| By
Voice staff
The Response
and Prevention Project of the U.S. Catholic bishops has released the results
of a national survey asking victims/survivors of clergy sexual abuse how
dioceses and parishes can develop appropriate responses to others who
have also suffered this abuse.
The survey was designed to elicit direct input and to provide survivors
the opportunity to voice their thoughts and express their feelings, said
Mary A. Lentz, an attorney who served as project director. The resulting
report is based on four focus groups for victims conducted in the spring
of 2004 as well as a Web-based survey. The latter received more than 1,300
actual responses, plus another 31,554 hits on the Web site.
Covering a variety of topics, the survey asked survivors what kinds of
coping mechanisms they used following their abuse, what responses they
received from diocesan officials, how their cases were handled and their
recommendations for responding to new cases.
Coping mechanisms ranged from mediation and prayer to avoiding any involvement
with the Church. Survivors mentioned seeking counseling/therapy and spiritual
direction; keeping a journal, helping others, learning more about the
dynamics of sexual abuse, reporting the abuser, becoming involved in a
support group, acknowledging that sexual abuse is not the fault of the
victim/survivor, and trying not to abuse drugs, alcohol, sex, or prescription
drugs.
Over 52 percent of the 787 respondents, who answered a question about
further contact with their abuser, responded that the survivor should
not have contact with the abuser.
Another 47.9 percent recommended that contact should take place either
in person, in writing, by telephone, or with another person present.
Asked to write a narrative listing recommendations as to how other survivors
can best begin their healing journey, 86.1 percent recommended counseling,
and 66.8 percent said that survivors needed to contact law enforcement.
Another 61.7 percent recommended that the abuse be reported to the diocesan/eparchy/religious
order.
The most frequent responses suggested that survivors contact national
support groups and talk with others like themselves. Some respondents
suggested that a lawyer be contacted while an equal number recommended
that lawyers be kept out of the process.
Over 600 people addressed how diocesan actions could have made a substantial
difference in a survivor’s healing. Their consensus was that Church
officials lacked prompt response and failed to believe the survivors when
they made their reports. People wrote of the Church’s “rapid,
but empty” responses; no responses; officials’ belief that
the abuser was innocent and that survivor was at fault.
When asked to recommend helpful actions that Church officials could provide,
survivors cited direct apologies, prayer, comfort, continual communication,
and spiritual support.
Other recommendations included providing networking opportunities among
survivors, making certain the perpetrator accepts responsibility, taking
seriously all accusations and suspicions, removing all hierarchy who aided
the abuser, educating people about what sexual abuse really is, mediating
a just compensation, paying for therapy and medical treatment for survivors,
and telling survivors where to report sexual abuse.
They also recommended that dioceses establish a confidential hot-line
to report sexual abuse, carefully study seminary formation, acknowledge
that sexual abusers cannot be cured, remove all sexual abusers from active
ministry, prohibit any sexual abuser from access to children alone, stop
transferring abusers, release names of all abusers, address child sexual
abuse as a known societal problem; and implement education programs regarding
sexual abuse.
Results of the survey can be accessed at: www.usccb.org/ocyp/rpproject.shtml
|
|
|