BishopAccountability.org
	Penn State, Child Sexual Abuse, and Why We Are Responsible By Jaime Romo Healing and Spirituality November 17, 2011 http://www.jaimeromo.com/blog/archives/374 Every day the revelations about Jerry Sandusky’s history of child sexual abuse during the decades he ran his ‘Second Mile’ non-profit in which hundreds of vulnerable boys were exposed to his care become more infuriating. Adults saw, told other adults, reported to police, reported to university administrators, received formal complaints as far back as 1998 and Sandusky was allowed to continue to act with full authority and access to more and more vulnerable children. The dynamics of his grooming that led to the rape of countless youth and the betrayal of all. Some writers have offered thoughtful parallels to clergy sexual abuse and sports as religion. Jon Stewart and Saturday Night Live cast seem to have expressed more outrage than church leaders or members. But what seems to be missing from this discourse is what is missing from discussions of childhood sexual abuse by clergy, teachers, coaches, therapists and others in roles of authority. We churchgoers are responsible. My experience with churchgoers when the sexual abuse revelations and lawsuits surface is that they see and treat as “then and there” problems of individuals, both perpetrators and victims. They see the following statistics as awful and shocking, but as something unrelated to them or as something they can’t do much about: One out of four girls and one out of six boys will be sexually abused by their 18th birthday (Finkelhor, 1990). The rate of child abuse is ten times the rate of cancer (Sadler, Chadwick, & Hensler, 1999). Ninety-three percent of sex offenders describe themselves as “religious” (Abel et al., 1987). Offenders known to have abused many children who maintained significant involvement with religious institutions “had more sexual offense convictions, more victims, and younger victims” (Eshuys & Smallbone, 2006). In a survey of 2,864 church leaders, 20% knew of a sex offender who was attending or serving as a member of their church (Liautaud, 2010). Sandusky groomed his victims, like clergy have groomed victims. He bought them gifts, gave them special attention, took kids on trips, took kids to church. Did you get that? He took his victims to church! Many sex offenders see themselves as religious. Many abusers carry on their grooming behaviors with the knowledge of church members. Isn’t protecting and caring for children and vulnerable adults a role that is clearly at the center of religious organizations’ missions? Institutional responses to sexual abuse have generally ranged from “one size fits all” Safe Church policies or clergy boundary trainings to the use of on-line videos and quizzes — with little assessment of their impact on congregations or individuals. Safe Church Policies created by a few people on behalf of a congregation do not protect children or create an environment in which those who are being groomed or sexually abused can find support and healing. Too often, parents and church members take comfort in the practice of implementing background checks to discover registered sex offenders. Sandusky was not on that list, but he was gaining access to vulnerable children and grooming them right under the noses of parents and church leaders and members. I think the lack of outrage by church folks may relate to guilt, shame and anger turned inward (depression) by those who saw and did not act. It may relate to the self protective reaction of many who have experienced sexual abuse to shut down, rather than intervene. It must stop. Parents and all church goers must get educated, get angry and act now. Jaime Romo, Ed.D. , is the author of “Healing the Sexually Abused Heart: A Workbook for Survivors, Thrivers, and Supporters” and “Parents Preventing Abuse”
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.