The minister/communicant privilege does not apply to Jehovah's Witnesses, because investigation/judicial committes always involve at least two elders, if not more, and correspondence regarding the communicant is sent to JW HQ.
The "Secrecy Policy
by Celestial 58 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
lisaBObeesa
What should change??
How about changing the part where the elders tell the family they can't tell anyone in the congregation about what happened?
How about the elders going straight to the police?
How about that, for a start?
-
Celestial
What should change??
How about changing the part where the elders tell the family they can't tell anyone in the congregation about what happened?
How about the elders going straight to the police?
How about that, for a start?
The elders can't make announcements about illegal activities and it shouldn't be discussed in the congregation. If any action is to be taken outside the Christian arrangement concerning a matter like this, it would involve going to the police. That's why the government has established mandatory reporting laws.
Under this arrangement, the elders can go to the police with impunity. If a congregation members are concerned about the fact that the elders contacted the police or they don't like the outcome of the subsequent police investigation, whatever that outcome may be, they can take it up with their local congressman, because as a “mandated reporter,” an elder had no choice but to report the matter.
It may be, that the elders do contact the police in response to this issue, even if the law doesn't require them to. In the early 1990's, the elders contacted CPS about man going from congregation to congregation that was abusing his children. It was actually pretty horrifying to learn about the matter, because you would think he was normal person if you talked to him at the Kingdom Hall just to learn that behind the scenes, he was a sick-o. I could have actually done without learning of the matter as there was really nothing I could do about it.
What's stated in Jehovah's Witnesses protection policy and what goes on in their congregations may at times be two different things, but as a minimum standard, their policy is compliant with the Christian arrangement and compliant with the law. -
JWdaughter
Just a point about the Conti case and similar ones: Why the HELL are mothers speaking to elders about their husbands touching their young daughters breasts? If it is innocent, they sure as HELL would not be speaking to anyone. If any mother knew or could reasonably construe that it was, there is NO way they would bring it up to anyone (we have all been (truly) inadvertantly touched, and we have all been DELIBERATELY touched and we know the difference. We do not take people to court for brushing up against us in a crowd. A man deliberately (and we know it was) touching a young girls breast should not be given a discussion by a religous leader-while it is a character issue, it is first a criminal issue.
EVERY person in EVERY church that knows of or experiences abuse should be told to go to the legal authorities first and then seek spiritual help. NOT to let the religions off the hook (although it would cut out a LOT of crap in the world), but to protect the children/women/men who are victims.
People need to stop treating sexual abuse as if it is a moral faiiling first. It is a CRIMINAL ACT. If they need spiritual help, they should get it-after they report to the police or DFS (I suggest the police as I am not sure what kind of games social services might play since they are so interested in "keeping families together".
-
Knowsnothing
Here's a question. Given that in the congregation it is considered of first and foremost importance to "obey God above men", who get's the priority on confession of child molestation, the congregation (the elders), or the authorities? Obviously the authorities, but according to Celestial's logic...
In view of the above statements, congregation elders can do little next to nothing to aid and abet law-enforcement by collecting information from their congregants. At best, they can route information to the respective authorities, but ultimately, an eyewitness has to cooperate with the authorities and corroborate their observations in a court of law. In all practicality, it shows initiative on the part of an eyewitness to contact the authorities from the onset.
The only other way an elder would know anything is if a molester voluntarily confesses something to an elder.Eyewitness corroboration isn't the the only testimony available. Depending on the length of time that has passed since being abused, forensical analysis is useful as well. Of course, forensics doesn't apply to this case.
“For Plaintiffs expert to be allowed to provide her opinion that churches must report "confirmed" child abuse to parents, other adults, and public officials, the Court must rule that her opinion is now the law in California, and the California Clergy-Penitent Privilege is no longer good law.”
I agree with this. The Clergy-Penitent Privilege must be taken down, or at least have an amendment added that makes an exception for punable acts. Of course, how do JWs even get to have a say if they can't even vote....
If the Clergy-Penitent Privilege is destroyed on behalf of Jehovah's Witnesses, they'll have no means to “ID these people” through the process of confession.
Confession need not be the only way to "ID these people". Besides, if the elders cannot inform the congregation of the specific actions of an individual, then how exactly does confession lead to the congregation's need to guard their children from the perpetrator?
What about Jehovah's Witnesses child protection policy do you want to change?
Stop the two witness rule. Children are vulnerable, and abuse can go on indefinitely, so long as it's only a child's word vs. an adult's.
If someone confesses, that should be the last time abuse can ever come from that person. Obviously going by the books isn't going to cut it, and there needs to be a much more robust system to prevent this from happening after the first reported offense.
-
diamondiiz
JWs are conditioned (programmed) to first approach the elders, elders in turn are told to contact wts legal department and go from there. There is no fucking excuse for elder to contact wts FIRST when he learns of a crime against humanity, be it rape murder or child abuse. Elders have no training to do any sort of investigation let alone decide if the individual is safe to be in the midst of the congregation without proper investigation.
People should stop excusing the cult and get their heads out of their ass and see it for what it is. On one hand wts tells the public they have an aggressive policy regards to child abuse and then they say that if the accused denies the allegation and there is no two witnesses they can't do anything about it. These assholes don't need to do anything more then pickup the bloody phone and call the authorities and wait for their investigation and then decide whether to df or not the individual at that point. But this would cause the problem in that if individual was found guilty by the authorities he would be named a JW pedophile while if they can df before that takes place they can say he was df and wasn't a JW so really JW congregations are clean of these sort of men.
People can argue that laws were different at the time, or this and that, but the bottom line is that morally sound leaders would have made the right call and if the police didn't do anything about it then if cases surface later in time, the organization could have pointed to the fact that the authorities were called and didn't do anything about it. Here were have a reactive organization after the fact trying to cover their ass, and not only that they make it statements that the authorities are notified in the states where it's the law for them crime to be reported but what about the states, provinces or countries where the law doesn't require reporting? I guess they aren't under a moral obligation to report it! This goes for wife abuse or any other crime.
-
LongHairGal
Celestial:
I am of the opinion that what you believe about the religion's policy is what is circulated for JW public consumption, designed to placate the average JWs in the halls that the religion is doing all it can to comply with the law, etc., and naturally everybody there buys it - hook, line and sinker. The few JW friends I have there believe this in their hearts.
HOWEVER, the REAL story comes out WHEN an active JW has to face this ugly issue first hand, either because it happens to their child or a close friend in the hall.
THEN THEY WILL SEE HOW THINGS REALLY WORK.
-
civicsi00
Celestial:
Question for you: Have you ever been sexually abused? If not, then how can you POSSIBLY believe that the policy as set forth by the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witness is set up to PROTECT those that have been abused?
Another question: Why is it that THOUSANDS of people have stood up and shouted that the policy set forth DID NOT PROTECT THEM?
-
00DAD
Celestial, you are a wonderful JW. I'm sure Jehovah is very proud of you for defending the WTBTS.
The rest of us here are concerned about the innocent victims, a concept that neither YOU nor the Pharisees running the WTBTS seem to understand.
I have a bit of advice for you: Go fuck yourself. Don't worry, it's not a disfellowshipping offense. Go ask André if you don't believe me.
00DAD
-
OUTLAW
What's stated in Jehovah's Witnesses protection policy and what goes on in their congregations may at times be two different things,
but as a minimum standard, their policy is compliant with the Christian arrangement and compliant with the law..Celestial
There is no JW Protection policy..Theres a WBT$ "Protect the Child Molester" policy..
If the WBT$ was Compliant with the Law..
There wouldn`t be a 28 million dollar judgement against the WBT$ for Protecting Child Molesters..
You Suck at Lying for the WBT$..
And..
You support a Corrupt WBT$ Organization and the Child Molesters they Protect..
Congratulations..
You win the JWN ..
..........................
...OUTLAW
