|
No Duty
to Seek Help for Mormon Abuse Victim
By Lorraine Bailey Courthouse News Service
February 4, 2014
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/02/03/65053.htm
(CN) - A Mormon bishop who failed to consult a
church-sponsored helpline for a sexually abused teen cannot be
held liable, the Utah Supreme Court ruled.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
established a 1-800 number in 1995 exclusively for clergy
members to call and get legal and counseling advice if they
become aware of possible abuse.
Between the ages of 12 and 15, Kareena MacGregor
was regularly sexually touched by a neighbor four years her
senior, Matthew.
MacGregor also became sexually involved with
Matthew's brother, Gregory, who was two years older than she
was. At age 15, she gave birth to Gregory's baby at home. The
baby died after she put him in a window well.
During these years, MacGregor claims she confided
in her bishop, Douglas Walker, on two occasions - although the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints disputes this claim.
MacGregor allegedly told Walker that she wanted
her relationship with Matthew to end, and that she wanted to
repent. She never told him about her relationship with Gregory.
Walker told her to pray, and stop seeing Matthew,
MacGregor says, but he never used the church's 24-hour helpline
for priests to determine whether he was required to report the
sexual abuse of a minor.
In a civil case, MacGregor claims that the church
voluntarily assumed a duty of care for its parishioners by
establishing the helpline, a duty that Walker violated.
A judge in Salt Lake ruled for the church,
however, and the Utah Supreme Court ruled affirmed Tuesday.
"The church's creation of the Help Line did not
give rise to a duty to MacGregor because, regardless of whether
the church undertook to render a service to MacGregor by virtue
of the help line, the existence of the help line did not
increase her risk of harm," Justice Jill Parrish wrote for the
five-judge panel. "The risk MacGregor faced was the same as that
she would have faced had the church never created the help line.
And the imposition of a duty based solely on the creation of the
help line would be contrary to public policy because it would
discourage organizations from providing such services."
Holding the church liable for its lack of action
in this case would discourage the creation of programs by
nongovernment actors that might prevent abuse and assist
victims, the court found.
"Moreover, we must be even more sensitive when
assessing a religious organization's internal policies," Parrish
wrote. "Because imposing a duty on the church in this case would
be contrary to public policy, we decline to do so."
The Supreme Court's decision did not reach the
issue of whether the church is immune from tort liability under
the First Amendment.
|