{"id":1113,"date":"2022-07-30T18:49:22","date_gmt":"2022-07-30T18:49:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jwchildabuse.org\/xqllht\/?p=1113"},"modified":"2022-07-30T20:08:34","modified_gmt":"2022-07-30T20:08:34","slug":"2016-watchtower-releases-updated-child-abuse-directive-to-elders","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jwchildabuse.org\/xqllht\/news\/2016-watchtower-releases-updated-child-abuse-directive-to-elders\/","title":{"rendered":"2016: Watchtower Releases Updated Child Abuse Directive to Elders"},"content":{"rendered":"

Published August 4th, 2016<\/em><\/p>\n

In a newly released\u00a0letter to all elders dated August 1st 2016<\/span><\/a>, The Christian Congregation of Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses has once again revised its instructions to elders on dealing with allegations of child abuse.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, the changes are completely inert, failing to address the flaws which have resulted in unprecedented numbers of lawsuits against JW congregations and their worldwide headquarters in New York.<\/p>\n

This leaked, internal document\u00a0is a modification of the\u00a0October 1st 2012 letter to elders<\/a><\/span>, which served as a guideline\u00a0for Jehovah\u2019s Witness elders who have come to obtain knowledge of an accusation of the physical or sexual abuse of a minor.<\/p>\n

For those unfamiliar with this ongoing saga, Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses maintain a rigidly controlled\u00a0central network of elders who are required to make first contact with the JW legal department instead of local police or child protection authorities when they become aware of child abuse allegations.<\/p>\n

The letter, deceptively titled \u201cProtecting Minors from Abuse\u201d is a 6-page document that contains the terms \u201clegal\u201d or \u201clegal department\u201d no less than 17 different times, and functions as an organizational tool that should be more accurately titled \u201cProtecting the Jehovah\u2019s Witness Organization from Liability and Negative Publicity.\u201d<\/p>\n

Legal Considerations<\/h3>\n

Following a descriptive definition of the term \u201cchild abuse,\u201d \u00a0Watchtower\u2019s instructions waste no time reminding elders that they may<\/b>\u00a0<\/em>be obligated to report an allegation of child abuse to local authorities.<\/p>\n

\"2016<\/a><\/p>\n

This is significant because this statement offers no proactive protection for victims, only a reactive reminder that elders\u00a0might<\/strong>\u00a0<\/em>be forced to comply with state laws. And who is responsible for informing elders of state laws in their jurisdiction? The Watchtower Legal Department.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cTo ensure that elders comply with child-abuse reporting laws, two elders should immediately call the Legal Department for legal advice when the elders learn of an accusation of child abuse. (Rom. 13:1-4)\u201d \u2013 Paragraph 6 August 1, 2016 Letter.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Using the example of the United States, it might seem logical that with 50 independent state governments, a centralized legal department would simplify the process for local elders, who are generally uninformed in legal matters. Unfortunately, the cold reality is that once the call is placed to Watchtower\u2019s legal department, the focus shifts from the protection of the victim to the protection of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, and their internal investigation of the accused.<\/p>\n

Absolute Right<\/h3>\n

As stated in paragraph 5 of the Watchtower letter, \u201cIn all cases, the victim and her parents have the\u00a0absolute right<\/strong>\u00a0to report an allegation to the authorities.\u201d \u00a0The term \u201cabsolute right\u201d does not originate with Watchtower, but is a legal term defined this way:<\/p>\n

\n

an unqualified right :<\/span>\u00a0 a legally enforceable right to take some action or to refrain from acting at the sole discretion of the person having the right\u201d (Merriam Webster)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The term appears in the final chapter of the JW elders\u2019s handbook \u201cShepherd the Flock of God\u201d under \u201cClarifications and Guidelines on Handling Certain Matters\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cChild abuse is a crime. Never suggest to anyone\u00a0that they should not report an allegation\u00a0of child abuse to the police or other authorities.\u00a0If you are asked, make it clear that whether to report\u00a0the matter to the authorities or not is a personal\u00a0decision for each individual to make and that there\u00a0are no congregation sanctions for either decision. Elders\u00a0will not criticize anyone who reports such an allegation\u00a0to the authorities.\u00a0If the victim wishes to\u00a0make a report, it is his or her absolute right to do so<\/strong>.\u201d \u00a0\u2013 Shepherd the Flock of God, pages 131- 32<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Clearly, Watchtower has purposefully\u00a0muddied the waters of justice by issuing a confusing statement in the very\u00a0book which should be relied upon to clarify the handling of serious matters. Instead, they obfuscate procedures by suggesting inaction on the part of elders, and shifting the burden of reporting abuse\u00a0to the victim. There is a substantial difference between\u00a0never<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0telling someone\u00a0not<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0to report, and actively telling someone they\u00a0should<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0report.<\/p>\n

In a great majority of JW abuse cases, the victims are underage, emotionally devastated, embarrassed, and completely unable to comprehend or navigate the process of reporting their abuser and the crime itself. Watchtower has effectively told the victim \u201cWe won\u2019t stop you from reporting this crime to the police if you really feel this is necessary; we are required to inform you that it is your legal \u2018absolute right\u2019 to do so, but we will not encourage this unless we as the body of elders are legally held responsible to contact the authorities.\u201d<\/p>\n

During the April 2013\u00a0Inquiry into the handling of child abuse by religious and other organisations<\/span><\/a>, held in Victoria Australia (not the 2015 Australian Royal Commission,) Watchtower legal counsel\u00a0Ms. Rachel\u00a0Van Witsen regurgitated the \u201cabsolute right\u201d phrase\u00a0multiple times, including the following statement defending Watchtower\u2019s position:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cOn that, if I may add, as part of giving that advice, our instructions are that first and\u00a0foremost is the protection of children in the organisation, whatever that takes. At the moment, because there is\u00a0no mandatory reporting for ministers of religion in Victoria, then the victim, who has very often had their\u00a0dignity removed, is then put in the driver\u2019s seat.\u00a0It is entirely their absolute right<\/strong>, and the elders are directed to\u00a0tell the victim and their family that it is their\u00a0absolute right<\/strong>, to report to the authorities, that they would be fully\u00a0supported whichever decision they made and that the elders are also directed in that advice to fully cooperate\u00a0with any police investigation.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Ms. Van Witsen was reminded by the court that the Australian Evidence Act of 2008 makes a special allowance for elders of any religion to report details of criminal conduct to civil authorities with no penalty. \u00a0Watchtower has flat out refused to comply<\/strong>\u00a0with this allowance. \u00a0This detail was revealed in the exchange between the honorable Nicholas Wakeling and acting Watchtower Australian Branch Overseer Terry O\u2019Brien:<\/p>\n

Mr. WAKELING<\/strong> \u2014 I am trying to be very clear here. If there was evidence of child abuse within the church that you are aware of, would you report that to the police?<\/p>\n

Mr. T. O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong> \u2014 Not if the victim did not want it reported.<\/p>\n

Mr. WAKELING<\/strong> \u2014 No, I am not asking you about the victim. I am asking: would you as an organisation report that to the police if you became aware of child abuse within your organisation?<\/p>\n

Mr. T. O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong> \u2014 We do not have the authority to do that.<\/p>\n

Mr. WAKELING<\/strong> \u2014 And why do you not have the authority?<\/p>\n

Mr. T. O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong> \u2014 Because of the mandatory reporting act.<\/p>\n

Mr. WAKELING<\/strong> \u2014 And why do you say that?<\/p>\n

Mr. T. O\u2019BRIEN<\/strong> \u2014 Because the minister does not have the priority over the victim. It is the victim\u2019s absolute right and privilege to decide whether they want the matter \u2014\u2014<\/p>\n

Mr. WAKELING<\/strong> \u2014 Mr. O\u2019Brien, if I may take you to the Evidence Act which we are talking about, section 127 of the Evidence Act states:<\/p>\n

\u201c(1) A person who is or was a member of the clergy of any church or religious denomination is entitled to refuse to divulge that a religious confession was made, or the contents of a religious confession made, to the person when a member of the clergy.\u201d The law does not prevent the church from providing information. The law provides an exemption for the church, but the law does not prevent a church in this state from providing information. It is clearly within the province of the Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses, if child sexual abuse is such a significant issue, for you as an organisation to waiver that and to report that.<\/em><\/p>\n

Ms. VAN WITSEN<\/strong> \u2014 Absolutely.<\/p>\n

[bold and italics ours]<\/p>\n

It is clear that Watchtower Attorney Rachel Van Witsen was caught between a rock and a hard place, formally agreeing with the court, while at the same time defending a position that obstructs justice and puts victims at an extreme disadvantage.<\/p>\n

She declared that \u201cour instructions are that first and foremost is the protection of children in the organization, whatever that takes\u201d while simultaneously\u00a0refusing to do \u201cwhatever that takes.\u201d<\/strong> \u00a0 The international courts of law have come to an agreement that it takes swift and immediate contact with law enforcement and child protection authorities to protect our community and children from abusers, and this action in no way violates the scriptural and religious beliefs of those who belong to Christian organizations.<\/p>\n

Congregation Considerations<\/h3>\n

Following the section on legal concerns, the newly released Watchtower letter focuses a great amount of attention on the internal investigations of any accusations of physical or sexual abuse of a minor. It is significant that an organization that directs so much effort into its internal religious justice system has been the subject of worldwide investigations by the very secular authorities which Witnesses claim to obey.<\/p>\n

The Watchtower organization suggests that their own due process protects minors, positing that the reproving or disfellowshipping of an offender warns the congregation about a predator in their midst. However, this premise is deceptively weak. \u00a0In a great number of sexual abuse cases, the victims have come forward only after extreme damage has been inflicted by the perpetrator on not one, but in most cases, multiple victims, often numbering double digits. The Australian Royal Commission on Child Abuse<\/a><\/span> found that of the 1,006 known cases of child abuse uncovered among Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses in Australia, the number of actually reported victims exceeded 1,730.<\/p>\n

Predators associated with the Jehovah\u2019s Witness religion know very well that the lack of cooperation with civil authorities coupled with the infamous JW \u201cTwo Witness\u201d rule\u00a0<\/a><\/span>allows an environment of tolerance to exist inside this religion which has paved the way for many sexual encounters between these predators and innocent Witness children.<\/p>\n

What many may not realize is that disfellowshipping for child abuse is a somewhat rare occurrence. [In many cases, elders have\u00a0disfellowshipped on the grounds of \u201clying\u201d rather than the actual crime of child abuse.] Obviously most abusers will flat out deny an accusation of abuse, and justice is further prevented because wrongdoing is usually not \u201cestablished\u201d without two credible witnesses. Aside from the ultra-rare confession of a molester, the only way an abuser can be convicted by a judicial committee would be when at least 2 independent victims come forward accusing the perpetrator of the same crime. Again, this is extraordinarily rare. The fact that Witness victims are effectively discouraged from contacting the authorities makes the chance\u00a0of additional victims coming forward even more unlikely.<\/p>\n

\"Judicial<\/a><\/p>\n

The list of policies and procedures for elders involved in processing an accused child molester is seemingly endless, as evidenced by the release of the new August 1st letter. What is absolutely horrific is that an accused and convicted child molester may not only attend meetings of Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses but engage in the public door-to-door ministry and become baptized (or reinstated) as an approved congregant.<\/p>\n

\"restrictions\"<\/a><\/p>\n

This letter mandates that \u201crestrictions\u201d will be placed on the abuser, stating that:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cThe elders will be directed to caution the individual\u00a0never to be alone with a minor, not to cultivate friendships with minors, not to display affection\u00a0for minors, and so forth.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Is this really a restriction? No, it is not. It is a suggestion to \u201ccaution\u201d this predator\u00a0to avoid circumstances that might lead to abuse. Any concerned parent would find absolutely no comfort whatsoever in the knowledge that a Jehovah\u2019s Witness elder \u201ccautioned\u201d a sick individual to avoid contact with their child. Abusers have severe personality disorders and are manipulative and controlling. When a deviant urge rises to the surface, there is no \u201ccaution\u201d in the world which will prevent an abuser from manipulating circumstances to his sick, sexual advantage.<\/p>\n

It is noteworthy that Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses offer absolutely no professional counseling either to the victims of sexual abuse or to predators seeking religious asylum within this organization. This is because, as an organization,\u00a0they support or sanction no approved treatments for either group.<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0In the case of offenders, even the suggestion of obtaining professional help is conspicuously absent from JW policy. \u00a0They seem to have no problem reinstating, baptizing, or even offering \u201cprivileges\u201d to offenders in some cases, but refuse to encourage\u00a0consultation with\u00a0a mental health professional.<\/p>\n

No Help for Victims<\/h3>\n

For as long as I was associated with the Jehovah\u2019s Witness organization, there was a notable reluctance to recommend professional counseling for any individual suffering from mental illness, depression, alcoholism, or the effects of child abuse. They believe the first authority in all such matters is the Bible,\u00a0but<\/strong>\u00a0<\/em>only as interpreted by the Jehovah\u2019s Witness Governing Body.<\/p>\n

This is yet another obstruction of justice, particularly for victims of child abuse who, more often than not, have already been denied civil justice or the benefit of child protection advocates.<\/p>\n

Just as with their reluctance to contact the police when learning of alleged abuse, they are equally remiss in establishing a welfare plan where victims can make contact with appropriate professionals who are trained to deal with physical or sexual abuse. The only mention of professional counseling occurs in section 11 of the Watchtower letter, which says:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cIn addition to the spiritual shepherding provided by the elders, the victim or her\u00a0family\u00a0may<\/strong>\u00a0desire other assistance. For example, the victim or her family may decide to consult\u00a0a mental-health professional. This would be a\u00a0personal decision<\/strong>\u00a0for them to make.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Once again, \u201cspiritual shepherding\u201d comes first, and is performed by window washers, carpenters, contractors, and other men who have absolutely no qualifications to handle counseling of any kind. Making matters worse, they are by design always men, further exacerbating an already sensitive situation for female abuse victims.<\/p>\n

The suggestion that victims \u201cmay\u201d decide to consult a mental health professional, and that this would be a \u201cpersonal decision\u201d demonstrates the well-known opposition among Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses to opening their minds and deepest thoughts to \u201cworldly\u201d individuals and persons they would refer to as \u201cso-called experts\u201d who do not have the \u201cbest interests\u201d of Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses at heart.<\/p>\n

Evidence of this position can be found in countless Watchtower and Awake! articles, such as the September 8th, 1986 issue of the Awake! which covered the subject of mental illness:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cMedical science today is likewise limited. True, one can take reasonable steps to attain a measure of relief. But rather than getting trapped on a treadmill of searching for an elusive cure, some may simply have to learn to live with and endure the problem.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The August 8th 1982 Awake! magazine article titled \u201cMaking Wise Health Decisions\u201d stated:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cA wise objective is to try to go through as much of life as possible free from pills or therapy. The number of persons who can say they live a pill-free life is becoming increasingly smaller\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Non-Jehovah\u2019s Witness Parents Excluded<\/h3>\n

The Jehovah\u2019s Witness organization governs its members on the principle that families should all accept the \u201ctruth\u201d and describes anyone who has not accepted this religion as an \u201cunbeliever.\u201d It stands to reason that if a husband and wife do not share the Witness theology, this detail would be irrelevant when it is discovered that one of their children has been abused. However, Jehovah\u2019s Witness leadership makes no mention of the involvement of a non-Witness parent during an abuse investigation, either in the updated 2016 letter to elders, or in the elder’s handbook \u201cShepherd the Flock.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIn the case of any discussion with a child abuse victim who is still a minor, an elder should never meet alone with the minor but should always involve another elder and another adult member of the congregation,\u00a0preferably\u00a0<\/strong>the minor\u2019s parent(s).\u201d \u00a0August 1st 2016 Letter to Elders, Par. 11<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is a very subtle point, but the use of the term \u201cpreferably\u201d opens the door for the involvement of a non-parent in cases where one of the parents is either deceased, the accused, or a\u00a0non-Witness<\/strong>. This is a reminder that the investigations performed by JW elders have no relevance in the real world, and are only used to execute their religious tribunal.<\/p>\n

A non-Witness parent is likely already aware that his presence at a JW judicial meeting is completely undesired. He is deemed worthy of death according to the Watchtower. When discussing the consequences of marrying an unbeliever, the May 1st, 2002 Watchtower says:<\/p>\n

\u201cGod\u2019s view of marrying an\u00a0unbeliever<\/span>\u00a0is expressed at Malachi 2:12: \u201cJehovah will cut off each one that does it.\u201d \u00a0Christians are urged to marry \u201conly in the Lord.\u201d (1\u00a0Corinthians 7:39) Under the Christian system of things, a believer is not \u201ccut off\u201d for marrying an\u00a0unbeliever<\/span>. Still, if the\u00a0unbeliever<\/span>\u00a0stays in his or her unbelief, what will happen to that one when God shortly brings this system to an end?\u2014Psalm 37:37,\u00a038.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In case you are unfamiliar with the Biblical term \u201ccut off,\u201d it means execution by God. Watchtower emphasizes that in pre-Christian days, marrying an unbeliever would result in death. They harness fear in the 21st Century by stating that the same behavior\u00a0will result in death by Jehovah at Armageddon.<\/p>\n

Summary of Changes<\/h3>\n

It has been nearly four years since the release of the October 1st, 2012 letter to elders, and while Watchtower’s policy on handling child abuse allegations has remained stagnant, for legal and administrative reasons the JW organization has seen fit to publish the following changes as noted in the August 1st, 2016 letter<\/p>\n