Sue the "sexperts"
California’s Dr. Judith Reisman urges bishops to take action against sex therapy experts who have advised the Church. And, if they don’t, the laity should.
California-based lecturer and author, Dr. Judith Reisman (she holds a Ph.D. in Communications) has served as an expert witness in lawsuits involving sexual abuse. Her research paper, “Reliance of the Catholic Church on Sexuality Advisors Whose Moral Foundation Differs Markedly from that of the Church,” was submitted to a select group of bishops in 2002, so far without official response. California Catholic Daily interviewed Reisman on Aug. 12.
**A number of Catholic priests later convicted for sex abuse were ex-patients of sexual therapy centers. What’s the problem here? **
Reisman: “Human sexuality education” has always been based on the Kinsey model. The “Harvard” of the Kinseyan field was the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco . The IASHS “education” canon reflected the frauds created by Kinsey, a pedophile advocate.
I most definately could be wrong here, but I believe the idea is this:The priests were responsible for their own actions, the Church was responsible for its own actions. The sex therapists did not force the priests continue abusing minors, nor did they force the Church to continue the abuse, regardless of whether or not their methods were flawed. The article is morally despicable.
Malpractice plain and simple.I most definitely could be wrong here, but I believe the idea is this:
In the past when a priest molested a child he was sent away to a therapist. This therapist (i.e. “expert in his field”) worked with him and eventually sent him back to the bishop and said the priest was ‘cured’. Acting upon this the bishop set the priest up in a new place where history was doomed to repeat itself.
That’s what I believe the gist of the ‘sue the sexperts’ is coming from.
That is a copout though. Some of these priests abused dozens of boys, and often times the bishops were covering up hundreds of cases. That is the reason why the church is being sued these days, not because some children were molested, but because the church continued to move these priests around and hide their actions even after knowing what the priests had done.In the past when a priest molested a child he was sent away to a therapist. This therapist (i.e. “expert in his field”) worked with him and eventually sent him back to the bishop and said the priest was ‘cured’. Acting upon this the bishop set the priest up in a new place where history was doomed to repeat itself.
That’s what I believe the gist of the ‘sue the sexperts’ is coming from.
Generally speaking, it’s not malpractice if you follow the standard of care. That standard has changed over the years, but if they treated the patients in a manner that a reasonable practitioner in their field would have done at that time, then they can’t really be faulted for their actions, however unfortunate the results.Malpractice plain and simple.
Now this is a concern.I most definately could be wrong here, but I believe the idea is this:
In the past when a priest molested a child he was sent away to a therapist. This therapist (i.e. “expert in his field”) worked with him and eventually sent him back to the bishop and said the priest was ‘cured’. Acting upon this the bishop set the priest up in a new place where history was doomed to repeat itself.
That’s what I believe the gist of the ‘sue the sexperts’ is coming from.
California can keep her.California’s Dr. Judith Reisman
Typical academic. They get a Ph.D. in anything (in this case, hardly anything) and they think they are an expert in everything.Dr. Judith Reisman (she holds a Ph.D. in Communications)
And we have all seen how successful the RCC has been in defending itself, what a crock.has served as an expert witness in lawsuits involving sexual abuse.
As much as I will receive flack for this. I don’t think anyone has the right to sue for the mistakes made 20, 30, 40 and 50 years ago. But, then this is my opinion.Now this is a concern.
Why were priests sent to therapy when they should have been handed over to the authorities? because the parents did not want to bring charges and in the 50’s and 60’s sexual abuse was kept quiet no matter what, family, church or school.
Did the children and their families receive any assistance, at the churches expense, to help them overcome this abuse? again in many cases the family and church did not know what happened. But, when they did they were not looking for money and going to a therapist was not socially acceptable that came more in the 70’s
The way that I see it is that the church should have condemned these child molesters and helped with their incarceration and supported the families involved, rather than sending child molesters to therapy. Then there would be far less reason to worry about the damage done to the church. as sad as it might seem. The norm for the times were followed. We know what to do now.
I don’t think that they have any right to sue what so ever.
I understand your opinion, but I have to respectfully disagree.As much as I will receive flack for this. I don’t think anyone has the right to sue for the mistakes made 20, 30, 40 and 50 years ago. But, then this is my opinion.
Every law against raping children were already on the books in 1950. The Bishops and Priests knew full well what they were doing was wrong. They exposed themselve to this liability and now they must pay.The representitives of the church at the time knew it was wrong. Regardless of how society chose to handle such things, they should have stuck by their convictions and done the right thing regardless of the social consequences.
My point is that they should have done something at the time these incidents happened.Every law against raping children were already on the books in 1950. The Bishops and Priests knew full well what they were doing was wrong. They exposed themselve to this liability and now they must pay.
Nohome
I couldn’t disagree more. The entire sex abuse crisis rest soley on the shoulders of the Bishops and Preists. I believe there is a special place in hell waiting for them.With such a scandal as this is (Sex abuse by Clerics) I think it should be acknowledged that there is a lot of blame to be passed around. Not just to one or two groups.
Perhaps this lawsuit can bring some good. How many of us really understand what TRULY went on rather than what we already know. I can’t speak for others but I know very little. Perhaps by suing the “experts” it can shed some light on how much culpability the Bishops really had.
There is a lot of blame in this and unless we get at the truth, the full truth we won’t know what really happened. These lawsuits may help to shed some light on it.
Yes, I think you misunderstood me. I actually agree with everything you have said. My comments were intended to fortify your position.I dont think that I really replied to you post, and I think that I may have misunderstood what you wrote. Im sorry about that and Im sorry for exposing you to my heated rant.
For such an opinion to hold any kind of weight it would have to be based upon detailed information of the first hand (not through gossip or so and so). Have you had any FIRST HAND experience in these matters?I couldn’t disagree more. The entire sex abuse crisis rest soley on the shoulders of the Bishops and Preists. I believe there is a special place in hell waiting for them.
Nohome
This is a fine point and it shows how widespread the corruption of this scandal is. If I am not mistaken some people have tried to do this and were prevented because of some state law that says the Diocese (Bishop) aren’t an organization. Certainly the State shares in SOME of this blame.If anybody ought to be sued, it should be the bishops who went to these “sexperts” for solutions to problems in the Church. What on earth were they thinking? Or were they not thinking?