Public schools / sexual predators

[Ken]

So without knowing anything specific about NYC...

If only we had someone here who was actually involved in teaching and administration in the public schools in NYC at the time this was allegedly happening, rather than having to rely on uninformed speculation....
/s

Are the criticisms of public schools and unions being made here limited to NYC?

[ohio jones]

Are the criticisms of public schools and unions being made here limited to NYC?

No, but you did bother to address JohnH's example in multiple posts.

[JohnH]

Public schools have become adept in allowing teachers accused of sexual assault to move to other schools, often with the help of collective bargaining agreements negotiated by teachers unions, a new report alleges.

The Washington Examiner reports,

According to the report, school employees who sexually abuse children are typically moved three different times before they are fired or arrested. The report cited a 2018 study that says this allows the employee to abuse “as many as 73 victims” throughout employment. The report used the latest Department of Education data that say there were 13,799 incidents of sexual assault in public schools during the 2017-2018 school year.

The report faults several causes for the pass the trash practice, including weak background checks and a lack of communication between school districts. The report also faults collective bargaining agreements made with teachers unions that allow employees to have their personnel files “scrubbed,” thus ensuring future employers are unaware of an abuser’s history.

Instead of pointing fingers, perhaps both public education systems and the Roman Catholic Church should learn from the problems each other have and find constructive ways to fix those problems.

[Ken]

When your law provides for privilege then explicitly singles out clergy you have demonstrated a clear violation of freedom of religion.

The law does no such thing. The law in nearly every state identifies ALL adults who occupy a trusted role with children and simply says that ALL of them are collectively responsible for reporting incidences of child abuse if they become aware of incidences of child abuse in the course of their work. Clergy are not singled out or treated different from any other professional who works with children.

Maybe the church shouldn't involve itself in working with children if they don't want the responsibility that goes along with it. My wife grew up attending Catholic schools and weekly confession was a part of attending Catholic school. There were priests, chapel, and confessionals right inside her high school.

Now, the double legal mistake of those in favor of the law, is nothing will happen.
How will you prosecute someone for NOT revealing what was said in a confessional?

Unless you wire tap a confessional (and there is a legal loser) how do you prove a priest was told about abuse and did not report it?
If the penitent says something, it is at best a “he said, she said” situation.

I dunno. Maybe from the testimony of hundreds or thousands of abuse victims who have come forward to tell us that they informed their priest about what was happening to them and their priest did nothing. But instead protected their abuser?

This is not at all about the abuse issue. It is purely a legal analysis. No way this law stands a constitutional test.
And no one will EVER be prosecuted under that provision.
Can you see the legal circus of a priest going to jail because he would not break the seal of the confessional?

This isn't about convicting priests. This is about protecting children. The church can choose whether it wants to be part of the solution or part of the problem. Historically it has always been a part of the problem. I guess we will find out if they have turned a corner or not.

[JohnH]

I dunno. Maybe from the testimony of hundreds or thousands of abuse victims who have come forward to tell us that they informed their priest about what was happening to them and their priest did nothing. But instead protected their abuser?

Is there some reason such people can't inform their priest outside of the confessional booth?

This isn't about convicting priests. This is about protecting children. The church can choose whether it wants to be part of the solution or part of the problem. Historically it has always been a part of the problem. I guess we will find out if they have turned a corner or not.

Please describe to us how you would see a law requiring priests to turn over confessions to the police would work.

Recordings in the confessional booth?

Live wiretap to police HQ?

[Ken]

I dunno. Maybe from the testimony of hundreds or thousands of abuse victims who have come forward to tell us that they informed their priest about what was happening to them and their priest did nothing. But instead protected their abuser?

Is there some reason such people can't inform their priest outside of the confessional booth?

This isn't about convicting priests. This is about protecting children. The church can choose whether it wants to be part of the solution or part of the problem. Historically it has always been a part of the problem. I guess we will find out if they have turned a corner or not.

Please describe to us how you would see a law requiring priests to turn over confessions to the police would work.

Recordings in the confessional booth?

Live wiretap to police HQ?

Why the ridiculous scenarios? This isn't about the confessional. Confessionals aren't even mentioned in WA law. It is a very simple law which states that if you are a professional who works with children you are obligated to report suspicions of child abuse if you become aware of them in the course of your work.

We don't wiretap doctors offices and exam rooms to make sure they comply with the law or to gather evidence of abuse. We just expect doctors and nurses to follow the law like anyone else and report suspicions of abuse if they have them. It is not that complicated.

The law works exactly the same for priests as it does for doctors, nurses, and teachers. The Catholic Church has chosen to work with millions of children across the country and holds itself up as a trusted authority for children for children to go to. Maybe it should live up to that responsibility and stop looking for excuses to protect abusers and sexual predators.

[JohnH]

Why the ridiculous scenarios? This isn't about the confessional. Confessionals aren't even mentioned in WA law. It is a very simple law which states that if you are a professional who works with children you are obligated to report suspicions of child abuse if you become aware of them in the course of your work.

Which includes the confessional seal (and I assume it talks about more than just "professionals" in their "line of work"; many priests are clergy who have taken a vow of poverty and don't even get paid, and many priests will take confessions at almost any time, even in unusual locations; the "course of their work" is 24/7).

But the Catholic church hasn't objected to priests being mandated reports. They've objected specifically to expecting to break the confessional seal, and that alone.

We don't wiretap doctors offices and exam rooms to make sure they comply with the law or to gather evidence of abuse. We just expect doctors and nurses to follow the law like anyone else and report suspicions of abuse if they have them. It is not that complicated.

Yes. So if you're going to have a law that requires priests to break the confessional seal, how do you enforce that law?

The law works exactly the same for priests as it does for doctors, nurses, and teachers. The Catholic Church has chosen to work with millions of children across the country and holds itself up as a trusted authority for children for children to go to. Maybe it should live up to that responsibility and stop looking for excuses to protect abusers and sexual predators.

Priests are not doctors, nurses, or teachers, and priests have been taking confessions for well over a thousand years. The Catholic Church's confessional seal is a legitimate thing - they have resisted past attempts by governments to interfere with it; it is part of one of their sacraments; it is an integral part of the Catholic religion. It is not something that was made up to try to evade mandatory reporting requirements; it predates the concept of a "mandated report" even existing.

So the better question then, is, how do you propose respecting the religious freedom that is required in this country for something like the confessional seal, and how will you ensure priests and penitents are not in fear that the confessional booth will become an interrogation room?

[temporal1]

it’s madness to allow materials+behaviors “any random neighbor” would be prosecuted for - into classrooms with bells on!

i agree with Matt. some saw the failure decades ago. far too ignored.

You can't cite the books of sex ed your kids have in school because it's too inappropriate

Thankfully, MANY parents are standing up to this, even in Illinois, even in Chicago, not a moment too soon.
This mayor has very low approval ratings, even in Chicago. i hope they do better. ASAP.
The governor is worse. i don’t know his approval rating. i hope abysmal. he is very wealthy and overly involved in D.C.
Current Illinois should serve as an alarm for other states.

i’m sad to say.
Illinois was never a “great” destination place, no oceans or mountains, it was a reliable place to find respectable work, active churches, good public schools, WARM CIVILIZED people. i knew many who reluctantly moved here, but, after years spent getting to know people, they didn’t want to leave! - because of people, families, communities. They would VISIT the more dramatic places, finding cornfields pretty good for families.

i’m sorry for today’s young people. they graduate and LEAVE for work.
the state has recognized this problem and has made “efforts” in attempt to keep graduates in state.

gov “efforts” aren’t known for being effective. spending tax dollars: yes. quite good at that. A+ .

[Ken]

Why the ridiculous scenarios? This isn't about the confessional. Confessionals aren't even mentioned in WA law. It is a very simple law which states that if you are a professional who works with children you are obligated to report suspicions of child abuse if you become aware of them in the course of your work.

Which includes the confessional seal (and I assume it talks about more than just "professionals" in their "line of work"; many priests are clergy who have taken a vow of poverty and don't even get paid, and many priests will take confessions at almost any time, even in unusual locations; the "course of their work" is 24/7).

But the Catholic church hasn't objected to priests being mandated reports. They've objected specifically to expecting to break the confessional seal, and that alone.

We don't wiretap doctors offices and exam rooms to make sure they comply with the law or to gather evidence of abuse. We just expect doctors and nurses to follow the law like anyone else and report suspicions of abuse if they have them. It is not that complicated.

Yes. So if you're going to have a law that requires priests to break the confessional seal, how do you enforce that law?

The law works exactly the same for priests as it does for doctors, nurses, and teachers. The Catholic Church has chosen to work with millions of children across the country and holds itself up as a trusted authority for children for children to go to. Maybe it should live up to that responsibility and stop looking for excuses to protect abusers and sexual predators.

Priests are not doctors, nurses, or teachers, and priests have been taking confessions for well over a thousand years. The Catholic Church's confessional seal is a legitimate thing - they have resisted past attempts by governments to interfere with it; it is part of one of their sacraments; it is an integral part of the Catholic religion. It is not something that was made up to try to evade mandatory reporting requirements; it predates the concept of a "mandated report" even existing.

So the better question then, is, how do you propose respecting the religious freedom that is required in this country for something like the confessional seal, and how will you ensure priests and penitents are not in fear that the confessional booth will become an interrogation room?

They are smart people. I'm sure the can figure it out the same as teachers and nurses. I'm not one to tell them how to do their jobs. But one obvious approach if a child in Catholic school is telling a priest about how they are a victim of sexual abuse would be to stop the confession and pull them out of the confession box and say something to the effect of: "look, this is not your fault and you are not the one who is sinning here. But I am obligated to report what you are telling me. If this is something you want to talk to me about I am here to listen. If not, I can find someone else who can help you through this."

Which is exactly what a teacher or school nurse is expected to say if a child comes to them with the same information. It isn't necessarily comfortable to tell a child "I have to report what you are telling me" but it is what you are required to do. Usually it is a cry for help and we are obligated to answer.

[temporal1]

JayP:
I do not think there is much question the Church will win this lawsuit. ..

This is why we have courts of law.
To prevent the world’s faulty domineering Tim Walzs from bullying over everyone.

i hope you’re correct.
i’m encouraged about other recent court rulings that respect religion in U.S. law.

Hopefully the trend of “rule by atheism” has passed.

Separation of church from state was not meant to auto-default to “rule by atheism”.
Nice try, tho.