ARC Analysis Summary of Case Files
I do believe that in some jurisdictions where it requires elders to report the matter, the must and should. In jurisdictions where it gives the option to report or not, they should encourage the family to report and if they choose not to report, then the elders should report.
So last year there was a letter to all BOE, that EVERY Damage to property and burglary (at kingdomhalls) should be reportet immediately to the police.
Why not such a letter because of a much worse crime???
It's a CRIME - not "only a sin" - and every crime has to be reported.
That should be the WT policy.
The OP made this statement:
But it seems like over half of the cases that the ARC is looking at happened within the family of the perpetrator. Certainly, many would contest that they could have done more after the fact to support the victim and ensure that the offender went to jail, but sadly probably very little could have been done to prevent that terrible act.
I disagree with that persons' position/opinion/perspective.
The OP presents that apparent distribution of sexual crimes being within families as an apology or rational for the appearance of this sexual crime within the JW religion.
And yes, it is an apologetic stance. Any sentence that starts with "but" is going to present an apparent reason for an anomaly occurring.
I have been aware that the pattern of sex abuse within the JWs occurs systemically - it happens at all levels, within and outside of that sanctified family circle. The WT has taken, for many decades, the legal position that the family unit is sacred. They have fought many legal battles on that principle and have taken that stand in their battle to have it ethical for parents to refuse life saving medical treatments for their children.
The factors that foster a climate of familial abuse are varied and the WTS is responsible for contributing to the problem. The numbers that we have available that point to this phenomena, that over half of the cases are familial, reveal that the WTS is aware of this too. Of course they are.
And yet what did they do right after the ARC started? They released a video for 'educational' purposes that was shown to parents and children that depicted the abuser as a stranger, a monster. And, the children were instructed to "tell their parents first". Really? The WTS, through the use of this video, reveals that they are reinforcing familial abuse, not preventing it.
The WTS wants to keep the family unit as a closed, sealed unit, where the parents (AKA parents who follow the WTS orders/rules) have full control and power over minor children. It is that ideology and practice that fosters and maintains familial sexual abuse.
I wonder that too why it was not reported if they were not JW members. That is why I don't agree with the feeling that the allegations are not reported "to protect Jehovah's name" as some have made the assertion of. Here clearly there would be no detriment to the organization name or reputation by just having a victim of child abuse amongst its membership and not a perpetrator. I think that they honestly feel that keeping a members confidential communication confidential is important. I may disagree with that think, because I feel that they should report it still, as long as the law doesn't bar them from reporting it. Could it be that they encouraged at least these victims to report the matter to the police I am not sure, and really no one here was in the room at the time that this was discussed with the victims in question so we don't know one way or another. But certainly they should have at a minimum strongly encouraged the victims to report it and if not report it themselves.
It should be noted, and you can be as skeptical as you want with what Watchtower says but they do indicate (Dates indicated were as of July 20, 2015):
In the last six months in South Australia, elders have been directed to report three separate instances of alleged child sexual abuse (two of which concerned sexting) to the secular authorities using the Child Abuse Report line.
In Victoria, the elders were directed to report a matter to the police involving a sexual offence committed against a 15 year old. Additionally, last year in Victoria, the elders were directed to report a matter involving child sexual abuse unless they could satisfy themselves that the matter had already been reported to the police.
Of course the timing of those reporting cases could be indicated by the fact that they were going to be investigated by ARC but at the very least the ARC is forcing Watchtower Australia to report it which is a benefit and not a determinant to law enforcement.
I am not going to get into an argument over this. My assertion in saying that they were familial cases of abuse was that, they did not gain access to their victims by their association with a congregation. I did state that the Elders should have reported the matter to the police and done a better job of supporting the victim. I made that statement to indicate that unfortunently, those victims would likely have been abused no matter what religious or secular association that the perpetrator was associated with.
If I remember the statement it refers to people who committed an act(s) of abuse Before they became a JW. To wit: "
- 95 of the alleged child abusers were not Jehovah’s Witnesses when they committed their first sexual abuse
The implication is that after this act they became a JW however I am not sure that having gotten a taste for Child sexual abuse they didn't continue to be an abuser even after they became a JW.
To the point of not reporting to 'protect Jehovah's made up name' Of course that and the two witness rule was the rational for not reporting.It wasn't a mistake 3000 plus Elders didn't report it was the Policy not to report.
Even at this late date the Society still requires a phone call to them first to see if the law is mandated in whatever state or area of the country the abuse took place. Meanwhile the child goes unprotected. They consistently demonstrate the inability to call this area of abuse as a crime.
If a person repents the act of abuse how important is repenting if there was no punishment?
Yet if a fire or crime is committed on the property of the JW's they are to call the police or fire dept. immediately.
It's hard to get away from the fact that a damaged KH chair is to be cared for immediately while an abused child is left exposed.
For people who were abused by family members or others within the congregation, if the elders knew about it and did nothing to involve the authorities, they were complicit in allowing the abuse to continue. Did you even consider that in a family setting if abuse was stopped by putting the offender in jail other children in the household would not be abused? I find it disgusting that you suggest otherwise.
Giordano: If you have a reference for the belief that these "not a JW member", meant that it was they were not JWs at the time that would be interesting to see. But it could also be that a child of a JW was molested by a teacher, other relative, stranger or a number of other aspects, and the Elders reported it to the Branch for record keeping purposes only. It could be the case that it was that it just applies to those that committed the crime prior to becoming a JW, but that is why I ask because there is no indication in the analysis that I am reading.
Again I never said that they were right in not reporting it to the police or at the very least strongly encouraging that family report it. I just said that they did not gain access to the victims because they were associated with a congregation.
But in many cases they continued to have access to the victim and other household victims due to the elders inaction.