Sexual Victimization of Minors by Priests: Insights and Prevention

 
Module F – Understanding Sexual
Victimization
 
For Seminary Faculty and Students,
Parishes and Dioceses
 
F-1
Understanding the Sexual
Victimization of Children
 
F-2
Main Sources of Data
 
Reports presented to the United States Conference of
Catholic Bishops by the John Jay College Research Team,
The City University of New York*
 
The Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by
Catholic Priests in the United States
, 1950-2010, March,
2011
 
The Nature and Scope of Sexual Abuse of Minors by
Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States, 1950-
2002
, February 2004
 
 
F-3
 
* 
The two reports are based on data supplied by 97 percent of U.S.
archdioceses and dioceses on all clergy accused of sexual abuse of minors
A.  Sexual Abuse Victims
 
 
 
Who Were the Minors Abused by Priests?
 
F-4
 
 
Gender:   
 
Male      = 
 
  81%
  
Female  =    19%
Age:
 
   Under 10     =     22%
 
   11 to 14
 
     =     51%
 
   15 to 17
 
     =     27%
B.  Onset of Sexual Abuse
 
Preconditions for Abuse
 
Factors in the Life of the Priests Who
Abuse
 
Overcoming External Factors that
Might Have Prevented Abuse
 
F-5
Onset of Abuse, 1:  Preconditions
 
The motivation to sexually abuse, for example,
emotional congruence, sexual arousal, or
blockage to “normal” sexual relationships
The ability to overcome internal inhibitions
The ability to overcome external factors that
may prevent the abuse
The ability to overcome the child’s resistance to
the abuse
 
F-6
Onset of Abuse, 2:  Relevant Factors for Priests
 
Priest-abusers were likely to have experienced
some of the following:
Poor relationships with their parents when
they were youths
A history of sexual abuse
Isolation, loneliness, insecurity, poor social
skills, lack of identity
Confusion over sexual identity,
psychosexual immaturity
Alcohol abuse
 
F-7
Onset of Abuse, 3:  Overcoming External
Factors that May Prevent Abuse from
Occurring
 
Abusers often create opportunities for the
abuse to take place, such as socializing and
building trust with the victim’s family
 
Abusers must overcome the child’s resistance
to the abuse, which is generally achieved
through grooming tactics such as
disproportionate attention, enticements,
games, seduction, verbal and/or physical
coercion
 
F-8
C.  Grooming Behavior
 
Examples of various tactics or methods used to
entice victims:
 
seduction or manipulation
 
building of personal and family relationships
  providing “benefits” such as drugs, alcohol, or
     pornography, money, or other gifts, tickets to
 
sporting events, or taking them on trips
  verbal or physical intimidation
     
Grooming 
is a pre-meditated behavior intended
to manipulate a potential victim into complying
with sexual abuse
 
F-9
Grooming 2,
Seduction and Testing of a Child
 
This tactic is used when there is a relationship
with a child and the child is accustomed to
the affectionate expression of the offender
 
The offender gradually extends the
affectionate behavior, all the while “testing”
the child’s response; if no overt resistance is
observed, the sexual abuse continues
 
F-10
Groom
ing 3, Emotional Manipulation
and Verbal Coercion
 
These were the most common tactics used by
offenders to groom their victims.  Examples:
Doing favors for the victim in exchange for sex
Emotionally blackmailing the victim into
compliance
Even though it may appear that there is room
for negotiation on the part of the victim, the
outcome always favors the offender
Grooming 4,
Catching the Victim by Surprise
 
The offender orchestrates a situation to distract
the victim or seizes the opportunity to abuse
when the situation occurs
A frequent situational opportunity arises when
potential victims become altar servers or
otherwise serve a role in the church
Seizing the opportunity is most common and is
usually the result of the offender’s frustration
from waiting for the right time to initiate contact
 
F-12
Grooming 5,
Using Verbal or Physical Force
 
The offender garners victim compliance
through use of force
 
The offender either commands the victim to
perform sexual acts and/or physically forces
the victim to engage in sexual acts
 
Physical force is one of the least common
grooming tactics; this factor is more common
among the most serious, repeat offenders
 
F-13
Grooming 6,
Disguising Sexual Advances
 
This tactic disguises sexual advances in the
context of playing a game.  Example:
 
Offender will begin by tickling the victim
and gradually progress to fondling
 
While this approach may appear spontaneous,
it has been well planned by the offender, yet
orchestrated in a rather surreptitious manner
 
F-14
Grooming 7, Using Alcohol and Drugs
During the peak years of abuse, the use of alcohol
and drugs by abusive priests increased significantly,
but only for male victims
 
Why this finding is important:
  
It is used to lower the inhibitions of the potential victim
 
The increase in the use of alcohol and drugs by the abuser is
consistent with the increase in the abuse of males
 
The increase in the abuse of males is consistent with the
increase in the abuse of minors by priests
 
The use of alcohol and/or drugs by the abuser is a feature
of the “situational” or “regressed” child abuser, but not of
the “fixated” abuser
 
F-15
Grooming 8, Building Relationships
with the Families of Victims
 
Family relationships were built to gain trust
Parents of abused children trusted the priests
without reservation
The children who were abused often accepted
the abuse and did not report it for many years
This lack of disclosure and fear about
reporting the abuse was one reason it
was able to persist
 
F-16
Grooming 9,
Effects of Grooming over Time
 
The offender is willing to wait months or even
possibly years to accomplish his task
Eventually the victim can become groomed to the
point that he/she believes to be in an apparent
“loving relationship” with the offender
Non-violent forms of extensive grooming or
persuasion make it difficult for a victim to understand
that the actions are abuse
 
F-17
 
Grooming tactics are premeditated and more
methodically planned than spontaneous abuse
D.  Persistence of Abuse
 
The accused priests employed a variety of
justifications and excuses 
to protect
themselves from self-blame and from
accepting the status of abuser
 
Techniques of neutralization 
were rooted in
culturally specific motives unique to the
Catholic Church
 
F-18
Persistence
 
of Abuse:  Categories
 
Three categories:
Excuses for behavior
Justifications for behavior
Deviance disavowal
 
F-19
Mechanisms used to alleviate feelings of guilt
and shame, thus enabling offenders to
commit acts of abuse, are called
neutralization techniques
Excuses for Behavior, 1:
Denial of Responsibility
 
Accused priests denied responsibility by
making claims that
They were “not well” (using or addicted to
substances such as alcohol and/or drugs)
They were compelled by “sick” or “sinful”
impulses
Forces beyond their control allowed them to
deny full responsibility for their behavior,
similar to legal claims of diminished capacity
 
F-20
Excuses for Behavior, 2:
Denying the Victim
 
Accused priests denied the victim his or her
status by claiming that the victim
Participated by being seductive or precocious,
or
Did not fight back or say anything during the
abuse
Accused priests blamed the victim or the victim’s
family for setting up conditions that allowed the
abuse to occur by inviting him into their home,
engaging him socially, and including him as part
of the family
 
F-21
Excuses for Behavior, 3:
Denying the Victim
 
Accused priests explicitly blamed victims by
placing the onus of the initiation of the
physical intimacy on the accuser
Referred to the abuse as a “relationship”
Noted that the victims were “willing” or
“precocious”
Considered themselves the “victims”
because they were accused of these
indecent acts
 
F-22
Justifications for Behavior, 1
 
Accused priests justified their actions by
Diminishing the 
wrongfulness
 of the behavior
Deflecting the 
harmfulness
 of the actions
Placing the 
responsibility
 for the deviance on
others, sometimes actually condemning the
condemners or criticizing their accusers
Accused priests 
downplayed what actually
occurred 
or used positive language
surrounding the “relationship” between
themselves and the victim
 
F-23
Justifications, 2:  Minimization of Harm
 
Viewed the sexual behavior as consensual, not
harmful, and any behavior short of intercourse as
not wrong because it was not sex
Insinuated that a single incident of sexual behavior
was not harmful; only repetitive acts caused harm
Implied that the harm should be forgotten because
of the time between the incident(s) and the
accusation
 
F-24
Many priest-abusers explained their actions as
being part of 
“a relationship,” “not sex,” 
or that it
happened only once,” 
or 
“occurred long ago”
Justifications, 3:  Condemning the Condemners
 
This 
behavior is a deflective technique 
in which
priest-abusers blamed church leaders for the abuse
and/or the responses to the accusation
 
One way of shifting the blame to the church
hierarchy was to say how poorly church leaders
prepared seminarians for life in the priesthood
They also blamed church leaders for how
ineffectively they dealt with accusations of
abuse, which they considered reactive and
unforgiving
 
F-25
Justifications, 4:  Condemning the Condemners
 
This view essentially eliminated the penance aspect
of reconciliation; some priests stated that public
embarrassment was sufficient penance
This attitude was particularly true for those who
participated in psychological treatments, but were
still removed, or served jail time
 
F-26
This form of justification draws on the culture of
forgiveness:  accused priests noted that the Catholic
practice of reconciliation should outweigh the sins
and no one should take action against them in
response to allegations
Justifications, 5:  Condemning the Condemners
 
 
Abusers felt they were denied due process
They believed that if only their leaders had done
things differently in the past, this “crisis” would
have been avoided
In particular they felt they were poorly socialized to
the life of a priest
 
F-27
Some clergy accused of sexual abuse believed that the
2002 
Charter for the Protection of Children and Young
People
 created a negative attitude particularly because
of the zero-tolerance policy for those accused of abuse
Justifications, 6:
Inadequate Seminary Preparation
 
They may not have chosen to be ordained, but in
some way felt pressured
They might have been better equipped to adjust
to the loneliness and realities of the life of
celibate chastity, though no priest said that the
vow of celibate chastity was the actual problem
 
F-28
 
Accused priests indicated that had each man been
adequately trained to undertake priestly life, they
may have been able to make better choices,
for example
Deviance Disavowal: Appealing to a
Higher Authority
 
Accused priests believed that a sin or infraction must
first be mended with a higher authority, that is, the
authority of God
Their particular focus was on relationship with God;
through the sacrament of reconciliation the slate
would have been wiped clean of sin
They may have sought forgiveness also from
parishioners and victims, or completed some distinct
punishment or treatment and therefore that should
be enough to end the process of condemnation
However, they failed to recognize any harm to the
victim
 
F-29
E.  Desistance from Abuse, 1:
Why Abuse Stopped
 
 
Some priest-abusers stopped because of
internal reasons
 Feeling guilty about their behavior
 Having a sense of remorse
 Feeling shame because of their behavior
 
F-30
Desistance from abuse is affected by both
internal and external influences
Desistance from Abuse, 2:
Why Abuse Stopped
 
More commonly, abuse stopped because of
external reasons
being removed from the parishes and situations
in which they could abuse
 
Others stopped because of a 
combination 
of
internal and external reasons
they earned a disgraceful reputation because of
their behavior
they were “reformed” after treatment
 
F-31
Summary of Understanding the
Sexual Victimization of Children
 
Age and Gender of Abuse Victims
Onset of Sexual Abuse
Grooming Behavior
Persistence of Abuse
Excuses for Abuse
Justifications for Abusing
Deviance Disavowal
Desistance from Abuse
 
F-32
Discussion Questions
 
What are some of the relevant factors to be
aware of at the onset of abuse?
How can those responsible for the care of
children and young people be made more aware
of the characteristics of grooming behavior and
how to respond?
How do the excuses and justifications for sexual
abuse affect the persistence of the behavior?
What are some other ways supervisors can more
readily detect abuse?
 
Link to USCCB – 
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-
action/child-and-youth-protection/charter.cfm
 
 
 
 
F-33
 
Prepared by:
Sister Katarina Schuth, O.S.F., St. Paul Seminary
School of Divinity, University of St. Thomas
 
Technical Associate:  Catherine Slight
 
Consultants:
Dr. Karen Terry and Margaret Smith, John Jay
College of Criminal Justice, authors of major studies
on sexual abuse for the USCCB;
Dr. Mary Gautier, Center for Applied Research in the
Apostolate
 
F-34
Slide Note
Embed
Share

This informative module explores the sexual victimization of minors by priests, providing data on the victims' demographics and the onset of abuse. Factors contributing to priest-abusers' behaviors are discussed, along with insights into preconditions and relevant factors. Understanding these aspects can guide efforts towards prevention and support for victims.

  • Sexual victimization
  • Minors
  • Priest abuse
  • Prevention
  • Insights

Uploaded on Sep 25, 2024 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Module F Understanding Sexual Victimization For Seminary Faculty and Students, Parishes and Dioceses F-1

  2. Understanding the Sexual Victimization of Children F-2

  3. Main Sources of Data Reports presented to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops by the John Jay College Research Team, The City University of New York* The Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests in the United States, 1950-2010, March, 2011 The Nature and Scope of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States, 1950- 2002, February 2004 * The two reports are based on data supplied by 97 percent of U.S. archdioceses and dioceses on all clergy accused of sexual abuse of minors F-3

  4. A. Sexual Abuse Victims Who Were the Minors Abused by Priests? Gender: Male = 81% Female = 19% Age: Under 10 = 22% 11 to 14 = 51% 15 to 17 = 27% F-4

  5. B. Onset of Sexual Abuse Preconditions for Abuse Factors in the Life of the Priests Who Abuse Overcoming External Factors that Might Have Prevented Abuse F-5

  6. Onset of Abuse, 1: Preconditions The motivation to sexually abuse, for example, emotional congruence, sexual arousal, or blockage to normal sexual relationships The ability to overcome internal inhibitions The ability to overcome external factors that may prevent the abuse The ability to overcome the child s resistance to the abuse F-6

  7. Onset of Abuse, 2: Relevant Factors for Priests Priest-abusers were likely to have experienced some of the following: Poor relationships with their parents when they were youths A history of sexual abuse Isolation, loneliness, insecurity, poor social skills, lack of identity Confusion over sexual identity, psychosexual immaturity Alcohol abuse F-7

  8. Onset of Abuse, 3: Overcoming External Factors that May Prevent Abuse from Occurring Abusers often create opportunities for the abuse to take place, such as socializing and building trust with the victim s family Abusers must overcome the child s resistance to the abuse, which is generally achieved through grooming tactics such as disproportionate attention, enticements, games, seduction, verbal and/or physical coercion F-8

  9. C. Grooming Behavior Grooming is a pre-meditated behavior intended to manipulate a potential victim into complying with sexual abuse Examples of various tactics or methods used to entice victims: seduction or manipulation building of personal and family relationships providing benefits such as drugs, alcohol, or pornography, money, or other gifts, tickets to sporting events, or taking them on trips verbal or physical intimidation F-9

  10. Grooming 2, Seduction and Testing of a Child This tactic is used when there is a relationship with a child and the child is accustomed to the affectionate expression of the offender The offender gradually extends the affectionate behavior, all the while testing the child s response; if no overt resistance is observed, the sexual abuse continues F-10

  11. Grooming 3, Emotional Manipulation and Verbal Coercion These were the most common tactics used by offenders to groom their victims. Examples: Doing favors for the victim in exchange for sex Emotionally blackmailing the victim into compliance Even though it may appear that there is room for negotiation on the part of the victim, the outcome always favors the offender

  12. Grooming 4, Catching the Victim by Surprise The offender orchestrates a situation to distract the victim or seizes the opportunity to abuse when the situation occurs A frequent situational opportunity arises when potential victims become altar servers or otherwise serve a role in the church Seizing the opportunity is most common and is usually the result of the offender s frustration from waiting for the right time to initiate contact F-12

  13. Grooming 5, Using Verbal or Physical Force The offender garners victim compliance through use of force The offender either commands the victim to perform sexual acts and/or physically forces the victim to engage in sexual acts Physical force is one of the least common grooming tactics; this factor is more common among the most serious, repeat offenders F-13

  14. Grooming 6, Disguising Sexual Advances This tactic disguises sexual advances in the context of playing a game. Example: Offender will begin by tickling the victim and gradually progress to fondling While this approach may appear spontaneous, it has been well planned by the offender, yet orchestrated in a rather surreptitious manner F-14

  15. Grooming 7, Using Alcohol and Drugs During the peak years of abuse, the use of alcohol and drugs by abusive priests increased significantly, but only for male victims Why this finding is important: It is used to lower the inhibitions of the potential victim The increase in the use of alcohol and drugs by the abuser is consistent with the increase in the abuse of males The increase in the abuse of males is consistent with the increase in the abuse of minors by priests The use of alcohol and/or drugs by the abuser is a feature of the situational or regressed child abuser, but not of the fixated abuser F-15

  16. Grooming 8, Building Relationships with the Families of Victims Family relationships were built to gain trust Parents of abused children trusted the priests without reservation The children who were abused often accepted the abuse and did not report it for many years This lack of disclosure and fear about reporting the abuse was one reason it was able to persist F-16

  17. Grooming 9, Effects of Grooming over Time Grooming tactics are premeditated and more methodically planned than spontaneous abuse The offender is willing to wait months or even possibly years to accomplish his task Eventually the victim can become groomed to the point that he/she believes to be in an apparent loving relationship with the offender Non-violent forms of extensive grooming or persuasion make it difficult for a victim to understand that the actions are abuse F-17

  18. D. Persistence of Abuse The accused priests employed a variety of justifications and excuses to protect themselves from self-blame and from accepting the status of abuser Techniques of neutralization were rooted in culturally specific motives unique to the Catholic Church F-18

  19. Persistence of Abuse: Categories Mechanisms used to alleviate feelings of guilt and shame, thus enabling offenders to commit acts of abuse, are called neutralization techniques Three categories: Excuses for behavior Justifications for behavior Deviance disavowal F-19

  20. Excuses for Behavior, 1: Denial of Responsibility Accused priests denied responsibility by making claims that They were not well (using or addicted to substances such as alcohol and/or drugs) They were compelled by sick or sinful impulses Forces beyond their control allowed them to deny full responsibility for their behavior, similar to legal claims of diminished capacity F-20

  21. Excuses for Behavior, 2: Denying the Victim Accused priests denied the victim his or her status by claiming that the victim Participated by being seductive or precocious, or Did not fight back or say anything during the abuse Accused priests blamed the victim or the victim s family for setting up conditions that allowed the abuse to occur by inviting him into their home, engaging him socially, and including him as part of the family F-21

  22. Excuses for Behavior, 3: Denying the Victim Accused priests explicitly blamed victims by placing the onus of the initiation of the physical intimacy on the accuser Referred to the abuse as a relationship Noted that the victims were willing or precocious Considered themselves the victims because they were accused of these indecent acts F-22

  23. Justifications for Behavior, 1 Accused priests justified their actions by Diminishing the wrongfulness of the behavior Deflecting the harmfulness of the actions Placing the responsibility for the deviance on others, sometimes actually condemning the condemners or criticizing their accusers Accused priests downplayed what actually occurred or used positive language surrounding the relationship between themselves and the victim F-23

  24. Justifications, 2: Minimization of Harm Many priest-abusers explained their actions as being part of a relationship, not sex, or that it happened only once, or occurred long ago Viewed the sexual behavior as consensual, not harmful, and any behavior short of intercourse as not wrong because it was not sex Insinuated that a single incident of sexual behavior was not harmful; only repetitive acts caused harm Implied that the harm should be forgotten because of the time between the incident(s) and the accusation F-24

  25. Justifications, 3: Condemning the Condemners This behavior is a deflective technique in which priest-abusers blamed church leaders for the abuse and/or the responses to the accusation One way of shifting the blame to the church hierarchy was to say how poorly church leaders prepared seminarians for life in the priesthood They also blamed church leaders for how ineffectively they dealt with accusations of abuse, which they considered reactive and unforgiving F-25

  26. Justifications, 4: Condemning the Condemners This form of justification draws on the culture of forgiveness: accused priests noted that the Catholic practice of reconciliation should outweigh the sins and no one should take action against them in response to allegations This view essentially eliminated the penance aspect of reconciliation; some priests stated that public embarrassment was sufficient penance This attitude was particularly true for those who participated in psychological treatments, but were still removed, or served jail time F-26

  27. Justifications, 5: Condemning the Condemners Some clergy accused of sexual abuse believed that the 2002 Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People created a negative attitude particularly because of the zero-tolerance policy for those accused of abuse Abusers felt they were denied due process They believed that if only their leaders had done things differently in the past, this crisis would have been avoided In particular they felt they were poorly socialized to the life of a priest F-27

  28. Justifications, 6: Inadequate Seminary Preparation Accused priests indicated that had each man been adequately trained to undertake priestly life, they may have been able to make better choices, for example They may not have chosen to be ordained, but in some way felt pressured They might have been better equipped to adjust to the loneliness and realities of the life of celibate chastity, though no priest said that the vow of celibate chastity was the actual problem F-28

  29. Deviance Disavowal: Appealing to a Higher Authority Accused priests believed that a sin or infraction must first be mended with a higher authority, that is, the authority of God Their particular focus was on relationship with God; through the sacrament of reconciliation the slate would have been wiped clean of sin They may have sought forgiveness also from parishioners and victims, or completed some distinct punishment or treatment and therefore that should be enough to end the process of condemnation However, they failed to recognize any harm to the victim F-29

  30. E. Desistance from Abuse, 1: Why Abuse Stopped Desistance from abuse is affected by both internal and external influences Some priest-abusers stopped because of internal reasons Feeling guilty about their behavior Having a sense of remorse Feeling shame because of their behavior F-30

  31. Desistance from Abuse, 2: Why Abuse Stopped More commonly, abuse stopped because of external reasons being removed from the parishes and situations in which they could abuse Others stopped because of a combination of internal and external reasons they earned a disgraceful reputation because of their behavior they were reformed after treatment F-31

  32. Summary of Understanding the Sexual Victimization of Children Age and Gender of Abuse Victims Onset of Sexual Abuse Grooming Behavior Persistence of Abuse Excuses for Abuse Justifications for Abusing Deviance Disavowal Desistance from Abuse F-32

  33. Discussion Questions What are some of the relevant factors to be aware of at the onset of abuse? How can those responsible for the care of children and young people be made more aware of the characteristics of grooming behavior and how to respond? How do the excuses and justifications for sexual abuse affect the persistence of the behavior? What are some other ways supervisors can more readily detect abuse? Link to USCCB http://www.usccb.org/issues-and- action/child-and-youth-protection/charter.cfm F-33

  34. Prepared by: Sister Katarina Schuth, O.S.F., St. Paul Seminary School of Divinity, University of St. Thomas Technical Associate: Catherine Slight Consultants: Dr. Karen Terry and Margaret Smith, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, authors of major studies on sexual abuse for the USCCB; Dr. Mary Gautier, Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate F-34

Related


More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#