Do the Boy Scouts have their own sex abuse crisis brewing?
A man in Oregon was just compensated $1.4 million dollars for sexual abuse he suffered as a child at the hands of a Scoutmaster in the 1980s.
The troubling part of the case was the introduction of what has been described by the Associated Press as “so-called perversion files.”
According to press coverage, the Scouts kept semi-secret files on misbehavior by scoutmasters for decades, apparently without revealing the information to police or other authorities.
Lawyers for the Scouts argued the files helped weed out suspected child molesters.
But the attorneys for Kerry Lewis, the man who filed the lawsuit, argued that keeping them secret meant that parents, children and volunteers were not warned about the risk of sexual abuse.
Worse, said attorneys Kelly Clark and Paul Mones, was the failure of the Scouts to set up a system to prevent and report abuse, and make it a top priority among all its members — despite decades of files.
The lawyers focused on the files from 1965 to mid-1984 in their case, calling them the “tip of the iceberg” because sex abuse is considered to be greatly underreported, especially in that era.
Scout officials argue that the number of assaults is minor, given the organization’s size.
But a continuing mystery here is why so many organizations felt it necessary to entangle themselves in these decisions.
Why not simply call the legal authorities — police, prosecutors — who have the expertise to deal with and resolve alleged or suspected sexual assaults?
This stuff has been going on for a long time. My 93 year old dad shared a couple stories when he was a boy. While he avoided be molested he was always suspicious of the type of person who became a scout leader over the years.
It makes you wonder why the organizations who most strongly push anti-gay policies are the ones that have the most problems with pedophilia.Or maybe it's because those organizations tend to push very hard the idea of obedience to authority (as opposed to mere respect for it).
First, I do not understand why people who claim to have been molested (and their parents) go to the organization where the molester works to make a complaint, rather than going to the police in the first place.If a Scout Master or a priest had shot at them, I think their first stop would have been the police, not the organizationThen years later, when they see others raking in the cash, they decide to sue.When they say it's not about the money, it's the money – for them and the lawyers.
Pete, I would hate to think that all of the many thousands of victims of childhood sexual abuse in our nation – regardless of the source of that abuse and regardless the type of "uniform" worn or "authority figure" status held by their perpetrators – are now being forthright about being abused by priests, ministers, teachers, Scout masters, etc. in order to become enriched by the telling.Many people, especially men, are deeply embarrassed and humiliated at what was done to them by these trusted and respected authoritiy figures. They are reluctant to admit to anyone, even to themselves, what took place while they were children.Also, there are cases where the molested child experienced pleasure at the out-of-bounds behavior of their molesters and they actually bonded with and respect the molester. As adults, these recollections bring back feelings of guilt and a sense that it is their fault for allowing the adult to molest them.Claiming that the molested are only coming forward to make themselves and their lawyers rich is not only wrong, it is hard-hearted and could only serve to give comfort to those bastards who have enjoyed destroying the souls and psyche's of the innocent.
fjthies,You neglected to comment on my first and most important point.As to the lawsuits, I have always been against lawsuits. This includes the OJ lawsuit.Money taints. I believe the criminal courts are the place for criminal crimes.Period.
I do understand your first point, Pete Klein.But why should the victims be limited to pursuing justice solely through the criminal justice system?Especially so, when these crimes are often revealed by the victims many years after the statute of limitations has run it's course. The litigants are then left with the options of exposing their abusers and the institutions that sheltered them to the court of public opinion, and to sue their sorry asses for as much money as they can legally obtain in restitution for the years of mental suffering – guilt, depression, suicidal thoughts, and nightmares that continued long after the physical abuse stopped.Yes, lawsuits serve a purpose, whether you like them or not.For you to suggest that the victims are coming forward solely to reap some type of financial windfall is a verbal slap in the face to those who have been abused.Pete Klein, if you slipped down someone's hypothetical porch steps, that were not legally up to building codes, and broke your neck in the fall, you would consider hiring an attorney.
No, I would not.I have health insurance.If the insurance wants to sue to get back what they paid for my bills, that's their choice.