MennoNet.com

Amish bishop enters probation program to resolve failure to report sexual abuse claims


https://lancasteronline.com/news/local/ ... d819c.html

(Tried to copy and paste as best I could Vote and discuss. I put this here instead of current events for reasons )

An Amish bishop has entered a probation program to resolve criminal charges that he failed to report suspected sexual abuse in what is apparently the first such case of its kind in Lancaster County.

Levi S. Esh Sr. 63, of Pequea, was accepted into Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition to settle two misdemeanor counts of failure to report to appropriate authorities on Oct. 16 before Lancaster County Judge Howard Knisely. The ARD program is a probationary program for first-time offenders that allows participants to expunge their record upon completion.

Esh will be on probation for two years and must perform 25 hours of community service aimed at informing the Amish community on mandated reporting. His attorney's office declined comment Tuesday.

According to charging documents, last October, two members of the Amish community met with Esh on one occasion, and another occasion, Esh and other Amish leaders, about sexual abuse.

State law classifies certain categories of adults, such as school employees, licensed health care workers and clergy, as “mandated reporters” who are required to report suspected child abuse to authorities.

They were told the problem was taken care of and to let it go, the documents said. The two then went to police.

The issue concerned John G. Beiler, 42, of Providence Township, who was charged in April with sexually assaulting three girls several times between 2011 and 2015. The girls were between 12 and 14 years old at the time.

According to court documents, Beiler confessed to church leaders to abusing the girls and was told to confess to the girls’ father. Beiler was then excommunicated and Esh told the girls’ father that church leaders were keeping a close eye on Beiler.

Beiler's case is pending. A conference is scheduled for Dec. 3

I did not vote as I am unfamiliar with the all of the particulars and motivations of the bishop. Also I cannot say that I am familiar enough with the Amish values to determine an outcome.

I will say that in Catholic world, politics, businesses, other denominations, families, and the population in general sweeping things under the rug was a behavior that came out of an earlier cultural value. "Saving face" is a powerful motivator. I personally do not believe it is right to cover up such things. I am merely saying that I understand the motivations for these behaviors having lived in that time period.

For those that are more familiar with the O/O amish… would an amish bishop even know what "mandatory reporting" is? In other words, do they know any better than handling situations like this internally?

Not that ignorance makes it okay, but I often wondered that.

steve-in-kville wrote:For those that are more familiar with the O/O amish… would an amish bishop even know what "mandatory reporting" is? In other words, do they know any better than handling situations like this internally?

Not that ignorance makes it okay, but I often wondered that.

Great questions! A certain element/level of “not having been informed” is definitely present. However, I don’t profess the ability to tease apart and identify at what point it becomes “willful ignorance.” If anything is known about mandatory reporting, it’s likely considered to only apply to “worldly folks.”

Very intriguing that this bishop’s mandatory community service is aimed at informing his fellow Amish about mandated reporting.

TruthSeeker wrote:If anything is known about mandatory reporting, it’s likely considered to only apply to “worldly folks.”

I've gotten that impression as I followed this case, as well as another similar case.

I didn't vote because I don't know how this bishop was treated relative to other mandatory reporters like teachers, health care workers, or other clergy who might have been charged with the same crime.

He should be treated no better or no worse than others who are in the same position of authority. I suspect probation is probably the appropriate punishment. For any other professional like a teacher or nurse it would likely mean losing one's teaching or nursing license to have this sort of conviction on one's record. So conviction and probation is actually a very severe penalty in the non-Amish professional world.

And I don't buy the "ignorance of the law" argument. The Amish, like everyone else, know full well that child sexual abuse is a crime. And they know full well that crimes should be reported to the authorities. He made a decision to protect and shelter the abusers rather than the abused. He actively discouraged others from taking action. That is not ignorance, that is intentional coverup. This is the consequence of that decision.

Ken wrote: The Amish, like everyone else, know full well that child sexual abuse is a crime. . .

I’m interested in hearing more about your experience(s) with the Amish that lead you to this conclusion.

In my community, when child sexual abuse is exposed, it’s typically simply termed “sin.” In extreme cases the perpetrator might be excommunicated. More typically the offender is merely required to engage in some type of “repentance” steps as outlined by the church.

Regrettably in some cases of unexposed child abuse, it’s chalked up as male privilege.

(As always, one size never fits all, and my above observations are generalities.)

Truthseeker wrote:In my community, when child sexual abuse is exposed, it’s typically simply termed “sin.” In extreme cases the perpetrator might be excommunicated. More typically the offender is merely required to engage in some type of “repentance” steps as outlined by the church.

Regrettably in some cases of unexposed child abuse, it’s chalked up as male privilege.

Male privilege?? Can you say more about how this idea is conveyed? Would adultery be handled differently than child sexual abuse? If so, how?

I disagree that simple probation was the correct decision. I am surrounded by a large conservative Mennonite community that has quietly experienced sexual abuse on several occasions. Each time it was met with silence, leaving each young woman both physical and psychological victims. Desperate to shield the reputation of the community and protect the image of relatives closely related to the bishop and/or ministers, it is my experience that truth is denied or covered up, and victims are wrongly advised to remain silent for whatever reason that, in my opinion, can not be defended as biblical.

This past year, a distant Mennonite minister boldly stood up and exposed a series of sexual abuse cases that he personally learned of involving young women living in our area. Once in court, the judgment was quick and severe. No probation here.

Also, I live near an Amish community and am personally acquainted with the bishop. Believe me, he knows what his obligations are in such an instance. Whether he would do the right thing or not, I do not know, but he certainly knows what he should do.

I believe every woman, both young and old, are to be protected by the men in their lives; and that includes fathers, ministers, and bishops. I read in the Modern King James Version, "Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him."

If this seems harsh and unreasonable, let it be clearly understood that I am adamant about protecting my wife, my daughters, and the young women around me. Yes, I am finally finished. Thanks for letting me vent.

.. If this seems harsh and unreasonable, let it be clearly understood that I am adamant about protecting my wife, my daughters, and the young women around me. Yes, I am finally finished. Thanks for letting me vent.

.. please remember boys and young men can be victims, too.
we protected and prepared our son equally as our daughter to beware of predators.