By Patsy Mcgarry
The Irish Times
February 25, 2009
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0225/1224241775856.html
 |
| George Bell (centre) breaks down while speaking about being abused at St Patrick's Industrial School, Upton, Co Cork during a protest by victims of abuse outside the Bicentenary Mass of the Christian and Presentation Brothers in the RDS, Dublin in 2002. New guidelines aim to standardise church responses to abuse claims. |
ANALYSIS: IT HAS been almost seven years since the Catholic bishops first announced an audit of its child protection practices and an intention to publish the findings. That followed the resignation of Bishop Brendan Comiskey in April 2002. We have yet to have either audit or report.
What was published yesterday by the National Board for Safeguarding Children (NBSC), an agency set up by the Catholic Church in 2006 but which operates independently of it, was “a work in progress, absolutely,” agreed NBSC chairman Aidan Canavan yesterday.
It is easy to see why.
Yesterday’s report noted that over the past 18 months the NBSC has been collating information on how church bodies were dealing with child protection issues.
What they found was unbelievable confusion, considering the attention this issue has received over the past two decades at least in Ireland, and publication of church guidelines in 1996 and again in 2005 following the Ferns Report.
Yesterday’s report said: “Analysis of responses to the first request for information addressed to the 26 dioceses and 166 religious congregations revealed a lack of clarity, understanding of language and common approach to safeguarding across the Church in Ireland. It was clear that the various dioceses and religious congregations placed different interpretations on what was being requested.”
So it was back to the drawing board. The report continued: “In order to obviate confusion, another request for information in December 2008 was confined to dioceses. An amended data collection questionnaire set out to facilitate a pilot study. All dioceses responded.” More confusion.
The report said of this latter exercise : “Through an examination of the returns and discussion with the dioceses of the cases behind some of the figures, it became clear that there is still variation in interpretation. The key issue was that some dioceses were being more rigorous than required by civil guidelines or Church standards.”
An example of some dioceses “being more rigorous” given yesterday by NBSC chief executive Ian Elliott was of one which reported an allegation that a priest had been seen at a football match with his hands on a child’s shoulder. The report said: “All allegations covered a broad spectrum in interpretation. Some were little more than suspicion and anonymous innuendo.”
It continued: “Having undertaken rigorous investigation of serious allegations in relation to at least one diocese, it was clear to the National Board that it would be inappropriate and unhelpful to accept these returns as a true reflection of safeguarding practice.” So we have no audit.
That must await the next NBSC report, planned for April 2010.
Yesterday’s report is reassuring on one point. It said: “The board would accept that, from the information it has received, appropriate procedures are being followed within all dioceses with regard to referring new allegations that emerge against members of clergy to the statutory authorities for their investigation.”
Yesterday’s report had been superseded by events, anyhow. On January 23rd the Irish bishops announced there would be yet another NBSC review, and all agreed to sign written commitments to co-operate fully with it and to implement the new Safeguarding Children document,also published by the NBSC yesterday.
Which is where we are at.
It remains to be seen how successful the review will be, and how successful the church will be in implementing these very latest child protection guidelines. Past experience does not inspire confidence.
But there can be no doubt that Safeguarding Children, the new “standards and guidance document for the Catholic Church in Ireland”, is a major advance on the Our Children Our Church document, published in December 2005.
It allows far less room for creative (mis)interpretation, with clear definitions of what constitutes abuse, to clear direction on who should report to whom and when.
Of possibly even greater importance are the auditing measures introduced as part of Safeguarding Children, to monitor its implementation.
The annual self-audit by church institutions, on NBSC-provided documents, should help concentrate minds, as ought the submission of that audit to the NBSC each year.
A great help in assisting such concentrating will be the NBSC plan to a carry out a number of extra audits every year, “on a planned discretionary basis”, with relevant church bodies notified 28 days in advance.
All church bodies will be so audited once every five years.
Concerns were being expressed yesterday that even still too much discretion has been allowed church authorities in Safeguarding Children.
Canavan and Elliot were both adamant yesterday that where they met lack of co-operation they would name names.
Following on the Cloyne report, there is every reason to believe they will.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.