Legal settlements and abuse

[yknot]

4 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

That's absolutely true, 100%.

The question is, what is the next best thing that can actually be done? And if that can't be done, what's the next best thing to the next best thing? And so on. Nowhere in that tree of potential actions do I see "survivors stop pursuing legal claims against tortfeasors" popping up. The argument being given for it isn't to create justice for survivors, it's pitting current scouts against survivors, which is a framing of the situation that I don't think is fruitful.

And then future-looking, like the mandatory reporting laws. That's a start, but undoubtedly sexual abuse still doesn't always get reported and prosecuted, especially when the survivors are men.

So we should ask what else can we do? We can consider the data that it is actually typical for CSA victims to never tell anyone until decades later, perhaps we should consider much longer statutes of limitations. We can remind ourselves that men are also raped, including by women, and that male rape victims deserve 100% of the support we offer female rape victims. We can demand that police believe survivors and really do everything they can to effectively clear rape cases. No years of old rape kits languishing, and so on. But again, in no case is it helpful for survivors to stop what little legal action is still possible.

I think your view also depends on whether you believe BSA shares some of the responsibility for the abuse with the perpetrators. I and many others do. Because of several lawsuits and settlements, BSA has told us, under protest, a little bit about how they have historically handled this issue. That's how the Ineligible Volunteer Files were made public. But there has been almost zero transparency since then or apart from that.  At the time the BSA declared bankruptcy, I believe some 1200 credible lawsuits were pending nationwide in communities large and small. Who knows what evidence would have been presented and what more would have become known had those cases worked their way through local legal systems -- dozens in each state.  I don't understand anger or resentment toward victims or the lawyers who represent them. If an organization that is supposed to represent the very best in moral leadership couldn't collectively figure out what the right thing to do was no matter what the times, then I don't think it should have been marketing or presenting itself as such to America's families. Parents weren't trusting their sons to Men Who Camp in the Woods With Boys, they were trusting Boy Scouts of America, and all that they believed that implied: Honor. Duty. Morally Straight, etc., etc. 

[InquisitiveScouter]

3 hours ago, yknot said:

If an organization that is supposed to represent the very best in moral leadership couldn't collectively figure out what the right thing to do was no matter what the times, then I don't think it should have been marketing or presenting itself as such to America's families. Parents weren't trusting their sons to Men Who Camp in the Woods With Boys, they were trusting Boy Scouts of America, and all that they believed that implied: Honor. Duty. Morally Straight, etc., etc. 

This is the real crux of the issue.  BSA executives, at the time, knew they had a problem within the organization, but did not make a clarion call for policies to intervene.  They chose to keep the trends they were seeing private, and protect the image and posterity of the organization, rather than take aggressive action to protect the children under their umbrella.

The IVF files, then, became the double-edged sword.  While it was a method for excluding perpetrators, it was a mechanism to keep the trends "in house", instead of bringing them into the light of day.  Their fear was that by bringing the issues to light, the BSA image would fail, and the membership roles would plummet.  They are now hoist with their own petard, as the files showed the trends that were kept hidden.  The result?  The image is tarnished, and the membership roles have fallen.

Illegal?  No. 

Unethical?  You bet. 

Morally straight?  Not in my book.

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

You beat me to it, @InquisitiveScouter. 

Because of where trying to save face led, I feel honor-bound to ignore BSA's face completely at the only way to save the BSA's face and be loyal to my scouts that I have a duty of care towards, should I get wind of any CSA around me. The scout has to come first, and to heck with what people will say about BSA. When a child under your protection needs help you just do it! Nobody will say anything good about the BSA if we're a bunch of hypocrites. Values first. Be morally straight and keep your honor intact before you do any PR.

This pattern is also not at all unique to BSA. There are so many examples of sexual abuse scandals in religious communities that have ripped organizations apart, and the bigger the face-saving effort the bigger the blowup has been. Even sports organizations have this very general pattern - my husband is suspicious of CSA in scouting, but also gymnastics. My scout's gymnastics studio hands a long anti-abuse policy checklist to new parents for a reason.

That it's a pattern of wrecking the organization's reputation (a little hyperbolic, all of the organizations affected still are operating and are held in fairly high esteem, but in the context of sexual abuse scandals they all have a black mark) because of what you did to protect it has repeated so many times I have no doubt that this is a situation of if you see the Buddha on the road, kill him. The only way to save the reputation is to ignore it completely when sexual abuse is discovered in an organization.

[InquisitiveScouter]

2 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

The result?  The image is tarnished, and the membership roles have fallen.

I am so sorry... In my haste, I completely excluded the paramount result: more kids were abused!!

Please forgive my oversight.

[ThenNow]

On 9/1/2023 at 7:50 PM, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Especially with that kind of harm, it can really mess you up. Rape can be a form of torture. Even as an adult, I read the news sometimes and wonder if I'd rather commit suicide than endure the sexual abuse some other human being endured, and it's not because I think my worth is tied up in some kind of sexual purity. It's just imagining the pain inflicted in an area that's supposed to be about the exact opposite. Mental pain on top of physical pain, physical pain that could incapacitate you (if it doesn't kill you) permanently. I can't help but doubt that my samadhi is strong enough for that kind of thing. I am no Yeshe Tsogyal (who enlightened her gang rapists even before attaining rainbow body). The friends I have who have been raped as adults really struggled. Trying to imagine what it's like to endure CSA makes me cry every time.

Bless you for your compassion and empathy, but as a CSA survivor this is a little much and wading into troubling. If you would consider dialing down the imagery and potentially triggering language, I would appreciate it. Yes, I know. Some of us speak of our abuse and the impacts, but I think we have earned the right to do that; it is not musing or speculation. Thanks a bunch.

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

If you would consider dialing down the imagery and potentially triggering language, I would appreciate it.

Absolutely! My bad, I should have thought of that. I can't delete the post, and I can no longer edit it. Perhaps a mod can help? It would be fine to just delete it.

[T2Eagle]

8 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Absolutely! My bad, I should have thought of that. I can't delete the post, and I can no longer edit it. Perhaps a mod can help? It would be fine to just delete it.

Post hidden per request

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

Thank you, @T2Eagle!

[fred8033]

On 9/1/2023 at 10:31 AM, Eagle94-A1 said:

As for the legal system, thankfully our legal system has progressed to have mandatory reporting laws so individuals and organizations can report allegations without fear of potential civil and legal trouble. People forget that mandatory reporting laws started in the late 1960/early 1970s and did not become widespread until the mid-to late 1980s. And even then, mandatory reporters were initially only physicians, then other medical professions, before it came to those of us who work with children. ...

The evolution of child protection laws is fascinating.  AND, not easy to quickly learn.  It's important to remember that the 1960s mandatory reporting targeted Battered Child Syndrome.  Thus, physicians were required to report.  Then, the fear became the 1970s / 1980s Stranger Danger.  Then, pornography.  Mandatory reporting slowly extended to teachers.  Then, other child care professions.  It's only the 1990s or even early 2000s when CSA was the main concern and that mandatory reporting was extended to everyone involved:  coaches, scout leaders, etc.  ...   The point is CSA was really not on mandatory reporting radar until relatively recently.   Decades after many of these cases. 

[fred8033]

On 9/1/2023 at 4:10 PM, InquisitiveScouter said:

This is the real crux of the issue.  BSA executives, at the time, knew they had a problem within the organization, but did not make a clarion call for policies to intervene.  They chose to keep the trends they were seeing private, and protect the image and posterity of the organization, rather than take aggressive action to protect the children under their umbrella.

The IVF files, then, became the double-edged sword.  While it was a method for excluding perpetrators, it was a mechanism to keep the trends "in house", instead of bringing them into the light of day.  Their fear was that by bringing the issues to light, the BSA image would fail, and the membership roles would plummet.  They are now hoist with their own petard, as the files showed the trends that were kept hidden.  The result?  The image is tarnished, and the membership roles have fallen.

Illegal?  No. 

Unethical?  You bet. 

Morally straight?  Not in my book.

This is where we differ.  With so many cases reported to police and a consistent effort to stop the perpetrators, I just don't believe BSA had any more responsibility than the rest of society.  Police (paid professionals that handle crime) and teachers (paid professionals that work with kids) also failed to advocate for change.  Heck, we still see teachers arrested weekly for abuse and that's decades of CSA and mandatory reporting. 

It's not about blaming victims.  It's about an accurate narrative.  

[InquisitiveScouter]

17 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

 I just don't believe BSA had any more responsibility than the rest of society. 

Not a legal responsibility, but a moral one.

[ThenNow]

1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Not a legal responsibility, but a moral one.

I sort of don't believe we're ploughing this dirt again, but there is little I don't believe about this situation after enduring the last 1294 days.

All of the societal norms and reporting jumbo mumbo gumbo aside, no other US YSO, save the the Catholic and LDS Churches, elevated men to the position of adulation and deference BSA did. Period. Both of those words are key; children and parents were instructed to elevate to pedestal height and be enormously trusting of Scoutmasters, in particular. Still, it spread across all uniform-wearing adult leaders. You may say, "Now hold on a minute there, Baba Looey!" but I was there. I saw it. I did it. So did those around me. I just got off the phone with my mother and she went on and on about how trusting she and dad were and how it seemed like the "best possible thing for me." (She also said she couldn't believe it when I didn't let my younger brothers join. Well, she didn't know the rest of the story, as PH used to say.) Maybe we were just rubes, you argue? Maybe. Ask around. I think you'd be told you're wrong.

Read the 1972 Scoutmaster's Handbook and other BSA literature to parents of the era. I had a national leader tell me "they should burn those books because they amount to, A pedophile's handbook and a "groomer's best friend." Even I was shocked to see some of that stuff on paper.

When kids and parents are told to, effectively, revere and give a very wide berth to someone's leadership, decisions, and actions, it's a powerful thing, especially then. I never saw such literature published and distributed to pave the way for such reverence and deference to my coaches, band directors, Key Club faculty sponsor, choir director...it never happened. Does that create an entirely different moral, social and psychological paradigm in which people act? C'mon, man. Of course it does.

-The End

PS - It's good to be back.  

Edited September 4, 2023 by ThenNow
Oops. Old habits die hard...with a vengeance.

[yknot]

2 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

I sort of don't believe we're ploughing this dirt again, but there is little I don't believe about this situation after enduring the last 1294 days.

All of the societal norms and reporting jumbo mumbo gumbo aside, no other US YSO, save the the Catholic and LDS Churches, elevated men to the position of adulation and deference BSA did. Period. Both of those words are key; children and parents were instructed to elevate to pedestal height and be enormously trusting of Scoutmasters, in particular, Still, it spread across all uniform-wearing adult leaders. You may say, "Now hold on a minute there, Baba Looey!" but I was there. I saw it. I did it. So did those around me. I just got off the phone with my mother and she went on and on about how trusting she and dad were and how it seemed like the "best possible thing for me." (She also said she couldn't believe it when I didn't let my younger brothers join. Well, she didn't know the rest of the story, as PH used to say.) Maybe we were just rubes, you argue? Maybe. Ask around. I think you'd be told you're wrong.

Read the 1972 Scoutmaster's Handbook and other BSA literature to parents of the era. I had a national leader tell me "they should burn those books because they amount to, A pedophile's handbook and a "groomer's best friend." Even I was shocked to see some of that stuff on paper.

When kids and parents are told to, effectively, revere and give a very wide berth to someone's leadership, decisions, and actions, it's a powerful thing, especially then. I never saw such literature published and distributed to pave the way for such reverence and deference to my coaches, band directors, Key Club faculty sponsor, choir director...it never happened. Does that create an entirely different moral, social and psychological paradigm in which people act? C'mon, man. Of course it does.

-The End

PS - It's good to be back.  

What you have described is why BSA is culpable. 

[skeptic]

2 hours ago, yknot said:

What you have described is why BSA is culpable. 

While your perspective has merit, again it was a different society.  I do though wonder how you did not see that similar respect and as you call it, bowing almost to the SM etc. in other youth leaders.  We were expected to do what those adults said, often with little expectation other than jump and follow.  Also, families were still more likely to enforce the absolute  concept of do not disrespect elders and so on.  But, it is really not comparing the proverbial fruits, and surely not comparative in the flow of time and societal evolution.  At least they BSA had a petard on which to be impaled.  Hardly anyone else did, and certainly the broader communities of the time did not, though we have all read about the suspected abuse that was found mutilated or just dead someplace.  Those responses may have been the best many had at the time, and ifit was widely accepted within the community that the person may be a predator, most would look the other way, or even say "just desserts".  Ultimately, we need to pay attention, follow the rules, always be vigilant, no matter who may be involved, and keep the youth foremost in our concern.  Sadly, it will still occur I fear.  And the images and examples in our modern society are not conducive to supporting this approach.  

[johnsch322]

28 minutes ago, skeptic said:

While your perspective has merit, again it was a different society.  I do though wonder how you did not see that similar respect and as you call it, bowing almost to the SM etc. in other youth leaders.  We were expected to do what those adults said, often with little expectation other than jump and follow.  Also, families were still more likely to enforce the absolute  concept of do not disrespect elders and so on.  But, it is really not comparing the proverbial fruits, and surely not comparative in the flow of time and societal evolution.  At least they BSA had a petard on which to be impaled.  Hardly anyone else did, and certainly the broader communities of the time did not, though we have all read about the suspected abuse that was found mutilated or just dead someplace.  Those responses may have been the best many had at the time, and ifit was widely accepted within the community that the person may be a predator, most would look the other way, or even say "just desserts".  Ultimately, we need to pay attention, follow the rules, always be vigilant, no matter who may be involved, and keep the youth foremost in our concern.  Sadly, it will still occur I fear.  And the images and examples in our modern society are not conducive to supporting this approach.  

So why is it that you feel that the BSA should not be held as accountable as the Catholic Church and other organizations which has had to pay out billions to victims of child abuse which happened at the same time as BSA Child Sexual Abuse?  Why do you blame parents, law enforcement, lawyers, society norms etc etc and not just say BSA was wrong for their cover ups and strong arming of parents not to prosecute and then burying any reports that they archives until the Oregon Supreme Court ordered the files to be released.