A "reduction of rules" is it the only way the WTBS can eliminate culpability?

by darthfader 10 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  darthfader

  How best can the WTBS alter it's rules or eliminate "enforcement" by making everything a "conscience matter"?

  What do you think is the likely outcome?

  cheers!
• 

  cedars

  darthfader - if you're referring to the handling of child abuse - NOTHING is really a "conscience matter". It's a simply matter of "do we comply with the law or not". The law requires elders to report cases of child abuse to the authorities. The Society prevents them from doing this by insisting on acting as a legal intermediary. The reason for this is that not all allegations of child abuse satisfy the "two witness" rule. In fact, given the very nature of child abuse, the majority of cases don't satisfy the "two witness" rule! Still, the Society wants control, hence the reason why they insist on being the first point of contact.

  The only way the Society can eliminate culpability is by dropping the "two witness" rule, or at least the application thereof to reporting child abuse. I was reading the court transcripts of the witnesses during the trial, and one witness gave an excellent analogy, which went something like this: if a murder is committed, and only one person sees the murderer "do it" and calls the elders, the elders will not hesitate to contact the police, or urge the witness to do this. In such a scenario, the "two witness" rule has been discarded - so why not also the reporting of child abuse?

  Of course, the Society will never drop this policy, because if they were that way inclined they would have done so already. I can see them fighting to the death over this. That's effectively what they've been doing over the past 20 years if you ask Barbara Anderson.

  Cedars
• 

  criticalwitness

  have christians grow to spiritual maturity! i wouldnt even know what that would look like. its funny because you alone are responsible for youre decisions before god so why is someone else making them for you? guiding some one and demanding someone do something are two different things. they will not give up that control the guilt trip and power they gain by having confessions.
• 

  Sulla

  cedars, do you know where the trial transcripts can be found? I've read through some of the motions filed in the case, but think the transcripts would be interesting to read. Thanks very much.
• 

  cedars

  Hi Sulla, I'm trying to find the forum thread with the link that I downloaded the files from.

  Please bear with me!!

  Cedars
• 

  cedars

  Ah-ha! I think I've found the download link in my browser history.

  Try this (beware, it's a huge folder, and you'll need winRAR to unzip it): https://cdn.anonfiles.com/1339876261245.zip

  Also, be warned that some of the stuff that comes out in the trial is stomach churning. Definitely not for the faint-hearted.

  Anyway, let me know if it works.

  Cedars
• 

  00DAD

  The problem is that the WTBTS somehow thinks they are "above the law," which is a dangerous place for any individual or organization to be.

  Their behavior and/or position on this matter would not be tolerated in any other area of life where adults in a position of trust and authority have children in their care.

  Two words: Mandated Reporters:

  In many U.S. states and Australia, mandated reporters are professionals who, in the ordinary course of their work and because they have regular contact with children, disabled persons, senior citizens, or other identified vulnerable populations, are required to report (or cause a report to be made) whenever financial, physical, sexual or other types of abuse has been observed or is suspected, or when there is evidence of neglect, knowledge of an incident, or an imminent risk of serious harm. For example, in South Australia, a school teacher must report a child attending school seeming malnourished or presenting with bruising, complaining of neglect or otherwise demonstrating neglect or abuse at home, to child welfare authorities.

  These professionals can be held liable by both the civil and criminal legal systems for intentionally failing to make a report but their name can also be said unidentified. Mandated reporters also include persons who have assumed full or intermittent responsibility for the care or custody of a child, dependent adult, or elder, whether or not they are compensated for their services. RAINN maintains a database of mandatory reporting regulations regarding children and the elderly by state, including who is required to report, standards of knowledge, definitions of a victim, to whom the report must be made, information required in the report, and regulations regarding timing and other procedures.

  Mandatory Reporters of Child Abuse and Neglect: Summary of State Laws

  All States, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have statutes identifying persons who are required to report child maltreatment under specific circumstances.

  Privileged Communications: Mandatory reporting statutes also may specify when a communication is privileged. "Privileged communications" is the statutory recognition of the right to maintain confidential communications between professionals and their clients, patients, or congregants. To enable States to provide protection to maltreated children, the reporting laws in most States and territories restrict this privilege for mandated reporters. All but three States and Puerto Rico currently address the issue of privileged communications within their reporting laws, either affirming the privilege or denying it (i.e., not allowing privilege to be grounds for failing to report).7 For instance:

  • The physician-patient and husband-wife privileges are the most common to be denied by States.
  • The attorney-client privilege is most commonly affirmed.
  • The clergy-penitent privilege is also widely affirmed, although that privilege usually is limited to confessional communications and, in some States, denied altogether

  It is both interesting and informative to note that one potential conflict is concerning clergy-penitent privilege. While this is a recognized conflict, it most assuredly does NOT apply when it is the VICTIM that reports the wrongdoing to a "clergy" member as is usually the case in the congregations of JWs.

  I'm a secondary school teacher in the United States. As such, I don't even have a choice about what to do if I even SUSPECT a student of mine is being abused physically, emotionally or sexually: I am legally obligated (mandated) to report it. If I do not then I too can face criminal prosecution.

  The WTBTS, as all other religions, should not be exempt from this clear law designed to protect the most innocent of victims: children.

  00DAD
• 

  darthfader

  Cedars good point. I was also thinking about them dropping the "Two Witness" rule (along with the myriad other rules thay have). It seems to me that by placing themselves (elders and other "spiritually advanced brothers") as judges, jury and executioners (disfellopshippers), they reaise the possibility of being held responsible when they make bad decisions.

  They have to either get out of the rule making business or suffer the backlash when they are incorrect.

  I certianly hope that a 28M Judgement causes them to pause and look for the more "christian" way to inflict their principles upon others. cheers!
• 

  Sulla

  Good Christ! 135 meg! Thanks, cedars.
• 

  skeeter1

  i heard that the Baptist coalition exerts very little control over its preachers/churches. Each church act autonomously, down to prparation of the service and material covered. The Baptist coalition does not keep files of sex offenders or followers at their hq, & this shields them from liability.