Читать книгу Preventing Child Sexual Abuse In Youth-Serving Organizations - Norman D. Bates - Страница 5

With reported rates of child sexual abuse reaching anywhere from 8% to 20% of the child population under 18, the true extensiveness of the problem is unknown. When assessing rates of child sexual abuse, a number of considerations must be understood and will be discussed throughout the first portion of this publication. Issues that may arise and pose a threat to the accuracy of child sexual abuse rates include distinguishing between intra- and extra-familial sexual abuse, delays in disclosure/reporting and under-reporting, and the limited prosecution of child sexual abuse cases.

1.Intra- and Extra-Familial Sexual Abuse

The reality of child sexual abuse is that most offenders are known to their victims, including relatives and family members. According to the Bureau of Statistics, it is estimated that approximately 90% of juvenile sexual abuse victims know their perpetrator in some way. However, the first gap in research and statistics of child sexual abuse is the challenge of categorizing offenders of child sexual abuse. Part of this can be attributed to the inherent complexity and nature of human relationships. Individuals can have family members, relatives, biological and non-biological parents/relatives, close friends, friends, acquaintances, friends of the family, trusted known persons, known persons, and strangers. It is no small feat to attempt to classify each case of sexual abuse into one of these categories, and therefore the categories are often condensed for purposes of simplicity. Some studies condense the categories of offenders to “known” versus “stranger”, while others attempt to elaborate and separate offenders into categories of relative/family member, acquaintance, and stranger.

The lack of uniformity about how to characterize offenders leads to poor estimates of the perpetrator data for child sexual abuse. Within the data analysis, how to distinguish a trusted coach who is a “friend of the family” from a worker at a local youth organization, who does not share a similar relationship to the family, remains an enigma. Because most child sexual abuse occurs within the family, traditional research may place less importance on the other categories of victim/offender relationships. This may be why the data for intra-familial child sexual abuse is more thorough than that for extra-familial child sexual abuse.

However, attention has shifted in recent years as a result of numerous child sexual abuse scandals reported by the press. The media has highlighted the need to be aware of individuals who are not immediately related to the child or are acquaintances of the family, but who may be working with the child in another capacity such as a coach, teacher, day care worker, or youth volunteer.

This publication will highlight some youth-serving organizations where the extra-familial relationships can be found. Substantial efforts are being made within these organizations to combat CSA. The organizations discussed include the Boy Scouts of America (BSA), YMCA, the Amateur Athletic Union (AAU), Big Brothers Big Sisters of America, and the Boys and Girls Club of America.

2.Disclosure of the Abuse

In addition to facing categorization difficulties, data regarding child sexual abuse is also skewed because of delayed disclosure or non-disclosure. Consequently, the exact number of children who are sexually abused annually is difficult to estimate. Yet, according to the Darkness to Light organization, “even if the true prevalence of child abuse is not known, most professionals agree that there will be 500,000 babies in the US this year that will be sexually abused before they turn 18 if steps are not taken to prevent it.”¹²

While the concept of non-disclosure poses a problem similar to that of delayed disclosure, the term “disclosure” itself lacks a clear and concise definition among researchers. Disclosure in this publication means the victim making sexual abuse public.

One of the main factors in whether children decide to disclose incidences of sexual abuse has primarily to do with who they are reporting it to and how likely those people are to believe what the children are saying. Parents should therefore maintain and create comfortable communication between themselves and their children. Studies have shown that “more than half of all child abuse incidents are never reported because the victims are too afraid or too confused to be able to report their experiences.”¹³

As a result of the fear of disclosing, the average age of disclosure of child sexual abuse is around 25 years, and only one-third of those sexually abused disclosed it before the age of 18. This is called delayed disclosure, and is often linked with repressed memories and other illnesses stemming from the abuse. Delayed disclosures are often difficult to substantiate because of the time that has elapsed between the sexual abuse and the report.

The following narrative is an excerpt from a police report, which illustrates a typical delayed disclosure in a case involving child sexual abuse.

“Victim states that ten years ago he was sexually assaulted by a white male named [name of assailant]. Victim states that he was at a lock-in at the [YSO facility] at 30 Main Street. Victim advised that he and other juveniles were with [the assailant] when the assault occurred. [The assailant] was supposed to be a counselor in training at the [YSO]. Victim advised that there should be other victims of sexual assault from the same subject.”

3.Limited Prosecution of Offenders

Another challenge to the accuracy of child sexual abuse rates is the limited prosecution of child sexual abuse cases. For example, arrests are made in only 29% of the cases reported to the police, with arrests being made more often in incidents involving older children (32%). Arrests are made in only 19% of cases involving children under the age of 6.¹⁴ In many cases where arrests are made, there is no prosecution.

Another possible reason for a case to not be prosecuted is the retraction of the accusation. Due to the pressure and encouragement of some adults, there are situations in which children will take back their accusations. There are a number of possible reasons why parents or guardians would pressure children into retracting their statements. One of the main reasons is that parents are concerned that their child would suffer more if made to go through an investigation and trial. This is often done on “behalf of the child,” so as not to put them through additional trauma.

Another reason for there to be no prosecution may be a lack of sufficient evidence. It is for this reason that reporting, interviewing, and investigative protocols are crucially important. They may be the difference between prosecuting the crime or not.

The reported number of child sexual abuse incidents is therefore lower than the actual frequency. This is due to cases being dropped, unsubstantiated, or retracted, even though the crime may have occurred.

Reporting sexual abuse is difficult and complex. There may be a number of reasons why a child withholds this information. A few examples cited by victims are shame and guilt, fear of backlash, not being “heard” or understood, getting in trouble or the fear of getting in trouble, poor communication with the adults in their lives, fear of repeat victimization, being threatened by the offender, and being in a position where contact with the offender is continuing. As previously mentioned, offenders are usually someone the child knows and may continue to see. They may endure not only the fear of disclosing but also the fear of being sexually abused again.

The Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome¹⁵

The Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS) is a syndrome that may account for a number of factors that prevent children from disclosing sexual abuse. They are as follows:

1. Secrecy The location of sexual abuse can be isolated or secluded; secrecy can also refer to the offender insisting on silence surrounding the abuse.

2. Helplessness Oftentimes, children are preyed upon by adults or individuals older than them who exude an air of power and authority, rendering them helpless to stop, avoid, or report the offender’s actions.

3. Entrapment and accommodation Children may feel trapped in the situation because of not immediately disclosing the sexual abuse or due to the pre-existing relationship that they may have had with the offender. The children accommodate, or learn to accept, the abusive behavior by blaming themselves or believing that their actions somehow warrant the sexual abuse.

4. Delayed, conflicted, and unconvincing disclosure Delayed disclosures are loaded with limitations and questions regarding their accuracy. Even when children do immediately disclose, precautions are taken relating to them potentially being confused about a situation or circumstance. This can sometimes lead to charges being dropped and no penalty for the offender.

5. Retraction While children may retract their disclosures, there are also situations where due to the pressure and encouragement of adults, parents or law enforcement, children will take back their accusation. This is often done on “behalf of the child,” so as not to put them through the trauma of a trial, or possibly because there does not exist enough evidence.

http://www.naasca.org/2011-Articles/060111-ChildSexAbuseAccommodationSyndrome.htm

Child Sexual Abuse in Sports

It is suggested that between 2% and 8% of all athletes experience some form of sexual abuse.¹⁶ Sexual abuse in sports and the failure to report incidents have received considerable attention after being brought to light by the Jerry Sandusky scandal at Penn State. Despite extensive publicity, effective policies are still lacking in the sports community. Given the culture of some sports, athletes may “normalize” inappropriate behaviors and therefore not perceive the conduct (e.g., sexual abuse) by the coach as inappropriate.

The complexity of sport-related sexual abuse has increased because of the role of the offender. In this setting, the offender is frequently in a position of control and authority, making disclosure by the victim much more difficult. Disclosure in these instances can be delayed and may not occur until long after the child has left the sport or been far removed from the offender. For this reason, it is not uncommon for children being sexually abused by coaches to suffer over a long period of time.

Ignoring the Problem

In this environment, as well as other youth organization cultures, it is important that administrators understand and respect the seriousness of such crimes and the critical importance of reporting suspected incidents. Unfortunately, there are obstacles. The following is a quote published in a study of sexual abuse disclosures within sports organizations. The administrator is discussing a case that occurred within his organizations where several children eventually came forward making similar claims against the same offender.

“What really helped in the case in my view was when the second [victimized athlete] came forward. If there had just been the first girl [the victim who filed the first complaint], a girl who is a bit emotionally unstable...Only girls who are kind of [emotionally] weak wouldn’t realize when this happens that it is totally unacceptable. That girl who was a bit unstable at the time...I’m not sure she had the credibility to have him [name of the coach] formally accused and then found guilty.”¹⁷

On some level, there is an understandable hesitation on the part of many administrators to turn to law enforcement because they do not want to exaggerate a situation that may be harmless, harm the reputation of the accused, or harm the health and well-being of the child. However, those in charge must follow proper procedure once they receive a report regardless of the situation.

Reporting sexual abuse only starts at the initial disclosure. The quote above stresses the need for more effective procedures on how to investigate those claims. It also emphasizes the importance of taking all claims seriously, regardless of the circumstances. Additional children can be victimized by an offender who goes unpunished.

Another example of the problem of ignorance surrounding child sexual abuse is illustrated by the numerous e-mails between Penn State University officials about how to approach the allegations of child sexual abuse against Jerry Sandusky.

On June 8th, 1998, Gary Schultz, Senior Vice President for Finance and Business at Penn State, wrote the following to Athletic Director Tim Curley in an e-mail with the subject line “Jerry” when asked for an update:

“Tim, I don’t have an update at this point. Just before I left for vac[ation], Tom told me that the DPW [Department of Public Welfare] and Univ[ersity] Police services were planning to meet with him. I’ll see if this has happened and get back to you.”¹⁸

This e-mail shows an ignorance about both the severity of the problem and the proper procedures to follow when allegations of child sexual abuse are made. Not only did the officials not know if or when the meeting with police had happened, but Schultz went on vacation in the middle of a significant time for investigating and protecting children who were being victimized.

On June 9th, Schultz informed Curley and two other officials, including the University President, of the following:

“They met with Jerry on Monday and concluded that there was no criminal behavior and the matter was closed as an investigation. He was a little emotional and expressed concern as to how this might have adversely affected the child. I think the matter has been appropriately investigated and I hope it is now behind us.”¹⁹

On the contrary, this matter was not behind them. Sandusky continued to sexually abuse boys. These officials faced a similar problem but again failed to go through the proper reporting channels in 2001 when more allegations were made against him.

The report by a Special Investigative Council states that the investigation revealed “a striking lack of empathy for child abuse victims by the most senior leaders of the University” as well as “a lack of awareness of child abuse issues” and “a failure of the Board...by not having regular reporting procedures or committee structures in place to ensure disclosure to the Board of major risks to the University.”²⁰

A great deal of concern has arisen from the apparent lack of action and failure to properly report Sandusky’s known offensive behavior to the appropriate authorities. Joe Paterno, Gary Schultz, and Tim Curley have been heavily criticized for their lack of response to the complaints. The timeline of Sandusky’s offensive behavior highlights common grooming methods used, the failure to report, and victim trauma as a result of ignoring the problem.

A Timeline of Offensive Behavior: The Jerry Sandusky Scandal at Penn State University²¹

1994: There were allegations of inappropriate behavior against Jerry Sandusky, the former defensive coordinator at Penn State, beginning as early as 1994.

1994-2011: Victims of Sandusky ranged in age from 7 to 13 years old.

1994-2011: Sandusky, like many perpetrators, began his sexual abuse with grooming such as touching, fondling, talking about inappropriate topics, and suggestive sexual talk. This escalated over time to full sexual encounters.

1994-2011: The victims were sexually abused in various locations including Sandusky’s home, his vehicle, hotel rooms, and the Penn State football facilities.

1997: Sandusky founded the Second Mile, a charity that was specifically geared towards assisting “at-risk” youth boys, many of whom became his victims.

1998: A claim was made against Sandusky stating that Sandusky had showered with an 11-year-old boy. In a June 1998 interview with investigators from multiple agencies, Sandusky admitted to showering naked with the boy, admitted that he knew that it was wrong, and promised not to do it again, according to the Grand Jury report. The district attorney advised investigators that no charges be filed and the University police chief instructed that the case be closed.

1999: Sandusky retired, but was still given access to the facilities where he continued to carry out his sexual abuse of boys from the Second Mile charity organization.

2001: Athletic Director Tim Curley was notified after an eyewitness informed Joe Paterno, then head football coach at Penn State, that he saw Sandusky sexually abusing a boy.

2001: About a week later, Mr. Curley and Gary Schultz, senior vice president for finance and business, met with the eyewitness, then told Sandusky that he could not bring any children from the Second Mile onto campus. Later, a Grand Jury said that Mr. Curley acknowledged that this ban was unenforceable. The university officials did not alert law enforcement.

2008: Despite the early suspicions and allegations dating back to 1994, the investigation into child sexual abuse by Jerry Sandusky did not begin until 2008.

2011: Sandusky was ultimately arrested on November 5, 2011 on charges of “sexually abusing eight boys over a 15 year period.” He was found guilty on 45 counts of the total 48 counts against him. Sandusky admitted in an interview, “I have horsed around with kids. I have showered after workouts. I have hugged them.”

2012: In June of 2012, Jerry Sandusky’s son came forward accusing him of abuse.

Here are some of the disturbing accounts of the victims and persons involved in this case.

•The Tickle Monster

•“Who would believe kids?”

•In the basement, nobody can hear you scream.

•Creepy love letters

•“He told me that if I ever told anyone, I’d never see my family again.”

•A skin-on-skin smacking sound

•Sandusky has “a heart of gold”: how the school counselor reassured the young victim who finally found the courage to confide

•Raspberries blown on the tummy

•The crying janitor, who has seen too much.

•“It is just remarkable how many children one man can shower with.”

•A young man, now shaken by the sight of chest hair.

Steps Towards Increasing Reports of CSA

Under-reporting can sometimes be attributed to the professionals who are responsible for reporting the suspected abuse. In order to combat the problem of under-reporting, teachers and individuals who work with children in various capacities should be trained in policies and procedures so that they

•Know how to identify possible sexual abuse

•Know what steps to take to report the suspicion to the appropriate person or agency

Organizations need to make their reporting policies clear and concise to anyone witnessing or suspecting child sexual abuse. Clear policies help to identify the appropriate channels of communication through which reports must be made. An organization may have pre-existing policies already in place but if an employee is confused about who the “appropriate authority” to report to is, or how exactly to report the abuse, they could become deterred from doing so for fear of doing it incorrectly or receiving backlash for not proceeding correctly.

Law enforcement should also establish policies to encourage reporting, including

•Emphasizing the criminal seriousness of such offenses

•Providing incentives to report

•Making reporting easier

•Working with schools about policies concerning when to involve the police.²²

It is important to note that individuals required to report sexual abuse can be legally culpable for not reporting it. In some instances, it is a felony offense to not report an incident when required by law.

See Appendix 1 and 2 for sample state statutes requiring mandatory reporting and the penalties for the failure to report child sexual abuse.