Would you put your child in danger

[Martin]

Prompted by the recent Pope's visit to Australia, where he said sorry for those thousands who had been sexually abused by his "staff" in Australia.

Is it sensible to send your kids to a Cathlic church or school - from the limited statistics I have found, it is a higher risk area.

Certainly there are many claims going on here, and lots of money changing hands, so my simple thoughts are... maybe there is something behind this that is possibly true.

Things in the media like ... if you do not want lung cancer, do not smoke, seems logical. [as it is a higher risk area]
Things in the media like... if you do not want to be sexually abused, do not put yourself near a catholic staff member, seems logical. [as a higher risk area]

In a world of "you are in the higher risk catogory" - I guess it is something to consider?

[Filthy Monkey]

Congratulations! I think you may just have found one of the weakest and most offensive arguments ever!!!

Yes, smoking is bad for you. I don't think anyone could put up an argument against that. All cigarettes contain various substances which can cause you harm.

Some people in catholic institutions have been abused, but here's the shocker! The abuse was carried out by a very small minority of staff, and even more shocking? Non-catholics abuse people too!!!

On the strength of your argument, maybe people shouldn't leave the house. There is clear evidence that they might get knocked down crossing the road. Dangerous! They might catch colds or other infections. Dangerous! Even worse, they may venture into London and get stabbed, because, if you believe what you read in the press, almost everybody in London carries a knife these days!

Actually, come to think of it, people shouldn't stay at home either, because, apparently, many of the worst accidents happen in the home.

Oh dear, it seems that everything puts you in a 'higher risk category' these days. Maybe we should all just stay in bed? Actually, that's not a very good idea either, just in case your local Catholic priest pops round to visit...

[Martin]

Some people in catholic institutions have been abused, but here's the shocker! The abuse was carried out by a very small minority of staff, and even more shocking? Non-catholics abuse people too!!!

Let's get it straight, we are talking thousands...

Let us the align that to someone in authority, say a school teacher.

Have thousands of school kids been abused by school teachers in the normal education system?

Assuming we can say, church officials and school teachers have the same standing of authority over kids.

I do not think you can compare someone in authority in the church, or in schools, who has responsibility, to some random guy in the street.

So do school teachers have as many claims and have they caused as many problems as people in authority in the Catholic church?

So comparing apples with apples... is it better to avoid catholic schools (and Catholic churches)?

[philsmove]

I was educated at a Catholic school
The Teaching was awful, something I only realized when I was fortunately transferred to a different school
I don’t think a Catholic education did my late brother much good ether
So I would not recommend Catholic Schools
But sexually abuse, would not be the reason. Nothing happened to me and I don’t think anything happened to my class mates

[Martin]

I was educated at a Catholic school
The Teaching was awful, something I only realized when I was fortunately transferred to a different school
I don’t think a Catholic education did my late brother much good ether
So I would not recommend Catholic Schools
But sexually abuse, would not be the reason. Nothing happened to me and I don’t think anything happened to my class mates

So there is a good reason up front - awfull teaching

However I have heard of some great Catholic schools who have great teachers.

As to your class mates... who knows, guilt plays a major part and things are often hidden due to guilt.

[philsmove]

However I have heard of some great Catholic schools who have great teachers.
:

Yes I am quite sure there are

But at my school, staff were selected because they were Catholic, not because they were good Teachers, but that was some time ago, long before OFSTED. Hopefully things have changed

Yes things are hidden due to guilt, but we were a pretty close bunch, so I doubt it

[MartinHarper]

Child sexual abuse: key child protection statistics : NSPCC inform

For the children who experienced sexual abuse outside of the family, the most common perpetrator was a boyfriend or girlfriend.

* 70% of penetrative/oral acts of sexual abuse outside of the family were by a boyfriend/girlfriend
* 17% were perpetrated by 'someone I recently met'
* 10% were perpetrated by a fellow student/pupil
* 6% were perpetrated by a friend of their parents
* 6% were perpetrated by a friend of their brother/sister.

Very few children (less than 1%) experienced abuse by professionals in a position of trust, for example a teacher, religious leader or care/social worker.

[Astro]

I think, in the case of children being abused by Catholic teachers there is a higher risk than from non catholic teacher if the teachers are priests or nuns.

This is due to the fact that they cannot marry.

Consequently homosexuals tended to apply in the past for this reason. not exacly to abuse children but so they would be with fellow gays in the priesthood.

The Nun's seemed to go in for violent abuse, more than sexual abuse.

These days when being gay is seen as normal, men don't need to join the priesthood.

This is just my theory, I'm not saying I'm right.

[bigdjiver]

... Have thousands of school kids been abused by school teachers in the normal education system?...

I would guess so. At one school we had a deputy head who was notorious for "touching up" the pupils.

[David Bailey]

Prompted by the recent Pope's visit to Australia, where he said sorry for those thousands who had been sexually abused by his "staff" in Australia.

Ooh, controversy

Is it sensible to send your kids to a Cathlic church or school - from the limited statistics I have found, it is a higher risk area.

A couple of points:

• Catholic churches are not Catholic schools.
• You don't "send your kid to church", you usually go with them

Certainly there are many claims going on here, and lots of money changing hands, so my simple thoughts are... maybe there is something behind this that is possibly true.

Oh yes, there's a lot of stuff behind it, the prevalence of abuse in Catholic churches is well-documented. As is the hypocrisy of those who covered it up for so long.

Things in the media like... if you do not want to be sexually abused, do not put yourself near a catholic staff member, seems logical. [as a higher risk area]

Again, schools are not churches.

My son goes to a catholic (state) school, no problem.

OK, I might be a bit more cautious about letting him be an altar boy or whatever, but as he has to be dragged to church anyway I can't see him being too keen on that.

[StokeBloke]

The Pope's apology is a good start. At least there is an acknowledgment that this is happening now. Hopefully when "staff" members are discovered abusing people they will now be turned over to the authorities rather than just moving the kiddie-fiddlers to a different area.

Now THAT would be a step forward for the church. They have turned a blind eye and allowed "staff" to slip quietly away for far too long. Perhaps this was a misguided belief that such scandal would damage the church - I don't know. But to me this seems like a step in the right direction.

Just think in years to come there may even be an apology from the Pope for the church supporting genocidal dictators - but I won't hold my breath waiting for that one

[MartinHarper]

In years to come there may even be an apology from the Pope for the church supporting genocidal dictators...

Ouch. That's a harsh way to describe God.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Congratulations! I think you may just have found one of the weakest and most offensive arguments ever!!!

He does have a point and as we can assume it would be mostly catholics who are offended, but what are they offended by; thousands of cases of child abuse in the church, or someone suggesting that the catholic church should accept some responsibility for that ?

Actually, come to think of it, people shouldn't stay at home either, because, apparently, many of the worst accidents happen in the home.

Accidents happen everywhere but avoiding going into a high risk environments that you have no control over is generally a good idea - it changes a risk, however minimal, into NO RISK AT ALL. In your own home you DO have control and can make your home as safe as possible.
I think you have ignored Martins point because you saw it as offensive

[Filthy Monkey]

By the arguments above, EVERYWHERE is a high risk environment. Personally, I'm not especially offended by Martin's point, because I'm not a Catholic staff member, but I can see it as an offensive post and can also recognise a poor argument when I see one. There are millions of people throughout the world working in Catholic schools or church funded projects doing an amazing job and helping countless people. They should not be made to suffer because of the acts of a small minority of people in a position of trust. From the NSPCC figures that Martin posted, less than 1% of children who experienced abuse were abused by a professional in a position of trust, such as a religious leader or care/social worker. As 6% were abused by their brother or sister, would you advocate that we all kill our siblings to minimise the risk or that we leave our children uneducated to reduce the risk from abuse by a fellow student / pupil?

The simple fact is, the argument was so slim that it made Victoria Beckham look positively obese I fully agree that we should all do our best to avoid high risk environments, but I can't see any reason to avoid a Catholic school or a church. Life is full of risks and we just have to deal with them. In your own home you have a certain amount of control, but not complete control. 'As safe as possible' is not 'NO RISK'. Accidents can and do still happen. Should we all avoid visiting our GP because of Harold Shipman? Or should we avoid going to hospital because of MRSA? No, life goes on and we need to use common sense, not scare mongering or paranoia.

[Martin]

By the arguments above, EVERYWHERE is a high risk environment. Personally, I'm not especially offended by Martin's point, because I'm not a Catholic staff member, but I can see it as an offensive post and can also recognise a poor argument when I see one. There are millions of people throughout the world working in Catholic schools or church funded projects doing an amazing job and helping countless people. They should not be made to suffer because of the acts of a small minority of people in a position of trust. From the NSPCC figures that Martin posted, less than 1% of children who experienced abuse were abused by a professional in a position of trust, such as a religious leader or care/social worker. As 6% were abused by their brother or sister, would you advocate that we all kill our siblings to minimise the risk or that we leave our children uneducated to reduce the risk from abuse by a fellow student / pupil?

The simple fact is, the argument was so slim that it made Victoria Beckham look positively obese I fully agree that we should all do our best to avoid high risk environments, but I can't see any reason to avoid a Catholic school or a church. Life is full of risks and we just have to deal with them. In your own home you have a certain amount of control, but not complete control. 'As safe as possible' is not 'NO RISK'. Accidents can and do still happen. Should we all avoid visiting our GP because of Harold Shipman? Or should we avoid going to hospital because of MRSA? No, life goes on and we need to use common sense, not scare mongering or paranoia.

Well firstly from the NSPCC report suplied by MartinHarper, there is also the direct quote by the NSPCC in their same report of "We know very little about the extent of child maltreatment in the UK. Official data
records only what is known to the authorities, and many offences against children are
known to go unreported."

So let's now move on from NSPCC (we really know nothing, but are giving out a report, based on... um er nothing of substance)

NSPCC have shot themselves in the foot in thier own report... So you cannot rely on any of thier data.

We also know most Catholic "miss-treatments" were settled "out of court" and so would not be included in the official figures of the NSPCC.

Now we can begin on the facts... Thousands are acknowledged to have been abused in Aussie. All these people are getting huge payouts or have had huge payouts.

Australia is a small population, so let's now extrapilate across more countries and maybe even the UK with a far higher population.

You may think I am being "silly" - but thousands in Aussie and many many thousands across the world might feel a little different...

Even if you were a Catholic staff member, I cannot see you being offended, but maybe a little embarised.

[MartinHarper]

So let's now move on from NSPCC.

Let's not. Like it or not, the NSPCC report, and similar reports, provide the best information we have about child abuse in this country.

Most Catholic "miss-treatments" were settled "out of court" and so would not be included in the official figures of the NSPCC.

The NSPCC report doesn't rely solely on official crime statistics. It also looks at crime surveys, to gauge the extent of unreported child abuse. Those surveys do not show a huge amount of unreported abuse in the UK by religious leaders and teachers.

Now we can begin on the facts... Thousands are acknowledged to have been abused in Aussie. All these people are getting huge payouts or have had huge payouts.

Source?

Even if you were a Catholic staff member, I cannot see you being offended, but maybe a little embarrassed.

I recommend not using blushing smiles and phases like "little embarrassed" when discussing child abuse.

[Astro]

It would be the boarding schools that would be high risk, more so than day schools and churches.

The Christian brothers are notorious. Are they catholic?

There was a film about the Magdelene nuns in Dublin and their mental and physical abuse - not sexual though.

Children's homes are risky and foster parents ditto.

There was that film with Brad Pitt and Matt Dillon. Robert De Nero was the catholic priest who was not a peodophile. it was Kevin Bacon as the Prison Officer who was.
"Sleepers"

Unfortunately jobs involving children are a magnet to the wrong sorts, that's why we need the Child Protection Register. It's a start, but some kiddie fidlers are pillars of the establishment and not suspected.

[~*~Saligal~*~]

Let's get it straight, we are talking thousands...

Let us the align that to someone in authority, say a school teacher.

Have thousands of school kids been abused by school teachers in the normal education system?

Assuming we can say, church officials and school teachers have the same standing of authority over kids.

I do not think you can compare someone in authority in the church, or in schools, who has responsibility, to some random guy in the street.

So do school teachers have as many claims and have they caused as many problems as people in authority in the Catholic church?

So comparing apples with apples... is it better to avoid catholic schools (and Catholic churches)?

I'm thinking that possibly minimising the likelihood that your chidl would be left alone with an adult (particularly one you don't know well) would be more of a priority. So this counts for girl guides, cubs, scouts - as well as letting your kids be part of the group looking after the alter details at church.
From going to a non-Catholic school in Oz and having friends who did attend Catholic schools the comparisons I have are that:

• Catholic schools had more extra-curricular activities held at the school; and
• Catholic schools had boarding facilities.

Not that this should be any major reason to think your child would be abused by the school staff. Especially when a lot of child sexual abuse actually happens either in the home or extended family members.

I read an article a little while back where the airlines were seating children who were travelling on their own with women only. What sort of message does this send to kids? it's not fair for kids to fear men.... and not correct to think that women wouldn't abuse children either.

[NZ Monkey]

I read an article a little while back where the airlines were seating children who were travelling on their own with women only. What sort of message does this send to kids? it's not fair for kids to fear men.... and not correct to think that women wouldn't abuse children either.

In all fairness, I think this had been a policy of most international airlines for a long time and that while not exactly a secret - it was not supposed to become widespread public knowledge.

I don't think it makes much difference to children. When I was young enough that this policy would have applied to me I wasn't particularly interested in what was happening on the news or in reading newspapers. Unless my parents were talking about it I'd probably never even think to be afraid of it in the first place.

I recall some time in the last year a study in NZ found that most cases of physical abuse of young children was by mothers, rather than men as general public impression seems to be. This makes sense when you consider that mothers usually spend more time "looking after" children than fathers do even in these days of working families and female empowerment. That said, I think the same study indicated that the most severe cases tended to be performed by men alone, or by both partners*.

*One probably rightly assumes that a fair proportion of those cases involved a particularly dominating man, but I don't remember if this was specified.

[Martin]

Having done a quick internet search.. If the internet is to be believed of course.

Official cover up

Pope 'led cover-up of child abuse by priests'| News | This is London

Apology

Pope 'deeply sorry' for 'evil' of child abuse - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)


Source re:thousands of cases, apart from it being reported on the news:

Broken Rites Australia supporting church sex abuse victims

Recent cases involving criminal convictions

Sex-abuse in the Catholic Church in Australia

I certainly am not saying I know more about it than some people on the forum.
I really just asked the question, as it has been on the news a lot recently.