by Viviane 30 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Im not sure that assumption is valid. You included far too many variables that are unproven (number of calls, people taking calls) as indicated by your frequent use of the word "assume".
I reached that conclusion in my second post. Keep up,slow poke.
While you were sleeping, I was making assertions and realizing they were wrong. ;)
Jws, obviously i agree that vivs method was flawed and required far to many assumptions but in the end the umber was near identical.
as for taking the repeat rate of sexual predators into acount, the 19 per 1000 includes that by default. Its a flat rate of total reports no matter who the offender was.
I agree its plausible to extrapolate that world wide but im nowhere near as confident. There may well be different rates of offense based on social norms, reporting law may skew data sets etc...
Interestingly close to viv's number of 3240. But my methodology was much better and is therefore valid
In other word, you did lot of work and took me 2 minutes.... (you know I am just funning with ya!)
I was doing this after a lot of no sleep and got excited and ahead of myself.
How do you know your assumptions are anywhere near ballpark or consistent? 4.5 calls/month, 60 years, etc.Based on what, apparently, the worst attorney in all of Australia said. The lawyer for the branch that handles these calls said he personally gets 3-4 calls on child abuse per month.
I'd guess there might also be other demographics at play too that could push those numbers one way or another.
"In other word, you did lot of work and took me 2 minutes.... (you know I am just funning with ya!)
I was doing this after a lot of no sleep and got excited and ahead of myself."
lol i wouldnt call a google search "a lot of work" but i admit im slightly irritate that we both got statistically the same number
Viv: Or more than 3 times the amount we know about.
In Australia alone.
Think about that.
Yes, the numbers that Toole presented don't quite jive. On one hand, he claims that the 1006 cases are correct. But, that works out to about 15 per year - a bit over one a month. And then Toole goes around and says - he hears about 3 to 4 per month. But...apparently the Service Desk are the ones who hear about them...mostly. I guess...
Well, Mr. Toole. Which is it? I have a sense that neither figure is right as to the true magnitude of the chid abuse within the JWs. Assuming that figures collected within the general population can be somewhat taken to be similar within the JWs, American statistics on child abuse point to the following:
http://www.naasca.org/2012-Resources/010812-StaisticsOfChildAbuse.htm
- 20 to 25 percent of all children will be abused during their childhood
- Somewhere between 2/3 and ninety percent of sexual abuse victims never tell !!!
If those statistics even loosely hold up within the JWs, given that the WTS guys are trying to make the case that the cases are actually more exposed by their judicial system and therefore higher, it would be difficult to evaluate the full extent of how many cases there actually are.
Instead of the problem being lower than national averages, however, I would guess that the rates are higher. Justice McClelland has called the Jehovah's Witness environment a "perfect storm" for child abuse to occur.
lol i wouldnt call a google search "a lot of work" but i admit im slightly irritate that we both got statistically the same number
Oh, well, I was just trying to make you sound more impressive. I like my men impressive....(and that's what Fermi estimations are for!)
Fermi Estimates, for those who aren't physics nerds....
I know that pedo's come from all walks of life and beliefs, but I wonder if there is something about the religious institutions that draws them?
Is it the idea of salvation from some outside source? Do people who feel there is someone higher up with the power to forgive anything they do make either pedo's drawn to religion? or religion fosters unaccountability for despicable crimes while obsessing over trivial "sins" and nonsense?
When you don't believe in GOD, you are accountable to yourself, no one is forgiving you for the things you do except you. Does someone who is capable of allowing themselves not to believe in the supreme forgiver of sins also less inclined to be involved in such disgusting abuse?
i don't know, but sometimes when i see these numbers, and think back to my history in the org how much abuse I heard of, that there is something that connects religion and child abusers.
Heaven: I think I'd be in the loony bin if I were hearing about 3-4 cases per month year after year after year! How can these guys even function knowing of this many?!
For sure. Just think of how many times those elders met and discussed just the two cases we have heard of so far? Just two cases, and the meetings and discussions went on and on. For years. A constant schedule of meetings set up with the accuser to try to get him to confess before they could re-instate him. Did nobody stop to think that those judicial meetings were actually an arena for that sick perverted man to hear all about those details all over again? That a confession would mean that his storytime would come to an end? That the judicial process fed his sick addiction? That he liked to hear all about it again...and if he was lucky, from the mouth of his victim?
Estimating the magnitude of the child abuse cases within the JWs is critical. We can extrapolate numbers from national statistics, but those numbers reflect a greater magnitude of harm when applying them to JW victims and how the predator is treated.
JWs are unique in ways that no other groups are - their judicial system feeds the predators' perversions in and of itself. It perpetuates the abuse, allowing for a greater rate of abuse within the JWs.
freemindfade: i don't know, but sometimes when i see these numbers, and think back to my history in the org how much abuse I heard of, that there is something that connects religion and child abusers.
Estimates of rates of abuse have to take that correlation into consideration and account for it, if possible.
I have been listening to the hearings and scratching my head as to why BCH was so persistent in reapplying for reinstatement over and over again. He had to know full well that repentance (confession) was key to him being approved. So why did he not confess? The only reason I can think of is that he didn't want the judicial meetings to stop. And what happens at those meetings? All those details are talked about. He gets his jollies off just listening to others talk about his crimes.
He denies the crimes. And gets another hearing. A place to re-tell his crimes.
That, I believe, is one of the contributors to expecting the JW numbers for predator rates to be much higher than national average. The "confession" process is flawed at a fundamental level.
fmf said: I know that pedo's come from all walks of life and beliefs, but I wonder if there is something about the religious institutions that draws them?
Just from my understanding of JW world, there is a level of trust that is given without any checks once a person is in. It is the worldly people, one's outside the group that are suspect, NOT the ones within. This is PERFECT for pedos. AND to top it off, in the JW religion, all you have to do is be repentant and you're allowed to stay and do it all over again.
OC, you make a very valid observation about feeding the cycle. Makes you wonder if many of the elders on the committees are also pedos. Not sure how these guys can stomach this stuff.
