Connected ? to the abuse thread, indirectly?

[skeptic]

A bill being proposed to deal with private institutional youth schools and such.  How much is this in some way similar to the abuse issue with BSA and others?

 

 

https://www.aol.com/entertainment/revealing-sexual-abuse-allegations-paris-191112644.html

[yknot]

58 minutes ago, skeptic said:

A bill being proposed to deal with private institutional youth schools and such.  How much is this in some way similar to the abuse issue with BSA and others?

 

 

https://www.aol.com/entertainment/revealing-sexual-abuse-allegations-paris-191112644.html

I don't think much unless it's related to the LDS connection to many of these troubled teen schools. 

[qwazse]

Exploitive teachers are nothing new. The issue is what schools are doing to screen out such teachers. Schools that are under the auspices of a larger organization may face legal action similar to BSA. How likely that is depends on the wealth of the organization.

[OaklandAndy]

38 minutes ago, qwazse said:

The issue is what schools are doing to screen out such teachers

Not trying to cause any opposition, but when did the public forget that people can be inherently evil. If an organization has done all they can do to put in safeguards and protect children and even employees, why should they be held responsible? There is no 100% guarantee that any organization can protect anyone from everything. Bad things happen. Now if any organization fails to put in those safeguards, then yes sue the heck out of them. Otherwise, individuals need to be  held for individual actions. If someone wants to do something illegal, then  they are going to do it no matter how many safeguards, screenings, trainings, seminars, etc., that you have. 

[fred8033]

52 minutes ago, OaklandAndy said:

... If an organization has done all they can do to put in safeguards and protect children and even employees, why should they be held responsible? ...

The gotcha is judging in hindsight whether they did all they can do.  The judgements will be very different in the moment ... versus a year later ... versus 25 years later.   No much survives unscathed when deciding what went wrong.  

Edited May 13, 2022 by fred8033

[OaklandAndy]

37 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

The judgements will be very different in the moment ... versus a year later ... versus 25 years later. 

If everything that could be done was done at the time, that should release them from future liability. It's like knowing you can be sued at any moment in the future even though you're doing everything right today. God help us. 

[fred8033]

2 hours ago, OaklandAndy said:

If everything that could be done was done at the time, that should release them from future liability. It's like knowing you can be sued at any moment in the future even though you're doing everything right today. God help us. 

Agreed.  It should.  It doesn't though.  "everything" always infers a reasonableness as in the definition of negligence.  The change is "reasonableness" changes over time as we learn and society changes. 

[ThenNow]

4 hours ago, OaklandAndy said:

Now if any organization fails to put in those safeguards, then yes sue the heck out of them. Otherwise, individuals need to be  held for individual actions. If someone wants to do something illegal, then  they are going to do it no matter how many safeguards, screenings, trainings, seminars, etc., that you have. 

I'm not sure if I am picking too much of a nit with your choice of language, but "putting in place safeguards..." is somewhat desultory or mechanical. Structure without comprehensive, consistent, enthusiastic application, oversight and upgrades is a skeleton without a brain, muscle, organs, blood, etc. (Apologies if those things were inherent in what you meant.) For example, I think the new YP measures in the plan "force," facilitate and enhance both the processes and protocols and cultural reinforcement in high-leverage areas that were lax. My nickels. 

Edited May 13, 2022 by ThenNow