Sexual Abuse in other faiths?

[InSearchofGrace]

From the John Jay report

It is worth noting that while the media has consistently referred to priest-abusers as “pedophile priests,” pedophilia is defined as the sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Yet, the data on priests show that 22 percent of victims were age ten and under, while the majority of victims were pubescent or postpubescent.
,

 

[DrTaffy]

Case in point, per your post, you choose to take the worse number of 1 in 5 instead of 1 in 10 or entertaining that it could be somewhere in between, as applies to Catholic clergy child sex abuse.

False. I referred to two figures - one at the high end of what I found, the other at the low end.

You must know the definition of pedophilia, that not all pedophiles molest or commit child sexual abuse, correct?

As any ‘unbiased’ person could tell from the post just above yours, posted more than 4 hours earlier.

Why you are so belligerently determined to show “anticatholic bias” in my every post I do not know, but there is no point in trying to talk with you while that is the case.

 

[CopticChristian]

This sort of figure (or even higher) seems to be assumed by those defending the rate of incidence of child abuse in the Catholic Church as ‘normal’ or even below normal, but I’ve never seen a reference - apart from off-hand estimates by ‘experts’. I’d love to see some justification for this.

The Australian public database lists around 1200 paedophiles out of a male population of about 8.5 million, which gives a much lower incidence rate in the general population.

Here is something called the Jay Report that may have your data…

usccb.org/issues-and-acti…-1950-2010.pdf

The Causes and Context
of Sexual Abuse of Minors by
Catholic Priests in the
United States, 1950-2010

 

[InSearchofGrace]

False. I referred to two figures - one at the high end of what I found, the other at the low end.

… after which you focused on the worse statistic. Never mind, you can skate on this one, although on review of your record of posts, I am not the first in this forum with the reaction to a statement by you that comes across as negative about something that pertains to the Catholic Church or her teaching.

As any ‘unbiased’ person could tell from the post just above yours, posted more than 4 hours earlier.

Why you are so belligerently determined to show “anticatholic bias” in my every post I do not know, but there is no point in trying to talk with you while that is the case.

You mean your post as an ‘unbiased’ person. Do you realize that using scare quotes, single or double, often times is short hand for actually meaning the opposite, if not to say that the description is arguable?

Well, you are explaining for yourself, I think, in that post of yours. Everbody here is clear we were not talking about child abuse but child sex abuse, specifically, the prevalence thereof. In my previous post, I made a comment or question on your possibly conflating pedophilia and child molestation / sex abuse.

Good day, DrTaffy.

 

[DrTaffy]

Here is something called the Jay Report that may have your data…

Which gives me:

Sorry! Page not found.

But assuming that is indeed the Jay report I know of, I have read it. Not ‘cover to cover’ recently, but I have read it, and I do not recall any evidence of the incidence of ‘having committed child abuse’ in the general population, which is the figure that seems to me to be missing from this debate. Do please set me right if I am wrong.

In various countries we know that X% of priests have been found guilty of child sexual abuse, and various people say “that is appallingly higher than average” or “that is no higher than average” or “that is way lower than average” and I have no idea which expert (I had best avoid the use of ‘scare quotes’!) to believe. So I would like to see the figures behind such claims, that is all.

Good day, DrTaffy.

And ‘Good day’ to you too and good luck with your search.

Since you are continuing on your confrontational approach, that is the only part of your post to which I will respond - these threads are heated enough without engaging someone who seems set on picking a fight.

 

[CopticChristian]

Which gives me:

But assuming that is indeed the Jay report I know of, I have read it. Not ‘cover to cover’ recently, but I have read it, and I do not recall any evidence of the incidence of ‘having committed child abuse’ in the general population, which is the figure that seems to me to be missing from this debate. Do please set me right if I am wrong.

In various countries we know that X% of priests have been found guilty of child sexual abuse, and various people say “that is appallingly higher than average” or “that is no higher than average” or “that is way lower than average” and I have no idea which expert (I had best avoid the use of ‘scare quotes’!) to believe. So I would like to see the figures behind such claims, that is all.

And ‘Good day’ to you too and good luck with your search.

Since you are continuing on your confrontational approach, that is the only part of your post to which I will respond - these threads are heated enough without engaging someone who seems set on picking a fight.

Here it is again, I checked it in the preview and it takes you right there…

usccb.org/issues-and-action/child-and-youth-protection/upload/The-Causes-and-Context-of-Sexual-Abuse-of-Minors-by-Catholic-Priests-in-the-United-States-1950-2010.pdf

If you cannot open it, search for the Jay report and you will find it.

 

[Southy82]

HabemusFrancis,
I was raised Freewill Baptist and I personally know two people, my sister and a middle school friend, who were sexually assaulted by officials in that church. I have been attending Mass for 14 years now and have never personally met anyone who was sexually assaulted or taken advantage of sexually.

 

[DrTaffy]

Here it is again, I checked it in the preview and it takes you right there…

usccb.org/issues-and-action/child-and-youth-protection/upload/The-Causes-and-Context-of-Sexual-Abuse-of-Minors-by-Catholic-Priests-in-the-United-States-1950-2010.pdf

Yeah, that works (although the first link still doesn’t, for me.)

Which is just as well as I cannot for the life of me find the copy of the Jay report that I was sure I had somewhere on my hard drive.

Again, a quick look through appears to confirm my recollection, that it gives no firm incidence rate for how many people have committed child sexual offences.

This is the figure I still think is missing, or rather there is too wide a range of answers given with insufficient supporting evidence, and often too little clarity to distinguish whether the figure refers to the incidence of merely experiencing paedophile urges, having actually assaulted a minor, or having assaulted a pre-pubescent specifically.

The Jay report does give figures for the incidence of children having been abused, a figure that seems to be much more widely available. e.g. on page 12:

According to the Endangerment Standard, one child out of every twenty-five in the United States has been maltreated. Results, however, did not show any reliable change since the NIS-3. Of those who were maltreated, 29 percent of children were abused and 77 percent were neglected. Of the 29 percent who were abused, 22 percent were sexually abused.

22% of 1 in 25 ‘children’ (defined how?) being sexually abused would give a figure of 1 in 110 (or so) children being sexually abused, but it is impossible to translate that into a figure of what percentage of adults have engaged in abuse without making other assumptions, such as the ration of abusers to victims.

I think is just a figure that we do not have, but given that the various judicial organisations must have figures on how many adults have been accused or convicted of such crimes, and figures for the adult population comes out of every census, I don’t see why not.

 

[GraceSofia]

Then it was conceded that the book didn’t actually mention homosexuals but communists and the KGB.

That has also been shown to be a complete fabrication.
…]
Now, do you have anything that would back up this idea that there has been an organised infiltration of the Church with the express aim of bringing it down?

I think it’s accepted as fact that the communists tried and had at least some success in infiltrating the Church.

…previously classified documents from Communist regimes reveal that in the late 1960s, half of the seminarians and all of the seminary rectors of the Pontifical Hungarian Institute were trained by Hungarian intelligence.

“Weigel said communist moles were placed successfully at Vatican Radio, at the Vatican newspaper and in pontifical universities,” according to a CNS report. “When Pope John Paul II was elected, he took some counter-intelligence steps; for one thing, materials dealing with Poland were no longer archived in the Secretariat of State but were kept in the papal apartment.”

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=8901

Ex-Communist and celebrated convert Douglas Hyde revealed long ago that in the 1930s the Communist leadership issued a worldwide directive about infiltrating the Catholic Church. While in the early 1950s, Mrs Bella Dodd was also providing detailed explanations of the Communist subversion of the Church. Speaking as a former high ranking official of the American Communist Party, Mrs Dodd said: “In the 1930s we put eleven hundred men into the priesthood in order to destroy the Church from within.” The idea was for these men to be ordained and progress to positions of influence and authority as Monsignors and Bishops.

This conspiracy has been confirmed time and again by Soviet defectors. Ex-KGB officer Anatoliy Golitsyn, who defected in 1961 and in 1984 forecast with 94% accuracy all the astonishing developments in the Communist Bloc since that time, confirmed several years ago that this “penetration of the Catholic and other churches” is part of the Party’s “general line * in the struggle against religion.” Hundreds of files secreted to the West by former KGB archivist Vassili Mitrokhin and published in 1999 tell a similar tale, about the KGB cultivating the closest possible relationships with ‘progressive’ Catholics and financing their activities.* freerepublic.com/focus/religion/804825/posts

 

[GraceSofia]

In the Chicago study, only a single priest out of over 2,200 fell into this pedophile
category: one priest, not 1 percent of priests.

If someone wants to claim that the Catholic priesthood is more prone to abusive behavior than other groups, then the burden of proof is upon that person: it is not possible to prove a negative. In order to establish a case proving priestly depravity, we would need to compare like samples of clergy from different denominations, with comparable systems of processing complaints and keeping records. No such studies have ever been attempted. As a result, the Catholic connection to abuse or pedophilia remains no more than an unproven assumption, or rather a prejudice.

The proliferation of specifically Catholic lawsuits does not mean that priests are more likely to have offended, but rather that a centralized church with good record keeping and extensive property holdings is a much more valuable legal target than a small decentralized congregation.

The Chicago Study

One of the Baptist groups voted NOT to keep centralised data on abuse charges–precisely because they saw what happened to the Catholic Church.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

For the interested, these studies that provide

Rate of Child Sex Abusers (predominantly male) in adult population
and
Rate of Sexually Abused Children, usually categorized by gender,

can be researched using any good search engine,

stats on the first under the subject Pedophilia
and stats on the second under Child Sex Abuse.

Current Wiki on said two sorted subjects contains a decent compilation and cites primary sources in numbered end notes.

Pedophilia: Prevalence and child molestation
The prevalence of pedophilia in the general population is not known,[4][63] but is estimated to be lower than 5% among adult men.

Most sexual offenders against children are male, although female offenders may account for 0.4% to 4% of convicted sexual offenders. On the basis of a range of published reports, McConaghy estimates a 10 to 1 ratio of male-to-female child molesters." …

The term pedophile is commonly used to describe all child sexual abuse offenders, including those who do not meet the clinical diagnosis standards, which is seen as problematic by researchers,[10][15] as most distinguish between child molesters and pedophiles.[4][14][15][43] …

The Mayo Clinic reports perpetrators who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia offend more often than non-pedophile perpetrators, and with a greater number of victims. They state that approximately 95% of child sexual abuse incidents are committed by the 88% of child molestation offenders who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia.[13]
Child Sex Abuse
The global prevalence of child sexual abuse has been estimated at 19.7% for females and 7.9% for males, according to a 2009 study published in Clinical Psychology Review that examined 65 studies from 22 countries.
…
Most sexual abuse offenders are acquainted with their victims; approximately 30% are relatives of the child, most often brothers, fathers, uncles or cousins; around 60% are other acquaintances such as ‘friends’ of the family, babysitters, or neighbors; strangers are the offenders in approximately 10% of child sexual abuse cases.[13]

Most child sexual abuse is committed by men.
The John Jay Report,

also linked in preceding posts by me in #60 and by Coptic in #66

provides an in-depth analysis based on actual numbers and credible cases of child sex abuse committed by Catholic priests and deacons. Relevant numbers below from said report
Less than 5% of the priests with allegations of abuse exhibited behavior consistent with a diagnosis of pedophilia (a psychiatric disorder that is characterized by recurrent fantasies, urges, and behaviors about prepubescent children).

The results indicated that the total number of priests with allegations from 1950 through 2002 was 4,392 out of a total of 109,694 priests who served in ministry at some point during that time. The number of accused priests is equivalent to 4% of priests in ministry.

Note that the majority of priest-abusers (56%) had one victim, though 3.5% of abusers were responsible for abusing 26% of victims who had come forward by 2002.

The majority of victims (81%) were male, in contrast to the distribution by victim gender for sexual crimes in the United States. National incidence studies have consistently shown that in general girls are three times more likely to be abused than boys.

Despite this widely accepted statistic on victim gender, recent studies of sexual abuse of minors within institutions have shown a higher percentage of male than female victims. Most sexual abuse victims of priests (51%) were between the ages of eleven and fourteen, while 27% were fifteen to seventeen, 16%were eight to ten, and nearly 6% were under age seven.

Over 40% of all victims were males between the ages of eleven and fourteen. It is worth noting that while the media has consistently referred to priest-abusers as “pedophile priests,” pedophilia is defined as the sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Yet, the data on priests show that 22% of victims were age ten and under, while the majority of victims were pubescent or post pubescent.
Comparative numbers
The state-level rates of child sexual abuse in 1992 range from a minimum of 87 per 100,000 children in New Jersey to a maximum of 688 per 100,000 children in Alaska. The average for forty-eight states and the District of Columbia is 246 children per 100,000.

In comparison to the state-level rates of abuse shown above, in 1992, there were 80 reported cases of abuse of youth by a Catholic priest, and 530,925 individuals were confirmed in 1992. The number of reports of abuse divided by the number confirmed, divided by 100,000, yields an “exposure” rate of 15 incidents of abuse per 100,000 confirmations.

A bit of good news
The state-level statistics for reports of sexual abuse of a youth are available for 2001 as well as 1992, and show a general decline. … The average rate of abuse for the forty-nine jurisdictions decreased by 45% 1992-2001, to 134 per 100,000 children. In 2001, there were 35 reports of sexual abuse taking place in that year by Catholic priests, and 651,433 confirmations. The rate calculation yields an “exposure” statistic of 5 incidents of abuse per 100,000 confirmations in the Catholic Church. The 2001 rate of abuse represents a 56% decline in incidence from the 1992 statistic.

Thus, incidence of child sexual abuse has declined in both the Catholic Church and in society generally.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

It may be that detractors and antagonists will always associate the Catholic Church with pedophile priests notwithstanding the truth. Child sex abuse is a problem with the general population, known to happen mostly in homes perpetrated by family members or relatives, and in all religious, sports, and civic organizations with ministries and programs involving youth.

The CC has become the whipping post of choice not just because of its size but also its unchanging teaching on all sexual sins, including homosexuality. Homosexual advocates are driven to put as much distance between homosexuality and pedophilia. That CC leaders are hypocrites … it is said, with basis, to an extent. The irony is that the Church sex abuse cases did not turn out to be largely pedophilia cases. As mentioned in a prior post, this is not a defense of the abuses. No excuse for abuse, which, to the unsympathetic and cynical public, is more unseemly, more unacceptable, for those held to a high standard.

To the discerning, the John Jay study shed a light on the problem of homosexual men in religious life as well who are unable to control the urge to act on same sex urge given opportunity (including with those of post-pubescent age), certainly not made easy by a hyper-sexualized culture. In his years as Cardinal and as Pope, Benedict had every good reason to narrow the gate to seminary applicants and qualification of these men during priest formation. Calling to the Catholic priesthood is not for the worldly heterosexual and homosexual men. It is difficult to be a Catholic; to say it is difficult to be a priest is a gross understatement. The sacrifice is enormous, but not nearly as much as The Sacrifice of our Lord Jesus and High Priest.

I call on my fellow Catholics for prayers for more true vocations.

 

[manualman]

But why is it in the US we only here about Catholics?

Most other faith communities are far more loosely organized. Those that do have a hierarchical structure are very small in comparison to the catholic church. Add these two facts together and nobody else makes as juicy a target for lawsuit lawyers as the catholic church.

Contrary to populat belief, reporters don’t very often go out and prowl the streets looking for news anymore. All too often, what happens is that they get tips from cops, activists and lawyers. Lawyers LOVE reporters. Lawyer gets a cleint alleging abuse, lawyer makes some phone calls to reporter buddies and reporters get a juicy story that just happens to get out there among the potential jury pool. See the pattern?

None of the above lessens the severity or the outrage of what happened to abuse victims of priests. But it DOES go a long way towards explaining why catholic dirty laundry usually gets a much bigger media airing than that of other communities. It’s not just media bias, it’s lawsuit lawyer shenanigans.

(for example, it now appears that the entire organization “SNAP” is funded by contributions from lawsuit lawyers who benefit from the ongoing media frenzy SNAP generates. From the lawyer’s point of view, it creates a cycle of business.)

 

[Winston_Smith]

Hi all. We are all sadly familiar with the many news reports on Clerical sexual misconduct. For me it has been a very disheartening, shaking experience, sifting through the various articles, and grand jury reports of various cities/ dioceses. I am fortunate to live in the Twin Cities/ Minnesota archdiocese, where thankfully, there has not been a flood of lawsuits and bankruptcy.

But I wonder about other faiths? Is it really just as bad in other religions? Is it better? Is it worse? I have heard that the Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Southern Baptists have severe problems in this regard, though this is just heresay.

Does anyone know?

It’s true, not just hearsay, that Jehovah’s Witnesses have this problem. The official response has not been as clear and forthcoming as the Catholic response, and I knew of cases in congregations where men were allowed to server as elders with a known past of child molestation.

 

[GraceSofia]

Yes, there is a group called Silent Lambs to help victims of JW abuse.

There is also Stop Baptist Predators.

A web site for the Orthodox : pokrov.org/displays.asp?ds=Convicted

“. . Public bias: The public may view sexual abuse by priests very differently from similar crimes by Protestant clergy. The Roman Catholic Church is generally seen as a monolithic organization with a clearly defined rigid hierarchy. Thus a case of abuse becomes a “Roman Catholic scandal” rather than a local parish problem. A similar molestation in a Protestant church would probably be viewed as a local problem isolated to a single congregation, because of the decentralized nature of most Protestant churches.Sex scandals also affect Protestant clergy…”
Quote from It Ain’t Just Catholic Priests

 

[jonathan_hili]

This sort of figure (or even higher) seems to be assumed by those defending the rate of incidence of child abuse in the Catholic Church as ‘normal’ or even below normal, but I’ve never seen a reference - apart from off-hand estimates by ‘experts’. I’d love to see some justification for this.

The Australian public database lists around 1200 paedophiles out of a male population of about 8.5 million, which gives a much lower incidence rate in the general population.

I think the difference might be that many of these priests are not actually paedophiles, that is, their victims are not always (pre-pubescent) children but young teens. However, the media tends to lump them all under the same category. Furthermore, most paedophilia and child abuse happens in families (especially by fathers or older siblings) and goes unreported. Also, quite a substantial amount occurs in public schools (I’ve heard of several cases, which were laughed off by teachers), and naturally the government isn’t too keen to have these come to much public scrutiny.

 

[DrTaffy]

I think the difference might be that many of these priests are not actually paedophiles, that is, their victims are not always (pre-pubescent) children but young teens.

It is an easy mistake to make. On the other hand ‘paedophiles’ need not ever act on their urges. Even InSearchofGrace shortly after very pointedly asking me “You must know the definition of pedophilia, that not all pedophiles molest or commit child sexual abuse, correct?” later quoted the wikipaedia article on the “prevalence of pedophilia” as relevant to this. Given that estimates vary from 1 in 5 adult men having abused a child to 1 in 7000, there is obviously far too much uncertainty on this issue.

Which is why I think that it is important to have figures from the same dataset, using the same definitions. Which surely the legislative bodies must have!

Furthermore, most paedophilia and child abuse happens in families (especially by fathers or older siblings) and goes unreported.

As it happens in the Catholic Church, and not only goes unreported but there was and maybe still is a large and well-oiled machinery set in place to try to cover it up. So the net result is that we know almost nothing about this very important and worrying field of crime.

There are two related but seperate allegations against the Catholic Church here.

1. That Catholic priests have a significantly higher incidence of reported child abuse than the general population
2. That when a Catholic priest is found to have abused a child, that the Church reacts to cover up the incident. That ‘safeguarding teams’ act to safeguard the Church against scandal, rather than safeguarding children against abuse. That Catholics in general are more offended by the accuser than by the accused, regardless of the truth of the accusation.

I personally would be more worried about the second accusation. Certainly the first implies greater personal culpability on the part of the individuals involved, but the second is the more damaging in the long run.

Indeed the first need not even reflect badly on the Catholic Church. If Catholic priests are no more likely to offend, but far more likely to be reported, that is surely a good thing and a credit to the Catholic Church, yet could account for the alleged difference? So I can only assume that the hostility often displayed to those who dare raise this subject is from those who privately feel that there is a big dirty catholic secret being hidden.

The biggest problem here is the tendency to ‘externalise’ it - to blame it on those other than ourselves, whether that means Catholic priests, homosexuals, immigrants or creepy old men. Homosexuality, for example, was explicitly ruled out as a risk factor in the Jay report (although ironically those with ‘negative feelings’ about homosexuality did have a small increased risk of child abuse).

So trying to pick a scapegoat group and blaming them is only harmful to the children. Far far better to ensure that cases of abuse are not covered up, that the police are always informed, and even better just arrange matters so that occasions for abuse do not occur. Banning gays (or catholic priests or immigrants) from the Boy Scouts will be far less effective than just ensuring that no adult scout leader is left alone with one boy (or two boys left alone together, for that matter.)

 

[CopticChristian]

It is an easy mistake to make. On the other hand ‘paedophiles’ need not ever act on their urges. Even InSearchofGrace shortly after very pointedly asking me “You must know the definition of pedophilia, that not all pedophiles molest or commit child sexual abuse, correct?” later quoted the wikipaedia article on the “prevalence of pedophilia” as relevant to this. Given that estimates vary from 1 in 5 adult men having abused a child to 1 in 7000, there is obviously far too much uncertainty on this issue.

Which is why I think that it is important to have figures from the same dataset, using the same definitions. Which surely the legislative bodies must have!

As it happens in the Catholic Church, and not only goes unreported but there was and maybe still is a large and well-oiled machinery set in place to try to cover it up. So the net result is that we know almost nothing about this very important and worrying field of crime.

There are two related but seperate allegations against the Catholic Church here.

1. That Catholic priests have a significantly higher incidence of reported child abuse than the general population

I personally would be more worried about the second accusation. Certainly the first implies greater personal culpability on the part of the individuals involved, but the second is the more damaging in the long run.

Indeed the first need not even reflect badly on the Catholic Church. If Catholic priests are no more likely to offend, but far more likely to be reported, that is surely a good thing and a credit to the Catholic Church, yet could account for the alleged difference? So I can only assume that the hostility often displayed to those who dare raise this subject is from those who privately feel that there is a big dirty catholic secret being hidden.

The biggest problem here is the tendency to ‘externalise’ it - to blame it on those other than ourselves, whether that means Catholic priests, homosexuals, immigrants or creepy old men. Homosexuality, for example, was explicitly ruled out as a risk factor in the Jay report (although ironically those with ‘negative feelings’ about homosexuality did have a small increased risk of child abuse).

So trying to pick a scapegoat group and blaming them is only harmful to the children. Far far better to ensure that cases of abuse are not covered up, that the police are always informed, and even better just arrange matters so that occasions for abuse do not occur. Banning gays (or catholic priests or immigrants) from the Boy Scouts will be far less effective than just ensuring that no adult scout leader is left alone with one boy (or two boys left alone together, for that matter.)

1. That when a Catholic priest is found to have abused a child, that the Church reacts to cover up the incident. That ‘safeguarding teams’ act to safeguard the Church against scandal, rather than safeguarding children against abuse. That Catholics in general are more offended by the accuser than by the accused, regardless of the truth of the accusation.

This is an assumption. You know as well as I do what happens when you assume anything. Your subsequent thoughts based on this assumption infer what that assumption says about you and not me as I do not assume this. I can tell you from personal experience in my parish that there is zero tolerance for anything that smells of impropriety.

You are wrong.

 

[DrTaffy]

This is an assumption.

No, that is an allegation, was clearly identified as such, and one that is made. But not by me, certainly not here.

 

[CopticChristian]

No, that is an allegation, was clearly identified as such, and one that is made. But not by me, certainly not here.

Dr.

Who is making the allegation?