by punkofnice 49 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
OCrow - I am thrilled with the Royal Commission. I never thought that in my lifetime I would see "Jehovah's representative" have to appear at a public hearing to justify the WTS' abusive policies to the rest of the world.
Yes. Me too.
I just wonder if it's only we ex-JJWs that are interested in the ARC though.
I think it is mainly us punk.
I imagine they will be changing a few things. Like Paul Grundy pointed out in his interview, some of their "new light" changes are money driven via the courts.
I can picture them having women as some kind of auxilliary comfort source while NOT letting them participate in the actual judicial process.
A way of having their cake and eating it too in their own minds. They already use women in the writing of publications, in the Attendance Dept. at Regional s, and on their legal team, so this wouldnt be a stretch really.
punk: I just wonder if it's only we ex-JJWs that are interested in the ARC though.
It may seem like that, at least in the public eye.
However, I am pretty confident that organizations like the Catholic Church are keeping a close eye on these proceedings. What happens with these hearings will impact other organizations besides the JWs. Not only that, but "worldy" people in the legal profession will be watching closely.
Give it time. The results of this hearing may have global impact yet. The WTS is, after all, a global organization. And, with the availiblity of information so easily accessible, things can move quite rapidly in our cyber based world. It isn't 1918 anymore where court transcripts and such take so long to get into the public domain - it happens instantly now.
Why won't they (the WBT$ head honchos), simply change policy on sex offenders? Will they?
If Watchtower history teaches us anything it teaches us that Watchtower changes. That goes for doctrine and policy.
Watchtower's policy on reports of child molestation will change. The only question is how and when will it change.
Based on work of the Royal Commission I predict Watchtower will soon change its policy on at least one fundamental. Rather than only not discouraging victims (or guardians) from reporting to secular authorities I think Watchtower will change its policy to encourage victims (or guardians) to report to secular authorities. This will move Watchtower policy from passive to active when it comes to reporting or not to secular authorities. At this point I see nothing Watchtower has to lose by this change in policy. They can even slough off the change as a "clarification" in order to obfuscate the fact of change to congregation elders.
On the other hand, I think Watchtower would rather not change its policy on when elders report allegation of child molestation. If elders are to always report these allegations I think Watchtower would rather governmental leaders decide that as a matter of public policy (law) to reduce liability to Watchtower in cases where appointed elders bungle up what and when they report something that might end up causing wrongful defamation.
I found a policy shift inside one of the Service Department Guideline documents released to the Royal Commission. It has to do with what local elders should tell parents with children when there is a known child molester in the congregation.
In the past congregation elders were instructed to tell parents they should not let so-and-so associate with their children, but were categorically told not to state why.
The documents released to the Royal Commission has a change. Now elders are instructed to tell parents that so-and-so is a "predator" and for that reason they should not let their children associate with the individual.
marvin: The documents released to the Royal Commission has a change. Now elders are instructed to tell parents that so-and-so is a "predator" and for that reason they should not let their children associate with the individual.
But does not the WTS retain the right to determine who is a "predator" or not? Do they not say that not everyone who is a child sex abuser is a "predator"?
I question the WTS' ability or capacity to determine who is a predator or not.
"I just wonder if it's only we ex-JWs that are interested in the ARC though."
For whatever it's worth. Our "worldly" friends who helped us through the early stages of leaving JW world are really interested. This couple said they normally pick a tv series they haven't watched like "Game of Thrones" to watch during the winter, but they were hooked by the selected short snippets of the ARC that we sent them and plan on watching the commission proceedings first.
The wife is a lawyer so she's especially interested.
Enough voices plaintively crying out in the wilderness cannot help but find sympathetic ears eventually.
And the problem of institutionalized sexual victimization is one that has been clearly demonstrated to affect everyone.
Why won't they (the WBT$ head honchos), simply change policy on sex offenders?
Good Question..
The WBT$ has left the problem for so long..
A lot of WBT$ Sexual Child Abusers have probably risen to Positions of Extreme Importance and Authority..
Some WBT$ Sexual Child Abusers could be WBT$ GB "Rock Star" Popes by now..
.
Would You Trust These "KNOWN" Pedophile Protectors..
............................WITH YOUR CHILDREN?..
..................
........
