Questions regarding child abuse

Hi Rav Eidensohn,

I have been following your blog for some time and specifically the topics of molestation. Additionally, I have followed stories of molestation on other Jewish sites, as well as in mainstream media with the current stories about priests.

There are a few questions I have and it is a difficult ones but I want your experienced opinion based on the information you know.

It seems from what I have read that nobody really has a clue what to do with molesters and how to solve the molestation problem. Additionally, there is no real proof that a molester can be cured. From what I have read, it seems that the only way to keep children safe is to lock these people up for life, or castrate them.

These people have a sick desire. Just like normal heterosexuals desire the opposite sex, these people desire children. Can one become homosexual with therapy if they are heterosexual? Can a homosexual become a heterosexual with therapy? Extremely unlikely, if not flat out no correct?

However it is an urge that normal people can control. Normal people don't go raping the opposite sex.

However these predators, desire children and put their desire before the welfare of the child.

Do you think a molester can be healed with therapy to the point that you can say he is no longer a threat to kids?

How many years of therapy?

Should they be in seclusion during therapy? (Prison or a mental home...)

How can we be confident that these people are healed to truly ever allow them near a child?

These are difficult questions, however it troubles me that most molesters get a few years prison and once they are out they get right back to business. Prison doesn't change. Them or deter them. It just makes them more careful and sneaky.

Personally, I think they need to be kept from chiildren permanently which means a life sentence, or castrated. This may sound extreme but is it really? How can we justify 10 years in prison when all reseaech points to the molester being likely to repeat his offenses once he is out?

I just don't see how the system is properly dealing with this problem. These guys get a slap on the wrist for destroying multiple childrens lives.

What about monetary punishment? If large cash rewards were awarded to victims (I mean over $1,000,000) would that do anything as a deterrent?

Please let me know what you think about all of this.

Best regards,
Josh

Dr. Marc Shapiro - Grossman execution & Tropper

Dr. Marc Shapiro has a fascinating post - which includes a discussion of the Grossman execution and Tropper at the end

SeforimBlog

[...] During the discussions about the Grossman execution, I looked at some of the haredi websites (until the comments made me sick). What I found interesting was the incredible level of ignorance of most of the writers, all of whom had been in yeshiva and many of whom had studied there for years. They were able to declare that a murderer can’t be executed unless he was observed by two kosher witnesses and was given warning, which they thought settled matters. Had these people known a bit of responsa literature, there would have understood how things worked in the real world, and especially what was done in the days of the rishonim. Do these people think that if a guy stood up in shul and opened fire with a machine gun, killing 20 people, that a Jewish court couldn’t execute him because he was never given a warning? Let’s continue with R. Liebes:[...]

Netanyahu reject U.S. demand for Jerusalem freeze

Haaretz

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected the Obama administration's demands to freeze construction in East Jerusalem, his bureau confirmed on Thursday.

The Prime Minister's Bureau was responding to a Wall Street Journal report that Netanyahu's government had delivered over the weekend its most substantive response yet to that U.S. request.

Obama reportedly made the demand for an East Jerusalem construction freeze, along with other requests, in a tense White House meeting with Netanyahu on March 23. His administration had seen been awaiting his reply, while Netanyahu had deliberated with his top ministers on possible confidence-building measures that would allow a revival of peace talks with the Palestinians.[...]

New Square appoint Vaad for abuse

Jewish Star

At noon on a Sunday afternoon, Isaac Brewer sits at his desk in the back of Fax Unlimited, the electronics store he operates on Route 59 in Spring Valley. The flat-screen monitor on his desk displays several camera views that let him watch the unattended front of the store. Every so often, a customer walks in and Brewer dishes with them over what printer to buy, and every so often, the phone rings and Brewer switches fluently between Yiddish and English, telling one customer that he’ll be happy to drop off a toner at so-and-so’s mother-in-law. And in between conversations, Brewer speaks about sexual abuse.

“The problem has been going on since the world has been created,” explained Brewer, black waistcoat and gray sweater draped over the back of his chair. “But the Rebbe felt a need to get serious about it and to help victims and stop predators… The Rebbe has given us a carte blanche.”

Brewer is part of a six-member committee established 18 months ago by the Skverer Rebbe, Rabbi Dovid Twersky, to combat sexual abuse inside the New Square chasidic community. The committee, known simply as the Vaad, in many ways represents a giant leap forward for the community in dealing with sexual abuse. Advocates for victims of sexual abuse are not as charitable, however, and view the Vaad as a continuation of the legacy of cover-ups that have tainted the larger Orthodox community’s past dealings regarding sexual abuse. [...]

In some adoptions, love doesn't conquer all

NYTimes

At times, Kelly Lytle Baehr wondered how they would all get through it.  Two years ago, she and her husband adopted three boys from Ukraine — two of them 8, the other 16 — and brought them back to their home in Omaha. She knew assimilation into a family life would not be easy; all had come from troubled backgrounds, including one who had spent the first five years of his life in a prison orphanage back in Ukraine, and had a mother who drank while she was pregnant.

She was often tested by the strains of raising these three new sons. The youngest of them, Ian (born Igor) had rummaged in garbage dumps in Ukraine for toys, with hub cabs and discarded car parts his only possessions. At the Baehrs’s home in Nebraska he soon became a wild, uncontrollable kleptomaniac, she said. The other 8-year-old, Erik, struggled to attach to her — kicking, screaming, biting and yelling, “I hate you.” Only the oldest son, Viktor, seemed to welcome his new life quickly, blending easily into the family and eventually making the honor roll at his high school.

When Ms. Lytle Baehr, who is going through a divorce and has custody of her children, heard the news break two weeks ago about Torry Ann Hansen shipping her 7-year-old adopted son back to Russia on a plane, unaccompanied, with just a note to the authorities, she felt something approaching sympathy. “When it boils down to it, I’m really similar to the woman in Tennessee,” Ms. Lytle Baehr said in a telephone interview this week. “We’ve all been there.”[...]

Reporting abuse does not require a judicial procedure

[I need to clarify the original post - which has been understood by some to mean that one should simply call the police in all cases. That is not what I said or meant. My purpose of writing this post is to point out that the process of deciding what to do is not a judicial process - but one of defense against harm. The rules of evidence are much more lenient in an extra judiciary process, there is no inherent need for a beis din or even a rav. However unless there is concern for immediate danger - then one should consult with experienced experts - which includes psychologists, social workers, as well as rabbis who are experienced and are well aware of the surrounding issues. Furthermore regarding a case of a perpetrator  who abused  long ago and has not  repeated his crime and there is no danger to others - than a judicial procedure is required. There needs to be adequate considerations of proportionality - one does not  need to call the police if a neighbor allowed your son to watch a t.v. show or his rebbe gave him a hug. Nor should one use a shotgun against someone who might have molested your child. The halacha in the case of rodef requires a focus on doing that which is necessary to stop the harm. If you feel that protection can only be accomplished by the police - then call the police.  You do not need to accept the promises that the person did teshuva or assurances that the perpetrator will now have adequate rabbinical supervision. Also in a case of government mandated reporting which is enforced - it is different than where there is no mandated reporting or it is not enforced.  In sum - I am saying that focus on protection from danger is the prime concern and the halacha clearly allows a person to do that which is necessary to protect children from being molested. You do not need to get caught up in a complicated halachic piplul - but need to act to protect the children. However it is not a blanket allowance to use any and all means to accomplish it and a person should act responsibly and consult those who are  experienced and wiser in these matters - which is not necessarily a rabbi. In fact an inexperienced rabbi or one not knowledgeable in these matters might prescribe a course of action which is naive and harmful to both the perpetrator and the victim. On the other hand, calling the police or social services might also not protect the child and might cause harm. Protecting the children must be the prime focus. ]


One of the major problems in dealing with child abuse is the insistence that it is a very complex and difficult halachic issue that must be judged by a beis din or at least an experienced and competent rabbi. Going to the secular system is considered mesira or as a minimum a violation of the prohibition of going to a secular court.  It is also claimed that we need two adult male Jewish witnesses as well a warning and careful investigation and cross examination. Because often these can not be done - it is considered beyond out capability to do anything -if we want to remain loyal to the Torah.

In fact - according to the halacha the above is not so. Reporting child abuse to the police is not in fact a judicial issue. It is a question of self-defense, protecting others or stopping others from sin. These do not require judicial procedures. This is the view of Rav Yehuda Silman that was published in the current issue of Yeschurun. While a beis din or a rav can be consulted - there seems to be no inherent requirement for such. In other words it is no different than the question of whether a judge needs to be consulted as to whether you can deal with an assailant who is beating you or your children or your neighbor. Similarly a judge is not needed to give permission to react to someone who is involved in sin and it is in our power to stop him. Clear circumstantial evidence is enough to act defensively. Reporting a suspected perpetrator to the authorities is not a judgment or punishment - it is done to defend our children from possible harm. Of course it is best if those experienced in these matters - whether rabbis or social workers or psychiatrists - be consulted. But not if the delay would result in harm.  Thus the case of prevention of harm is different than punishment for sin - which in fact requires a beis din. This distinction between prevention of harm and punishment of past sin is very important and in fact is often blurred and confused.

Rabbi Yehuda Silman wrote:

Furthermore in the original article [Yeschurun 15] it was concluded that that it is obvious that there is no need to have witnesses that meet the standards required by the Torah but even less than that is sufficient and I cited a number of rishonim. The reason is reporting the teacher to the secular authorities is not punishment requiring a beis din but is an action mandated by secular law (in the Diaspora) or in order to separate the abuser from committing sin. In addition according to the reason that even in the case of a possible rodef it is permitted to inform the authorities – it is obvious that is permitted without proper witnesses since all that is required is that there be the possibility that he is an abuser.

Abuse:- Jeff Anderson- chief pursuer of the Vatican

Washington Post

The Vatican's chief American pursuer once flunked out of law school and sold shoes for a living. A father at 19, an alcoholic until nearly 50, he got his start in the law by representing indigent clients. He is now a fitness fanatic who lights his ornate office here with Tiffany reproductions and drives a Lexus.

He gets his balance from Zen Buddhism, his persistence from the reporters who felled Richard Nixon and his inspiration from the sexually abused clients who trust him to make the Roman Catholic Church pay for the sins of its fathers.

Jeff Anderson, who draws headlines and epithets and rarely sleeps more than four hours a night, is using his manic energy to challenge one of the most powerful and secretive institutions in the world, a 2,000-year-old church with hundreds of millions of devoted followers.[...]

Rav S' Kaminetsky & Rav Pam: Child abuse conference 2000

Rabbi Reisman -introduces topic
David Mandel of Ohel - moderator

Blogging & Fair Use Doctrine

Webpronews

With all of the struggles and controversies surrounding the news industry these days, there is a lot of confusion out there about what falls under fair use and what doesn't. The more savvy bloggers who have been in the game for a while usually have a better grasp on the concept, but there are still plenty of others who aren't so well versed. After all, anyone can start a blog, and not everyone comes from a news or legal background.

Video: Baruch Lebovitz - convicted child abuser

 

Dr. Shapiro's theory for abuse coverups

<sup>Dr. Marc Shapiro wrote: in the last footnote


8</sup> There is another theory as to why the sectarian hasidic world in particular has had so many cases of covering up and defending child sex abusers. It is that they simply do not regard these people as so terrible. The evidence for this appears obvious, in that in case of after case we see that they continue to allow sex abusers to teach and refuse to turn them over to the authorities and warn the parent body. Had they caught the rebbe eating at McDonald’s, you can be sure he would have been fired, but not so when it comes to fooling around with kids. The question is why do they have this outlook, and how come they don’t regard child sex abusers as so terrible? Here is a possible answer (which a wise person suggested). Look at where these societies get their information about human nature, the information that they regard as authentic and true. It does not come from modern psychology, but from Torah sources and folk beliefs. If you look only at traditional rabbinic literature, you won’t conclude that child sex abuse is as terrible as modern society views it. Yes, it is a sin and the person who commits it must repent as he must do with all sins, but there is nothing in the traditional literature that speaks to the great trauma suffered by the victim. How do we know about this trauma? Only from modern psychology and the testimony of the victims. Yet this type of evidence does not have much significance in the insular hasidic world (unless it is your own child who has been abused). Certainly modern psychology, which is often attacked by figures in that community, is not given much credence, especially not when they are confronted with an issur of mesirah. This theory makes a lot of sense to me and I am curious to hear what others have to say.