tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post4505308740930115041..comments2023-12-16T16:17:43.886+00:00Comments on Fr Ray Blake's Blog: Trouble with PriestsFr Ray Blakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05584140126211527252noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-12217205549733257952011-06-27T19:28:28.196+01:002011-06-27T19:28:28.196+01:00@Mr West
Where in my statements have I endeavoure...@Mr West<br /><br />Where in my statements have I endeavoured to justify abuse and I am a Catholic? Where is there a statement from a serving Catholic bishop justifying abuse or indeed the Pope himself? This charge is absurd. I am a victim of abuse in a case documented in the Westminster archives with dates and names provided on request. It is unreasonable to suggest that I am justifying abuse or that any attempt was made to justify the abuse to me by any Catholic cleric. Furthermore, where in the Murphy report does Dr. Murphy quote one single authority who justifes sexual abuse?<br /><br />You have made unsubstantiated claims which you fail to back up with any empirical evidence and I am left concluding that it is not the Catholic Church which holds itself to "a higher standard than the rest of society" but YOU.Sadie Vacantisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04823532366874114366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-39513838689628903062011-06-27T19:28:09.864+01:002011-06-27T19:28:09.864+01:00@Mr West
Where in my statements have I endeavoure...@Mr West<br /><br />Where in my statements have I endeavoured to justify abuse and I am a Catholic? Where is there a statement from a serving Catholic bishop justifying abuse or indeed the Pope himself? This charge is absurd. I am a victim of abuse in a case documented in the Westminster archives with dates and names provided on request. It is unreasonable to suggest that I am justifying abuse or that any attempt was made to justify the abuse to me by any Catholic cleric. Furthermore, where in the Murphy report does Dr. Murphy quote one single authority who justifes sexual abuse?<br /><br />You have made unsubstantiated claims which you fail to back up with any empirical evidence and I am left concluding that it is not the Catholic Church which holds itself to "a higher standard than the rest of society" but YOU.Sadie Vacantisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04823532366874114366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-44504164938596894142011-06-27T18:13:17.666+01:002011-06-27T18:13:17.666+01:00Nicholas Bellord/Jonathan West
In the hypothetical...Nicholas Bellord/Jonathan West<br />In the hypothetical case you were dicussing might not the confessor kill or otherwise "incapacitate" the abuser to protect the victim without violating the seal of the confessional as long as he then paid the penalty for murder/gbh without revealing the abuse in mitigation?Timnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-91343530005325498712011-06-27T11:19:42.418+01:002011-06-27T11:19:42.418+01:00Sadie
Would a similar study of British state run ...Sadie<br /><br /><i>Would a similar study of British state run institiutions from the period elicit different results?</i><br /><br />Possibly not. But then the British state isn't trying to justify past abuses, and it is open about the need to make changes to improve things each time a failure is uncovered.<br /><br />Studying the past has no purpose unless you are going to use it as a guide to doing differently and better in the future.<br /><br />It seems to me that your approach to this is that you are studying the past in order to reinforce the conclusion that the Catholic Church wasn't really all that bad, and so nothing needs to be changed about it.<br /><br />And yet, the abuse scandals have happened, all over the place. Even if we were for the sake of argument to accept the hypothesis that the church is being held to a higher standard than the rest of society. It is a standard the church has set ofr itself, and if priests fall below that standard, and bishops and archbishops cover it up putting the reputation of the church ahead of the welfare of children, then a scandal is the obvious and inevitable consequence when it finally does come to light. <br /><br />So better procedures to detect and prevent abuse are going to be necessary anyway. Might as well get on with it. Fr Ray could make a start by publishing the safeguarding procedures for his own parish on the parish website.Jonathan Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00527063732905729010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-16849043741831906512011-06-27T11:01:44.098+01:002011-06-27T11:01:44.098+01:00Jonathan:
I have looked up the relevant Canon Law...Jonathan:<br /><br />I have looked up the relevant Canon Law and there seems to be no exception to the rule against breaking the seal of confession - viz 983,984 & 1388. Perhaps someone more erudite would like to comment on this but I am afraid I can see the point of the rule. I suspect such dilemmas are very rare and one has to keep a sense of proportion. The importance of confession as a channel of God's grace may indeed trump preventing a crime. There are tough decisions to be made in choosing the lesser of two evils and a study of ethics does help to illustrate that.<br /><br />Further a good confession and a firm purpose of amendment may be sufficient to prevent further abuse in a way that nothing else may in particular circumstances.<br /><br />As a lawyer, I believe that one of the greatest modern heresies is that one can make a perfect society by laws, regulations and procedures whilst ignoring the personal responsibility of individuals for sins. The development of a sound conscience and the use of confession is crucial to this.<br /><br />Nicolas Bellordsantoeusebiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07032325567755620919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-79567770148125178032011-06-27T07:59:21.202+01:002011-06-27T07:59:21.202+01:00@Mr West
What the Murphy report demonstrates is ...@Mr West <br /><br />What the Murphy report demonstrates is the failure of the rehabilitation programs. You have produced no evidence that Church sponsored program were any worse than their secular equivalents. We know about the Church programs because the Church "opened the books" to which Dr. Murphy had access.<br /><br />Another feature of the Irish report is that it failed to provide any socio-economic, socio-historical or socio-historical context as to its findings i.e. the Irish Church was a one-stop shop for ALL social services, namely penal (young offenders institutions), health and education following the foundation of the Irish Free State in the early 1920's. Would a similar study of British state run institiutions from the period elicit different results?Sadie Vacantisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04823532366874114366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-89741374369251523782011-06-26T19:09:52.172+01:002011-06-26T19:09:52.172+01:00Nicolas
In practice, we would need to find out wh...Nicolas<br /><br />In practice, we would need to find out whether any abusing priests had confessed their abuse, and then gone on to abuse again because no action (or inadequate action) was taken to keep the abuser away from children.<br /><br />We are unlikely to find out, because the church is most unlikely to permit the necessary research to take place, because to even conduct the research would require breaking the seal of confession to some degree.<br /><br />So if that is going to be unthinkable, then if children are to be adequately protected, then the confessor has to have some means of acting to keep the abuser away from children in a way that does not break the seal of confession.<br /><br />And if no such course of action is available, then you are placing the seal of confession above the safety of children. There are no words that could express the contempt in which I would hold such a system of morality.Jonathan Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00527063732905729010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-22111887198074977842011-06-26T19:03:14.863+01:002011-06-26T19:03:14.863+01:00Sadie
Quite frankly, the absolute levels don'...Sadie<br /><br />Quite frankly, the absolute levels don't matter either. What matters is that <i>avoidable</i> cases of abuse don't happen, i.e. abuse which is perpetrated by somebody already known to be an abuser.<br /><br />And we need look no further than the Murphy Report for a thorough investigation which demonstrates beyond all possible doubt that this has happened many, many times.Jonathan Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00527063732905729010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-71069207427879900022011-06-26T12:20:52.070+01:002011-06-26T12:20:52.070+01:00Jonathan: I think we are getting into very deep w...Jonathan: I think we are getting into very deep waters when we talk about "a person's sexuality and sexual drives are not under conscious control (otherwise he wouldn't have abused in the first place)".<br /><br />I believe that we are not automatons and though we may have involuntary sexual desires which may be temptations to evil we should develop conscious control over those desires. Once you become orientated to a particular habit it may be incredibly difficult to change one's ways (I think St Augustine says as much) but with the help of the grace of God we surely believe that such is possible. The first port of call in getting that grace is surely confession and I would have thought that the confessor would recommend or even insist that the sinner remove himself from the occasion of sin before giving absolution (how many times are sins retained by priests these days?). <br /><br />However this is where I think we will have to disagree over the seal of confession which in my mind must be absolute - if it is not then you are going to deter people from going to confession and receiving that grace which helps them to resist future temptation. You should also receive the guidance of a good priest.<br /><br />I think you have to balance matters here - to destroy the seal of confession would be a graver matter than continuing abuse. It would be a situation where you have to choose between two evils.<br /><br />I do get the feeling that you regard paedophiles as irredeemable and unforgivable by either God or man and once a paedophile always a paedophile.<br /><br />As to modernism and liberalism I do believe they bear some responsibility. These are mortal sins, which we are talking about, which separate us from God and if we were to die in such a state one goes to Hell. Yet to-day that is regarded as an old-fashioned idea and we hear that the concept of mortal sin was just invented to frighten us, that we do not need to confess such and confessing "serious sins" (whatever is meant by that) once a year (Kieran Conry) is sufficient. We have also had the theory of the fundamental option i.e. that my long term aim is good but I cannot help myself now so it is okay ("Make me chaste but not yet").<br /><br />Nicolas Bellord<br /><br />P.S. Just to back a bit I would have suggested to Mgr Dooley in respect of matters told him in confidence (NOT in the confessional) that there is a legal saying "There is no confidence in iniquity".santoeusebiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07032325567755620919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-88372867664777392712011-06-26T09:10:41.721+01:002011-06-26T09:10:41.721+01:00@Mr West
I produced these figures for the benefit...@Mr West<br /><br />I produced these figures for the benefit of MF. Your claim that there are more victims per catholic priest than other sex offenders - can you substantiate this claim with evidence that can withstand "penetrating questions" in respect of its research methodology?Sadie Vacantisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04823532366874114366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-45105840799268778382011-06-25T17:53:42.861+01:002011-06-25T17:53:42.861+01:00Nicolas
i suspect that much depends on the view o...Nicolas<br /><br />i suspect that much depends on the view of the confessor as to the likelihood that further crimes will be committed.<br /><br />Given that the person's sexuality and sexual drives are often not under conscious control (otherwise he wouldn't have abused in the first place) the assumption has to be that the risk of reoffending is very high.<br /><br />It seems that under such circumstances, the seal of confession, if kept, would quite likely result in more children coming to harm.<br /><br />You might regard that as an acceptable outcome. I do not. I question a system of morality that would put confessional confidentiality above the rape of children.Jonathan Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00527063732905729010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-76189066515254180572011-06-25T17:48:59.199+01:002011-06-25T17:48:59.199+01:00Sadie
Even if the numbers you describe for propro...Sadie<br /><br />Even if the numbers you describe for proprotions of priests against whom there have been credible complaints are true (and I can think of several penetrating questions to ask about the research methodology), this still entirely misses the point.<br /><br />What matters is not the number of priests against whom complaints have been made, but rather the number of victims they had a chance to get at before they were stopped.<br /><br />The problem for the Catholic Church is that in too many cases that number has been allowed to become scandalously high, because of the failures of the senior leaders within the church.Jonathan Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00527063732905729010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-30922293449255371742011-06-25T15:18:46.539+01:002011-06-25T15:18:46.539+01:00Jonathan: I would tend to think that your solutio...Jonathan: I would tend to think that your solution for case 3 is breaking the seal of the confession. After all I am not sure that there is a moral obligation to confess one's crimes to the Police. In one's enthusiasm to nail abusers I think one must be careful not to go overboard.<br /><br />Nicolas Bellordsantoeusebiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07032325567755620919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-50191677789275962352011-06-25T13:03:22.271+01:002011-06-25T13:03:22.271+01:00@Mf
http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/j/p/jpj1/...@Mf<br /><br />http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/j/p/jpj1/vita.htm<br /><br />Jenkins said "a bold and thorough self-study" of clergy misconduct was done by the Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago in the early 1990s. It looked at every priest who had served in the archdiocese for the past 40 years -- some 2,200 individuals -- and "reopened every internal complaint ever made against these men." <br /><br />"The standard of evidence applied was not legal proof that would stand up in a court of law, but just the consensus that a particular charge was probably justified," he wrote. "By this low standard, the survey found that about 40 priests -- about 1.8 percent of the whole -- were probably guilty of misconduct with minors at some point in their careers. <br /><br />"Put another way, no evidence existed against about 98 percent of parish clergy, the overwhelming majority of the group," he added. <br /><br />In the Post-Gazette article, Jenkins said he is "in no sense soft on the issue of child abuse" and "cannot be called a Catholic apologist, since I am not even a Catholic." <br /><br />If you look further into the reserach, of the 40 priests against whom credible complaints have been made, nearly all the victims were not "children" - as in pre-pubescent adolescents, but mostly behaviour familiar to anyone educated in a private school in Britain.<br /><br />The assumption is made that anyone who makes this sort of presentation is doing so as part of an apologetics schema. No, it is simply to explain the nature and scope of the problem.Sadie Vacantisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04823532366874114366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-39033137810752833512011-06-25T12:04:19.746+01:002011-06-25T12:04:19.746+01:00Nicolas
In case 1 that you describe, the London C...Nicolas<br /><br />In case 1 that you describe, the London Child Protection Procedures specifies that the <i>employer</i> must immediately inform the LADO of any allegation of abuse, whether or not there is criminality involved. Therefore, if Mgr Dooley had been informed of abuse by another priest, then he should have reported it immediately to whoever was responsible for safeguarding within his local parish or diocese, and they should have immediately informed the authorities.<br /><br />In case 2, the seal of the confessional doesn't apply, and so this comes under the same principle as case 1, it is a report or allegation of abuse, and must be passed on to the authorities.<br /><br />In case 3, given what we know know of the behaviour of paedophiles, absolution most definitely should be withheld unless and until the priest has demonstrated true penitence and a determination not to let it happen again. Given the harm that has been done to the victims, demonstrating penitence probably involves repeating the confession at the local police station.Jonathan Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00527063732905729010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-86291540291666333272011-06-25T09:14:12.054+01:002011-06-25T09:14:12.054+01:00@ Sadie V
Still no details on the Chicago study c...@ Sadie V<br /><br />Still no details on the Chicago study cited.<br /><br />@Father Ray<br /><br />Thank you for your original post and the mostly valuable comments it has produced.<br />As the scandal fades from media scrutiny I believe your blog has made some contribution to the debate and, hopefully, light has been thrown on methods of dealing with these continuing crimes.MFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-61635571048824342942011-06-24T20:38:58.517+01:002011-06-24T20:38:58.517+01:00@Mr West
If you look at my list from a previous ...@Mr West<br /><br />If you look at my list from a previous contribution, I make a few points which in no way reflect the caricature you portray or resort to anything approaching a rhetorical style. Either the Murphy report or Dr. Judith Reisman (something of a guru in these matters) confirm my points. <br /><br />As a victim of abuse myself, in a case documented by the Westminster archives, I have no agenda in this discussion. I simply endeavour to state the truth. Please feel free to challenge me on those points I have made in a rational and understandable manner.Sadie Vacantisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04823532366874114366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-72937996209929634812011-06-24T15:46:06.985+01:002011-06-24T15:46:06.985+01:00Jonathan West: I was thinking of a slightly diffe...Jonathan West: I was thinking of a slightly different context i.e. if a client e.g. a religious order came to me, as a Solicitor, for advice on an abuse case then I would advise immediate reporting to the police if there was criminality. One would also advise them to follow whatever procedures there were.<br /><br />The interview with Mgr Dooley referred to by donk raised a number of issues & three different situations:<br /><br />1. A parent goes to a priest to complain. Again if there is criminality surely the priest should tell the parent to go to the police and if necessary offer to accompany them. If the parent won't then surely the priest should. Mgr Dooley did not seem to agree.<br /><br />2. An abuser goes to the priest and tells him of his abuse. Even if the abuser has asked for it to be in confidence I do not think the priest would be bound by that confidence in the case of criminality and probability of repeated abuse. Mgr Dooley thought differently.<br /><br />3. An abuser goes to confession to a priest and tells him about the abuse. Would not the priest refuse absolution unless he was satisfied with a firm purpose of amendment and that the abuser will remove himself from the occasion of sin e.g. leave the school? Could the priest do more? I suppose not but perhaps some priest could enlighten us.<br /><br />It seemed to me that the interview failed to distinguish between these 3 cases.<br /><br />Nicolas Bellordsantoeusebiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07032325567755620919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-85175482803727430992011-06-24T14:36:55.120+01:002011-06-24T14:36:55.120+01:00Is this a record? Fifty-six comments and counting...Is this a record? Fifty-six comments and counting...<br />Shows the depth of feeling on this ghastly subject.<br />Regards.Marienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-24104596348406827262011-06-24T14:32:41.369+01:002011-06-24T14:32:41.369+01:00Nicholas Bellord
What you have described is not g...Nicholas Bellord<br /><br />What you have described is not good safeguarding practice. When an allegation of abuse comes in, for instance in a school context, the <i>first</i> thing you should do is pass it to the LADO, whether or not the abuse if substantiated would amount to a criminal offence. That is because the LADO knows how to go about investigating, and will not be burdened by preconceptions of what a splendid fellow XYZ is.<br /><br />If the LADO thinks there is a need for a criminal investigation, the LADO will call in the police.<br /><br />But abuse short of a criminal act also needs to be looked at. For instance, if a teacher were reported to have got a number of sixth-form girls individually into his office alone with him and quizzed them on what they got up to with their boyfriends, that's not illegal if no touching occurred. But it would certainly require investigation, as it would be a possible indicator that the teacher had an unhealthy sexual interest in the girls, and that he was therefore a threat to the safety of children.<br /><br />If the investigation concluded that, the teacher wouldn't be charged with any criminal offence, but he might well be dismissed. If he was dismissed, the school would have a statutory duty to report the matter to the Independent Safeguarding Authority, and the ISA would then take a view as to whether the teacher should be placed on "List 99", the list of those considered unsuitable to work with children.<br /><br />A List 99 entry would show up if the teacher applied for a job at any other school - List 99 checks have been mandatory for teachers since long before CRB checks were introduced.<br /><br />But this whole system only works if two things happen<br /><br />1. That allegations of abuse are actually reported to the civil authorities, and<br /><br />2. Everybody does the necessary background checks before employing new staff.<br /><br />The Catholic Church can greatly benefit from integrating itself into this system, because it can then make use of the record-keeping systems of the government. Church schools of course have to make CRB and List 99 checks anyway, its the law. But the church can contribute to keeping both itself and the outside world safe by making proper reports, so that teachers or priests who are got rid of can't get jobs in other schools (including church schools) and go on abusing.<br /><br />All these measures are designed to ensure that once an abuser is found out, he or she can't get access to more victims. If the church puts in place procedures to ensure that, then the crisis will go away. You'll have some years of bad headlines, as past cases still pop up, but that will die away in time.<br /><br />So the solution to the crisis is very simple. But it's not easy. It requires a degree of determination, first to accept that these sorts of measures are needed, and second to get the working effectively, at every school, parish, youth group, playcentre and similar organisation in the whole country that is run by the church.<br /><br />Safeguarding is <i>everybody's</i> business.Jonathan Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00527063732905729010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-64302194014642180172011-06-24T13:01:00.504+01:002011-06-24T13:01:00.504+01:00Interesting comment from donk. I think I am corre...Interesting comment from donk. I think I am correct in saying that in English law there is no obligation to report any crime to the police or other authority as a general rule - although there may be statutory exceptions. I think this has given rise to the situation described by donk.<br /><br />My view has always been that the first thing to do in a case of abuse is to decide whether it is an allegation of criminal activity and you should seek legal advice on this. If it is then you should unfailingly report it to the Police. I would have thought that under the Church's guidelines (which of course are only guidelines and not part of the English legal system) that should be mandatory.<br /><br />If you do not report a crime you should make sure that you do not become an accessory!<br /><br />Nicolas Bellordsantoeusebiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07032325567755620919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-89190978115114558382011-06-24T11:56:57.647+01:002011-06-24T11:56:57.647+01:00Father Ray
I would be grateful if you would repeat...Father Ray<br />I would be grateful if you would repeat my request for the reference cited by Sadie Vacantist (Chicago study).<br />Unless commenters can offer supporting evidence for their obsevations I suggest the debate has become sterile.<br />I hope those who have made a valuable contribution to this deeply disturbing subject will not feel obliged to respond to unhelpful remarks.<br />This was one of the more positive examples of discussion on the Catholic blogosphere and I would suggest any protracted, argumentative commentary be taken elsewhere.<br />Thank you.MF et al.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-58367641400107381712011-06-24T11:19:38.509+01:002011-06-24T11:19:38.509+01:00PART II
And so – what would be a huge contributor...PART II<br /><br />And so – what would be a huge contributor to improvement while the unsatisfactory mess we have currently is resolved? <br /><br />To ensure that all child settings undertake in their publically available (many settings insist that parents have to ask for policies – an out of sight out of mind arrangement) safeguarding policies to report all allegations to the LADO. Mr West has made clear the reasoning behind this and increasingly safeguarding boards are adopting this protocol. Buy it is only guidance and can be ignored by the setting. It is down to parental pressure being exerted on the setting in question. <br /><br />With this simple undertaking the opportunity for cover up and/or errors are significantly reduced. Any setting breaking this contract would be very foolish, the cost would be too great. <br /><br />Now for a view from inside the church. <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/nolan/clips/20100317_dooley" rel="nofollow"> This is Monsigneur Maurice Dooley a professor of cannon law speaking to Stephen Nolan of BBC Radio Ulster.</a> He is speaking from Eire where there is no mandatory reporting of abuse. It is important to remember this during the interview which becomes more involving as it continues.<br /><br /><br />please forgive typos + grammar - in haste.donknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-10169262162266921642011-06-24T11:14:01.152+01:002011-06-24T11:14:01.152+01:00Sadie,
It is very simple. There are those in the ...Sadie,<br /><br />It is very simple. There are those in the catholic Church who don't want to believe there is a crisis about abuse. They don't want to believe that there is anything the church needs to do, because this would be an acknowledgement that the church is imperfect in a very serious way.<br /><br />There are a considerable number of people who will pay lipservice to the idea that the church is imperfect, but faced when evidence of some serious imperfection involving evil done by priests, they run in the opposite direction and take refuge in wishful thinking.<br /><br />That wishful thinking includes<br /><br />- Clinging to the clinical definition of paedophilia, and so claiming that very few of the assaults are true paedophile actions against prepubescent boys, as if all the other assaults somehow don't count.<br /><br />- Assuming that a large proportion of the accounts are fictitious<br /><br />- Putting the blame outside the church, on liberalism, on the 1960s, on secularism, or on all the evil atheists for attacking the church<br /><br />- Putting the blame on some other faction within the church (e.g. suggesting that it is all down to a lack of discipline and we should go back to using the old Latin mass)Jonathan Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00527063732905729010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31069882.post-32394489773668129632011-06-24T11:13:43.020+01:002011-06-24T11:13:43.020+01:00PART I
Comment is degenerating when the word '...PART I<br /><br />Comment is degenerating when the word 'obsession' is being used pejoratively. <br /><br />I am very familiar with the subject of safeguarding, and the alleged protection of children in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and to some extent Eire. <br /><br />In EWS it may surprise you to know that there is no mandatory requirement to report the crime of abuse on a child. In for example the school setting about which Mr West writes, were I to report witnessed abuse of a child to the protection officer, who passed the information to the Head of the school - who then consulted with the Chairman of Trustees who is the person statutorily responsible for the 'safeguarding' in the setting, neither the Head or the Chairman of Trustees is under any obligation to report the abuse to the Authorities - which include the LADO (Local Authority Designated Officer), police, children’s or social services. A physically or sexually abused child in EWS (and as it happens Eire) is not entitled under law to have the abuse reported. This means that an abused child is not even entitled to an impact assessment for the abuse, no counselling, nothing. <br /><br />The ministry responsible for the shambles is the Department for Education where safeguarding legislation is created, but it is the Home Office that puts it into statutory draft form and guides it through the house. <br /><br />Of course this appalling nonexistent framework applies equally to education, sport, faith, healthcare, clubs, associations and so forth. <br /><br />The US has mostly mandatory reporting of such matters - it is an offence if you fail to report actual abuse. <br /><br />All that exists in education in England for example is an expectation that teachers will do their duty and report abuse. That's it. Failure to report brings no sanction, other than a teacher possibly being brought to the disciplinary panel of the GTC - which is the current Education Bill is about to be disbanded.<br /><br />Most safeguarding officers believe that there is a mandatory requirement to report. I spoke to one in a huge local authority yesterday who repeatedly told me I was wrong. I sent a .pdf of counsel’s opinion to the person and suggested they spoke to their legal department. <br /><br />People in safeguarding have been misled by the DfE. A visit to the DfE safeguarding site is to disappear in a smog of links to other sites, contradictory guidance, bits bobs and nonsense – misleading statement’s - it’s grim. The leading book on the statutory framework is - Child Abuse: <i>Law and policy across boundaries</i> by Prof Laura Hoyano and Caroline Keenan. I received and email from Caroline which described legislation in the UK in the following terms - <b>“to start with it is important to recognize two problems in the current law relating to child abuse (i) it is a patchwork of different types of law often created as a specific reaction to a particular scandal. It has no cohesion and can be contradictory. It is, for want of a better description, the Dangerous Dogs Act writ large (ii) It is unwieldy. There are hundreds of different rules in different places. </b>donknoreply@blogger.com