Welcome to the Nexus of Ethics, Psychology, Morality, Philosophy and Health Care

Welcome to the nexus of ethics, psychology, morality, technology, health care, and philosophy
Showing posts with label Jerry Sandusky. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jerry Sandusky. Show all posts

Monday, October 8, 2012

In Plain View: How child molesters get away with it.

By Malcolm Gladwell
The New Yorker
Originally published September 24, 2012

Here are some excerpts:

The pedophile is often imagined as the dishevelled old man baldly offering candy to preschoolers. But the truth is that most of the time we have no clue what we are dealing with. A fellow-teacher at Mr. Clay’s school, whose son was one of those who complained of being fondled, went directly to Clay after she heard the allegations. “I didn’t do anything to those little boys,” Clay responded. “I’m innocent. . . . Would you and your husband stand beside me if it goes to court?” Of course, they said. People didn’t believe that Clay was a pedophile because people liked Clay—without realizing that Clay was in the business of being likable.

Did anyone at Penn State understand what they were dealing with, either? Here was a man who built a sophisticated, multimillion-dollar, fully integrated grooming operation, outsourcing to child-care professionals the task of locating vulnerable children—all the while playing the role of lovable goofball. “If Sandusky did not have such a human side,” Sports Illustrateds Jack McCallum wrote, in 1999, “there would be a temptation around Happy Valley to canonize him.” A week later, Bill Lyon, of the Philadelphia Inquirer, paid tribute to Sandusky’s selflessness. “In more than one motel hallway, whenever you encountered him and offered what sounded like even the vaguest sort of compliment, he would blush and an engaging, lopsided grin of modesty would wrap its way around his face,” Lyon wrote. “He isn’t in this business for recognition. His defense plays out in front of millions. But when he opens the door and invites in another stray, there is no audience. The ennobling measure of the man is that he has chosen the work that is done without public notice.”

(cut)

This is standard child-molester tradecraft. The successful pedophile does not select his targets arbitrarily. He culls them from a larger pool, testing and probing until he finds the most vulnerable. Clay, for example, first put himself in a place with easy access to children—an elementary school. Then he worked his way through his class. He began by simply asking boys if they wanted to stay after school. “Those who could not do so without parental permission were screened out,” van Dam writes. Children with vigilant parents are too risky. Those who remained were then caressed on the back, first over the shirt and then, if there was no objection from the child, under the shirt. “The child’s response was evaluated by waiting to see what was reported to the parents,” she goes on. “Parents inquiring about this behavior were told by Mr. Clay that he had simply been checking their child for signs of chicken pox. Those children were not targeted further.” The rest were “selected for more contact,” gradually moving below the belt and then to the genitals.

The child molester’s key strategy is one of escalation, desensitizing the target with an ever-expanding touch. In interviews and autobiographies, pedophiles describe their escalation techniques like fly fishermen comparing lures.

The entire story is here.

Thanks to Rick Small for this story.

Monday, July 2, 2012

Sandusky Verdict: Will Reporting Rates For Sex Abuse Improve?

A strong set of beliefs prevents reporting, but seeing the system visibly work will encourage others to come forward

by Christopher J. Ferguson
Time Magazine - Ideas
Originally published June 25, 2012

Jerry Sandusky
With the verdict in the Jerry Sandusky trial behind us, it’s worth reconsidering one of the most troubling aspects of this case: Why do many people, including professionals such as psychologists and pediatricians, fail to report child sexual abuse? It is well-known that authorities at Penn State, including head football coach Joe Paterno, did not report what they had learned to legal authorities. The incident witnessed by Mike McQueary was passed up the chain at Penn State, but no one took that crucial step of informing law enforcement officials. This failure allowed Sandusky to remain free to continue to abuse children.

It is easy to convince ourselves that we would act more decisively if we were in the same situation, and many people indeed do. But even medical and mental health professionals with a legal duty to report abuse fail to do so.

The entire story is here.

Thanks to Gary Schoener for this story.

------------------------------------

On a national ethics educators listserv, the following exchange took place about this article.

Sam Knapp:

This article reflects popular attitudes about mandated reporting.

However, reporting rates are highly influenced by rates of substantiation after reports of abuse are made. Pennsylvania has the lowest rate of substantiated child abuse in the country (one-seventh the national average) and a rate of substantiating child abuse, which is 14% (compared to 23% nationwide). And if you look across the country you find that the states that have low rates of child abuse reports tend to have low rates of substantiating those reports and states that have high rates of child abuse reports tend to have high rates of substantiating those reports. What happens is an informal process of education where mandated reporters learn, over time, that certain reports are not going to be founded (or even investigated), so they discontinue making those reports.

Some states have proposed legislation that would make the failure to file a mandated a report a felony (in most states it is a misdemeanor). My concern is that the fear of a felony will cause mandated reporters to adopt a very low threshold for making reports resulting in an investigation of a large number of cases where the likelihood of child abuse being founded is extremely low.

I know that we as a profession can do better at educating our own on child abuse and child abuse reporting laws. My point is that reporting rates are very much influenced by the response of the child protective system to those reports.

Gary Schoener responded:

I agree Sam that reporting is not the issue in terms of mandated reporters -- at least not the lone issue.

What was troubling about the Sandusky case was not the non-reporting as much as the inaction by the adults -- especially officials.  I have seen cases where at least there is internal disciplinary action, referral for therapy, etc.  In fact, some of the high visibility Catholic cases actually did involve taking action -- it's just that the action was ineffective.

One common problem was the failure of professionals who were sent pedophiles for treatment to know what they were doing, or to propose a return to work without any surveillance.  You may not remember, but in Boston there was a big pissing match between the Archdiocese and the Institute for Living.  The Archdiocese did not ask if the guy should be put back, and the Inst. for Living allegedly made no such warning or recommendation about safety.

Likewise, that Minnesota statute I mentioned was directed at people like us, asking that we be accountable in cases where someone has been caught and is being fired or resigning.  We have not eliminated silence agreements completely, I am sure, but they are very rare indeed here.

I certainly agree that reporting to child protection can be very ineffective, and the same can be true for reporting to the police.