnesses' children they would try to help them in a way that shows respect for their religion and their sensitivies.

  • THE GLADIATOR
    THE GLADIATOR

    The term paedophilia erotica was coined in 1886 by the Viennese psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing in his writing Psychopathia Sexualis.

    In the UK we spell this word the correct way - Paedophile.

  • ziddina
    ziddina

    Has anyone else noticed how hard Jordan12 is working to 'disprove' the problems the WTBTS has with its policies on child molestation???

    Methinks the man doth protest too much... This issue seems to punch very particular 'buttons' for him...

    Wonder what is hidden in HIS closet...????

    Zid

  • Georgiegirl
    Georgiegirl

    Just a few points.

    1. Policies HAVE changed. It IS being handled differently now. Um...woohoo? So for the last 20 years (and it always takes time for the policies to be adjusted multiple times etc etc etc for it to be fully changed) the "official" published doctrine (as ably quoted by Jordan12) IS the "official" way. Of course, it took media exposure and lawsuits for that to happen. And what was the policy for ONE HUNDRED YEARS prior? Yep. Cover it up, blame the victim, don't tell the rank and file, and above all don't call the police. DF the victims for slander if necessary.

    2. Over and over again the policies referred to are U.S. policies. Only 1/6 of JWs are in the U.S. (maybe less now?). So tell me, what happens in other countries? I would be interested to know what happens in - oh say - Africa. Anyone willing to bet the policies of US witnesses on this are different simply because the law is different?

    And yet a loving God who had only one true approved organized religion would surely have protected his flock from these egregrious crimes - or at the very least - made sure it was handled far better and more progressively than the world would. Let's see, this is a God who people claim was way ahead of the medical doctors on blood transfusions, who "protected" the Israelites from all sorts of disease by dietary restrictions...and yet - allowed the policies regarding the sexual rape of children to go unchecked for a hundred years? What? The fact that things have (relatively) recently changed means we can excuse history? Seriously?

  • ziddina
    ziddina

    Georgiegirl, the latest I've heard about the way pedophiles are managed in the U.S. - is that it depends on whether the offense occurred in a "reporting" or in a "non-reporting" state...

    In other words, since state laws vary, molestation in a "reporting" state should legally - to avoid those expensive lawsuits - be reported to the police...

    But if the victim is unfortunate enough to live in a "non-reporting" state - one that does NOT require third-party reporting of such crimes - it is likely that the elders will 'handle' the situation privately, and avoid the public embarrassment of a trial of one of "Jehovah's" people...

    Zid

    [Edited to read...] Waitasec. I just tried to find the list of "reporting" states versus "non-reporting" states... How the heck does one look that up? I tried "Silent Lambs" website, but couldn't find the list nor a definition of "reporting" versus "non-reporting"... ????

  • ziddina
    ziddina

    Here is a very interesting link to a study by the Mayo clinic... Under "Reporting", it indicates that ALL states require SUSPECTED cases of pedophilia to be reported... http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/content/82/4/457.full#sec-18

    I am confused. What is this about some states being "non-reporting"????

    Here's another interesting site - according to this site http://www.minddisorders.com/Ob-Ps/Pedophilia.html, "In the United States, about 50% of men arrested for pedophilia are married."

    Now, that's interesting... Here's another site; this one looks the most promising... http://www.smith-lawfirm.com/mandatory_reporting.htm

    All of the above indicate that MANDATORY reporting is required of "professionals"... Perhaps the problem lies with whether a "spiritual" leader, i.e. "elder", is REQUIRED BY LAW to report suspected cases of child molestation???

  • Georgiegirl
    Georgiegirl

    The laws have changed, especially after the Adam Walsh Act. All states now are reporting states. The details vary on what and how it is to be reported.

  • Georgiegirl
    Georgiegirl

    Parts of the AWA are currently under review by the US Supreme Court, btw, for being overbroad and over-reaching and violating civil rights. They have not yet ruled.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit