Category: Uncategorized

Posted on

Why chaperoning abusers in church is unwise

Abusers in church

A few years ago I was home with a bad stomach bug. I was in the middle of a violent vomiting episode when I heard my dogs barking and going nuts. For ten minutes they were barking obsessively. I finally got enough energy to go inspect the issue and there stood a man, hands cupped against his face, peering into my living room window as he called out my name. I knew the guy. And didn’t like him either. He was an abuser who lived across from my church office and regularly stopped cancer patients as they were pulling into the neighboring oncology center to harass and cuss them out. He had the police called on him repeatedly. I called the police on him multiple times. I watched out my church office window one day as a police officer drew his gun on him because he was threatening to kill his girlfriend with a knife. One time he pulled a knife out at a local church and was invoking my name to get off the hook, saying that we were good friends. I had sent multiple email warnings to all the local churches about him and told them about his violence. Yet several churches told me it was their “Christian duty” to invite him in. I disagree.

This man is currently in prison for beating up his girlfriend and leaving her for dead. He routinely harassed and threatened me, sometimes calling me fifteen times a day. There is a difference between someone who has anger issues and someone who is an abuser. This man did not have anger issues. He is an abuser. He will never be invited into my home or church when he is released from prison. My elders at church will not offer a chaperone to “keep an eye on him” when he is released. They won’t do it because he is an abuser. He is violent. He has a long history of harassing, intimidating, and threatening people.

Quite often I’m told of churches who have “covenant agreements” with known serial child predators. They, too, are abusers. Churches have shared covenant agreements with me to show me how wonderful it is that the leadership extends grace while “keeping an eye” on convicted serial abusers. I’m unimpressed. If we don’t trust predators to be in our homes around our own children, why would we invite them into our churches to have access to other people’s children? To make it worse, leaders normally keep the abuse a secret from the church members.

The following is a covenant agreement that was given to me by a church that has a child rapist in the church who doubled as a minister and youth minister when he was raping multiple young girls in his youth group. He is a tier 3 offender and, against the strong recommendation of the Sex Offender Assessment Board, a judge chose not to assign a sexually violent predator status. Only a hand full of church leaders even know he is a sex offender, and the congregation was never informed. This is a large church and parents of kids have no idea that there is a serial child rapist sitting in their pews. Parents, if they knew of the terms of the covenant agreement, should be alarmed. The serial predator has a sponsor who he “may be” asked to check in with. I redacted the church name and highlighted some things that just made me shake my head in disbelief. This covenant agreement is very similar to all the others that I’ve collected over the years.

There are a host of reasons why I think chaperoning known abusers is a bad idea, but I’ll share just a few here. For one, abusers are far more sophisticated than the chaperones who “may” be watching them. They are masters of deception and the average person does not know how sophisticated their techniques are. I know, in the above mentioned case, that the abuser is not confined to areas of the building designated for adults only. I know because he attends worship, where hundreds of children surround him. The notion that there are areas of a church building “designated for adults” is absurd.

Second, churches most often are not informed that such agreements even exist and leaders intentionally keep hidden the fact that sexual predators are in the church. This agreement says, “Information about your background will only be shared with people of the congregation who need to be aware.” In this case, at a church of over 1,000, seven people were counted among those who “need to be aware.” I would like to know who makes the decision for who remains informed and who doesn’t.

Third, abusers are wolves. This particular man was masquerading as a minister of the Gospel while he was raping multiple children. He is not a “lost, injured, or weak” Christian who needs to be prayed over. He is an abuser, an impostor, and a deceiver who needs to be kept at bay.

Fourth, if an abuser can’t be trusted and has all kinds of restrictions, including having a chaperone, he is not repentant. I challenge you to find this twisted theology in the Bible that I hear so often–“He can be forgiven but that doesn’t mean we should trust him.” This statement comes from our desperation to be inclusive of everyone. Can you imagine the church saying this about the apostle Paul? Which leads me to the final point.

Abusers have a pathology. They abuse people, not because they “struggle” with sin, but because they want to abuse people. This is why they can’t ever be trusted. The Bible correctly labels abusive people as deceivers, impostors, white washed tombs, snakes, thorns, thistles, chaff, waterless mists, evil people, wolves, and so on. It’s important to note that this language is not used for sinners like you, me, or even the apostle Paul.

In fact, all of us have a pathology. While we’re talking about Paul, let’s talk about why he went from insolent opponent and persecutor of Christians to an apostle and missionary. Paul’s pathology was always to please God no matter what. Period. Wrong as he was when he persecuted Christians, Paul wasn’t deceptive and dishonest when he did it. Nor was he doing it for personal gain or pleasure. Paul was persecuting Christians for one reason and one reason only: because he thought that’s what God wanted. When Paul had a vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus, his pathology never changed. Paul repented, was baptized, and continued to do what would please God. His pathology never changed. His actions did.

In fact, Paul told Timothy, “I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief. . . ” (1 Timothy 1:12, 13). It was because of Paul’s ignorance and unbelief that he was able to receive mercy. Paul was not intentionally deceptive. In fact, Paul talks very negatively about such wolves: “. . . while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13). Paul’s advice for people who are abusive, treacherous, ungrateful, having the appearance of godliness but denying its power? . . . “Avoid such people” (2 Timothy 3:5). Why? because they have a pathology. And that pathology isn’t to please God. It’s to pretend to be godly so they can abuse, steal, deceive, and get what they came for.

Just imagine if the church in Antioch said, “Paul we’re going to have you sign a covenant saying you won’t go near Christians who are vulnerable. We’ll assign you a chaperone. There are certain areas that you’ll be restricted from going to. If you violate this covenant, you “may be” removed.” The very thought of it is absurd. Paul was trusted because Paul previously sinned in ignorance. Though he once persecuted Christians he was not pretending to be someone he wasn’t. He didn’t deceive, lie, threaten, intimidate, stalk, molest, grope, or rape people while pretending to be a godly man. But Paul sure mentions such people. In fact, he has a lot to say about deception: “Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not become partners with them. . . and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them” (Ephesians 5:6-11).

Paul never extended an invitation to deceivers and people who work in secrecy for selfish gain. He consistently said to avoid them, expose them, and keep them out of the church. Why? Because abusers’ pathology is to deceive, steal, and masquerade as someone they are not in order to get what they want.

Ask your leaders if they have a secret covenant agreement to keep wolves secretly hidden within the confines of your church. If they do, ask for a copy. Ask if there are currently any people who have signed such an agreement and who they are. My guess is that they will tell you that you will not be qualified as someone “who needs to be aware,” but ask yourself, is this something Jesus would be OK with? Would Paul be OK with wolves having a secret agreement between just them and the leaders and having a chaperone because they can’t be trusted? If the answer is no, perhaps there needs to be a serious conversation about the validity of these secret covenants.

Photo by Kristina Flour on Unsplash

Posted on

Abusers look for opportunities more than vulnerabilities

Deception

“I turned my back for literally ONE second!!”, she lamented. My wife is Assistant Director and Preschool teacher at a daycare center. She has a few students who are a handful, to say the least. The child she was telling me about decked another kid the second my wife turned her head. This is routine behavior for this particular child. I talk a lot about “testing” vs “grooming” behaviors. Children know how to test us adults from a young age. It’s a normal part of learning, growing, and maturing. They test boundaries to know what they can and cannot get away with. Parents or caregivers who are more passive may witness children who easily test boundaries and get away with much more than children whose parents intervene quickly.

We often hear that abusers find vulnerabilities and exploit them–that they search for the vulnerable single parent to target them or their kids, or they find vulnerable institutions with weak policies, or they find vulnerable kids who have an unstable home life or low self-esteem. With this premise, training tends to focus on reducing vulnerabilities and increasing awareness. Educate people more, create more programs to help at-risk children, have seminars on better parenting, put two adults in every classroom, put windows in doors, talk to teens about self-esteem, and on the list goes. While I’m in favor for doing all of the above, I also know enough now to know that this will do very little to deter abusers. This is a defensive stance, and abusers are always on the offensive. When they see someone playing defense, they will forge a way to covertly go around that line and accomplish the goal they set out to do anyway. Like the child who saw an opportunity when my wife turned her back, abusers know how to see opportunities the second they arise. And if opportunities don’t present themselves, abusers will create opportunities.

In studying abusers, I’ve found that they wear a very different lens than we do. We think they look for vulnerabilities, and to some extent they do. But this is not their modus operandi. Looking for and creating opportunities, however, is. In fact, abusers exploit our perception of vulnerabilities to create more opportunity to abuse. For example, one of the most common and ineffective policies is where churches keep known child molesters from entering a children’s wing of the church but still allow them to be elsewhere in close proximity to children (albeit supervised–though there are serious issues with this as well). This policy, otherwise known as a “limited contact agreement,” assumes that “keeping an eye on” an abuser is enough to hold them accountable and keep them from abusing more victims. It also assumes that children in the children’s wing are more vulnerable because there is a higher concentration of them all in one area.

But an abuser will use your perception of vulnerability in order to create opportunity. Remember, he or she is always on the offensive. For example, while everyone feels safe and secure because known child molesters are not allowed in the children’s wing or in bathrooms alone, they will observe which of the children outside the children’s wing are running around unmonitored. Abusers are always watching and taking inventory. Which children are allowed to roam? Which ones have unassuming parents? How do they interact with adults? With each other? It’s important to note that abusers live, breathe, and think deception constantly. This is why Paul warns Timothy: “. . . evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13). Paul rightly extends no invitation into the church for abusers. He does not tell Timothy to have an open door policy for all in the Ephesian church. Instead, Paul warns Timothy that they are “having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people” (2 Timothy 3:5).

Paul also uses the proper terminology to describe these deceivers–impostors. I believe that part of why so many are afraid to use that language in the church is because they falsely believe that abusers sheepishly look for vulnerabilities and those vulnerabilities are what “tempt” the abuser. Once they find vulnerabilities, they “fall into sin” because they were tempted. If we remove vulnerabilities, according to this reasoning, it’s as if we are helping abusers avoid temptation. But I strongly insist that this is not the correct way to view deception. Again, abusers are not looking for vulnerabilities as much as they are creating opportunities. This is why Paul warns that they will go on from bad to worse. It’s why he is so quick to label them impostors. It’s why he warns Timothy to avoid them.

This is also why I liken abuse to other petty crimes like pick pocketing. Pick pockets are not simply polished criminals with slick hands. They also know how to read people really, really well. They do it intuitively. They are people watchers. Yes, abusers do look for vulnerabilities, but they primarily are creating opportunities. It takes tremendous practice, skill, ability to read people, ability to deceive people, and–most importantly–the heart to actually follow through and pull it off. Abusers know what to say, how to say it, when to say it, and how you will respond to what they are saying. If we think that reducing vulnerabilities will reduce the chances of an offender creating more victims, we are wrong. They will simply migrate to another person, geographic area, or church. Put another way, they will create new opportunities to keep deceiving in order to produce more victims. “They will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.”

When I go to churches and other organizations to train, my goal is not just to reduce vulnerabilities. While that’s important, my main goal is to train people to detect deception and intervene. Many people ask me for a checklist of things to look for in an abuser, and it really is not this simplistic. Abusers are dynamic; always changing, observing, and looking for opportunity. As soon as we create a checklist of “red flags,” they’ve already adapted and have found 100 more opportunities to abuse in 100 different ways. The good news is that if we rethink the way abusers operate, we can begin to see their “tells.”

For example, I observe people who are observing others. Who are the adults whose eyes are always roaming? Do the conversations usually turn to boasting about love for children? Are there people who, even if for a second, can’t keep their eyes from looking at children? My father once told me, from prison, that he can spot another pedophile within 30 seconds of walking into a crowded room. Asked how he can do this with such ease, he answered, “Easy! I just watch their eyes.” Are these same adults with roaming eyes able to keep their hands to themselves or are they patting kids on the head as they walk by? Do they talk out of both sides of their mouth? When they speak are they drawing people in or are they just holding normal conversations? Do they exaggerate? Do they use compliments or tell jokes in order to gain interest or divert attention? Do they flirt with women? Say inappropriate things or tell jokes that are just a little off color?

There are so many more tells, but the point for this post is that a skilled abuser won’t be deterred by churches or organizations that reduce vulnerabilities. They’re far too skilled and determined to be deterred. The best chance we have at limiting the risk of abuse is to be more proactive at observing people constantly and with consistency. We need to be far more honest when someone is making other people uncomfortable. And we need to be willing to determine who the impostors are and to name them as such.

Cancer cells in the body are impostors. They are much like normal cells in the body, but the difference is that cancer cells continue to divide, masquerading as normal cells while wreaking havoc on the cells that actually are normal. I’m not a doctor and don’t pretend to be one but oncologists, to my knowledge, never attempt to rehabilitate cancer cells and turn them back into normal ones. Rather, oncologists know the imminent danger these impostor cells pose and the goal is to identify and remove them as quickly and completely as possible. Can you imagine an oncologist using the same philosophy as most churches today? “Let’s not judge. Forgive and move on. All cells are welcome in this body. Reconcile in Jesus’ name. Let’s all be together. Please don’t call them cancer cells; they’ve repented. We’ll allow these cells here in the main part of the body, we just won’t let them in the children’s corner. We’ll keep an eye on them.” Such a response would be embarrassingly ridiculous. Yet this has become the norm for how churches respond to abuse.

Some may take issue with this analogy and think that if we take this approach with abusers there would be nothing to stop us from taking the same approach with all sinners. After all, we all sin and fall short of the glory, right? But we are not talking about sinners like you and me. We are talking about people who intentionally and serially deceive and masquerade as one of us when they are not. The Bible uses all kinds of terms to describe this class of sinner: wolves, false prophets, dogs, thorn bushes, thistles, animals, impostors, born for destruction, blots, blemishes, to name a few. The Bible not only identifies them as such, but it never recommends rehabilitation, reconciliation, or any kind of association once they’ve been identified. This is not a coincidence. It is essential for the life of the church to name the ones who are hell bent on destroying it by ruining innocent lives. A body cannot thrive when cancer is slowly eating its host away.

And, like cancer cells, abusive impostors will find opportunity where they can best cloak themselves and do the most amount of damage. They don’t do this because they are “tempted by vulnerabilities.” They do it because it is what they do and who they are.

Until we shift our thinking and begin studying and understanding deception, the church will continue to be light years behind the secular world while its impostors continue to destroy the innocence of every good, young, and healthy cell within the Body.

Photo by W A T A R I on Unsplash

Posted on

A Safe Place: Guest Post by Pastor Gricel Medina & Ryan Ashton

safe church

EDITOR’S NOTE
The poor, sick, and oppressed flocked to Jesus by the thousands because He was safe. Sometimes He called people to follow Him. Other times people begged to follow Him and He sent them away to live in peace instead. Jesus didn’t elevate the invitation to church above justice and nurturing the wounded. This guest post is by two people whom I love dearly and who really understand what it is to provide a safe community for survivors of abuse. This is incredibly helpful.
—Jimmy Hinton

“Church is one of the least safe places to acknowledge abuse because the way it is counseled is, more often than not, damaging to the victim…. It is with deep regret that I say the Church is one of the worst places to go for help.”
—Rachael Denhollander ¹


Never have the words “church is one of the least safe places” been so true as these past few years. From megachurches to non-denominational churches, Independent Fundamental Baptists to Southern Baptists, progressive to conservative, religious communities are full of tragedies we can no longer ignore. Listening to so many survivors tell their stories of the horrible ways they were treated by the Church leaves no doubt that churches have become some of the most unsafe places on the planet to be a survivor of abuse. Faith communities too often hide a toxic culture where abusers thrive and victims are shunned and silenced. The dismissiveness of those in authority, the isolation of the vulnerable, the imbalance of power, and the expectation to stay silent and “forgive” are realities we all must acknowledge. Our theology and Christ’s gospel have so often been hijacked by those who use it as a license for impunity rather than accountability, and church culture has become complicit by rewarding the silence of institutional protectionism. No one is safe under the current conditions of the Church today.


While walking with survivors we are often asked “what is a safe church? How will I know I’m ready to go back?”

According to the most recent statistics, one in three women and one in six men experience sexual abuse at some point in their lives.² In a congregation of 100 people, that is easily 25% of those who attend, and these numbers are most likely low estimates. If we include domestic violence, emotional or spiritual abuse, these numbers climb to as much as 40% according to some experts.³ This is important to understand because we all know a survivor of abuse, even if we do not yet realize it. Survivors are watching how we’ve been responding to #MeToo and other stories of abuse in our society, especially the tragedies currently involving the Church. 

However, some survivors taking a break from attending church becomes a problem for many Christians. For many survivors, taking a break from church meetings is the only alternative they have if they cannot find people they can trust. Abuse survivors can still believe in Jesus while being unable to engage a religious community where they would be reliving their deep and lasting traumas of spiritual, sexual, or emotional abuse inflicted by Christians in the Church.

While walking with survivors we are often asked “what is a safe church? How will I know I’m ready to go back?” Making the Church a safe place begins with us. We hope to provide some insight of what we have both learned about safe churches. 

Making Your Church a Safe Church

One of the worst things to say to a survivor is “there is no such thing as a perfect church.” This confusing of definitions belittle survivors. “Safe” is very different than “perfect.” People will always disappoint and hurt us in a fallen world, but enduring abuse is never an option we must settle for. Abuse or predatory behavior is never acceptable under any circumstance.

To boil it down to a simple definition, abuse is anything someone does to isolate, deflect, manipulate, or intimidate you. Abuse can be sexual, physical, verbal, emotional, and spiritual, and many resources exist that explain what abuse looks like under a variety of contexts.

A safe church is one that does not tolerate any mistreatment of any member, whether it’s from a casual attendee to the highly-respected and gifted celebrity pastor. No one is above accountability in a safe church (cf. Matthew 18; 1 Timothy 5:19). Safe churches take every allegation seriously, report crimes immediately, do not silence or shame victims, and support victims with tangible resources. Most pastors are not equipped to counsel trauma victims and safe churches refer victims to professional therapy for their trauma. Safe churches recognize sadness and lament are appropriate responses to hurt and that anger is a correct response to injustice (cf. Psalm 82). Safe churches give space for victims to fully grieve their loss and betrayal and grieve with victims as a community (cf. Romans 12:15). Safe churches do not force people to conform to a false positivity (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:26). Safe places do not just hear what a victim is saying, but truly listen with empathetic hearts that are willing to learn. Walking with survivors is a long-term process and overcoming trauma is a lifelong journey. 

It is especially difficult for those with authoritative or dogmatic backgrounds to be willing to listen. We are tempted to give out advice on trauma which often comes from a place of discomfort seeking to quickly fix a person or situation. Yet trauma is not a superficial wound and cannot be quickly healed. As Christian therapist, Dr. Diane Langberg, says, victims need “talking, tears, and time.”⁴ Coercing forgiveness actually impedes the healing God is doing and is incredibly detrimental to survivors.

Abusers are master manipulators, using deception and deflection to appear as victims themselves.⁵  However, abusers cannot get the help they need unless people are willing to hold them accountable. This is extremely important when an abuser is someone in power, where it is hard to take a hurting victim seriously when the alleged perpetrator shines in the spotlight. Yet enough cases exist where horrendous abuse is overlooked because the abuser is likable, nice, or has a veneer of spirituality. When this pattern repeats itself over and over and a wake of victims demonstrate a long-term and willful ignorance, people always say “I wish I would have listened!” Yet when a leader who flees or resigns in disgrace, often only to reappear again in a different place, there are plenty of people who warn the pattern will continue, only to be dismissed. The truth is that church culture does not listen. We must be wiser than predators, and that begins with believing victims and ensuring every situation is properly handled with the right authorities.


Too often, victims suffer more from their faith community’s ignorance, lack of empathy, and the rush to quickly fix things, leaving deep and lasting wounds to someone already hurting.

A safe church is one that values the voices of survivors, knowing that when God heals a victim, they become a powerful agent for justice who always look out for others. Abuse is the last thing a community of Christ should enable, but often our communal desire for acceptance impairs our wisdom and discernment to see what is otherwise apparent. It is for this reason that God is faithful to send people to warn us—often survivors themselves—who can advise our communities on what to look for. They’ve lived through it, and know better than most what manipulation and abuse looks like. Similar to the prophets and prophetesses of old, God always provides His body with an immune system whose  priceless wisdom sees through a manipulator’s charm.

Addressing Church Culture

Christian institutions can become a culture of deceit because genuine spirituality is hard to measure. Image-conscious communities tend to reward the flashy, put-together people instead of standing with those who are broken. In contrast, a safe church is one where survivors are not isolated from everyone else and kept at an arm’s length, but are valued and included. We all come to Christ with baggage, and we even acquire hurts after believing in Him. Safe places understand and value the imperfections of human beings and are careful to discern the difference between someone’s involuntary trauma responses and “sin.” Safe churches do not confuse Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, hurt, or grief with sin, but have compassion. There are no accusations of “bitterness” or “unforgiveness” in a loving community. Too often, victims suffer more from their faith community’s ignorance, lack of empathy, and the rush to quickly fix things, leaving deep and lasting wounds to someone already hurting. 

When institutional change is required, safe churches embrace transparency and accountability and listen to the voices of victims. Repentance—both individual and corporate—takes time. Survivors are looking for places where the willingness to change culture supersedes the desire to maintain a damaging status quo. Predators have taken advantage of the havens Christians unwittingly made for them. The more we learn about abuse and trauma, the more every part of our society needs to adapt—from politics, workplaces, homes, and churches.

Churches need to rethink how to approach authority since no one is infallible, including leaders. In some circles, the pastor has arrogantly replaced the Holy Spirit, and our expected obeisance often approaches idolatry. Every one of us is responsible for making our faith communities safe places for the vulnerable, and that requires understanding how social influence, peer pressure, and coercive control works in churches. We all experience the effects of socialization without realizing it, much as a fish experiences wetness. We should never ignore the red flags that raise internal alarms. If something seems wrong, it is worth paying attention to. We have all been given the ability to discern between good and evil and are responsible to do so. (Cf. 1 John 4:1; 1Thessalonians 5:20-21)

Prevention & Education

Beyond caring for survivors in our midst, do our churches equip themselves with the best practices on prevention? Are we aware of national organizations like GRACE or local resources that can empower our faith communities implement policies that protect the vulnerable? 

Some questions we need to ask include inquiring of our church leaders whether there is an abuse prevention policy at all. If there isn’t one, that’s a problem; if your church leadership is evasive about providing you with it, that’s another problem. Do we have competent and properly vetted volunteers? Do we perform background checks on a yearly basis? Since many abusers are not caught, do we look for behaviors rather than rely solely on background checks? Are there at least two to three volunteers with children at all times? Are bathroom visits for children supervised with more than one volunteer? Are there windows in the nursery and classrooms? Do we have board members or elders who are able to disagree with the pastor and hold them accountable? Do we adequately support spouses if they come forward with a domestic violence complaint? How do we respond if we fail? 

Conclusion

Rather than expect survivors to attend your church, do whatever you can to make your church a safe place. Survivors will come when they are ready. Realize that because God is everywhere, He has not abandoned survivors. Psalm 139 among many other passages should be the confidence we rely on for God’s continuing presence in the believer who cannot attend church services. God is not angry or annoyed with victims, and neither should we be as the Church. God is near the broken-hearted (cf. Psalm 34). Building a safe church requires us to be safe people, those who reflect the unconditional love of God. 

These words of wisdom from F. Remy Diederich’s Broken Trust are particularly helpful for those wondering how to approach the Christian who is no longer attending church services: 

“Resist the temptation or sense of obligation to return to your former group, or any organized religion, right away. When you come out of a performance-based setting, you will naturally feel the need to be a ‘good Christian’ and return. 

“Part of the sickness of spiritual abuse is that it demands an unhealthy dependence on a person, or organization, rather than on God. Taking a break from organized religion is a good way to prove to yourself that you can survive with God alone. Well-meaning believers will tell you that you must be in a fellowship of faith. It’s dangerous to isolate yourself from the Body of Christ. All kinds of problems will result if you aren’t a part of a community of believers. Nonsense. That’s like telling someone who just came out of an abusive marriage to get married right away. In both scenarios, a person needs time to reflect on what just happened. Their soul needs to be repaired before re-engaging.

“Spiritual safety doesn’t come from organized religion. It comes from the Spirit of God living inside of you. Being a member of a faith community can certainly help you, and it’s my hope that you will one day return to be an active member of a healthy community, but you can survive a season without one. Just like a wounded athlete has to leave the game to tend to their injury, so there are times when a wounded believer needs to leave their faith community. In both cases, the goal is to return. What your well-meaning friends don’t understand are the raw feelings people often have after a spiritually abusive experience. Going to worship too soon can actually be traumatic. You might be surprised how sensitive you are to experiences that remind you of the past abuse. Give yourself permission to take a sabbatical from organized religion so your broken trust can be repaired.”

Be that safe person—that love of God incarnate. As Dr. Diane Langberg writes in The Spiritual Impact of Sexual Abuse: 

“In other words, we are to demonstrate in the flesh the character of God over time so that who we are reveals the truth about God to the survivor. This is not in any way to deny or underestimate the Word of God. However, often the Word needs to be fleshed out and not just spoken for us to truly grasp what it means. 

“This work is both difficult and a great privilege. The task of serving as a representative of God so that His character can be grasped and believed is far beyond any capability of yours or mine. It is a work that will bring us to our knees if we let it, with hearts hungry for more of God so that we might bring His presence in very concrete ways into places where He has not yet been known.”

In those places of darkness, despair, and excruciating pain, Jesus is there. He never leaves us or forsakes us. We have found that it is in the darkness that some of the most sacred church services are found wherever love is graciously displayed. You do not need a church building to be that safe place. 

Gricel Medina is a pastor, speaker, writer, and advocate who has planted three churches and leads a prayer movement for the MidSouth Conference. Pastor Medina has written for several widely distributed Spanish and English magazines, devotionals, and blogs, including Covenant Companion. She is a regular writer for the award-winning magazine, Mutuality, and the CBE blog Arise. Pastor Medina has been a speaker for CBE International Conference and The Courage Conference.
Twitter: @pastorgricel

Ryan Ashton is a survivor, advocate, and graphic designer. A 2018 graduate from Bob Jones University (BFA, Graphic Design), Ryan is the Director of Technology and Social Media for GRACE and the Creative Director for The Courage Conference. Ryan currently volunteers with Greenville’s Julie Valentine Center as a sexual assault victim advocate.
Twitter: @ryanllashton

References

[1] Lee, Morgan. “My Larry Nassar Testimony Went Viral. But There’s More to the Gospel Than Forgiveness.” Christian History | Learn the History of Christianity & the Church, Christianity Today, www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2018/january-web-only/rachael-denhollander-larry-nassar-forgiveness-gospel.html. Accessed 15 Jan. 2019.
[2] “Sexual Assault in the United States.” Sexual Assault Statistics | National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC), www.nsvrc.org/statistics.
[3] “Interview with Rachael Denhollander about Pastors Protecting Children and Advocating for Victims.” Practical Shepherding, 15 Feb. 2018, practicalshepherding.com/2019/02/14/interview-with-rachael-denhollander-about-pastors-protecting-children-and-advocating-for-victims/.
[4] “A Visit from Dr. Diane Langberg.” Helping Up Mission, 11 May 2017, helpingupmission.org/2017/05/langberg/. Accessed 18 Feb. 2019.
[5] “What Is DARVO?” Commentary: Loftus, Bugs Bunny, Memory, & Media, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, https://dynamic.uoregon.edu/jjf/defineDARVO.html?fbclid=IwAR2A9jTrqhzHHliPt0GxdZZDBPX5yl6-a_idcFthXIB05dYj8prcU8q3NUk#Short%20Definition. Accessed 18 Feb. 2019.

Posted on

Why I talk about abusers “testing” instead of grooming

deception

Groom (verb)-to get into readiness for a specific objective: Prepare

Test (verb)-to make a preliminary test or survey (as of reaction or interest) before embarking on a course of action

Prior to learning in 2011 that my dad was a very sophisticated child sexual predator, I had no reason to believe he was abusing children. Not only was he abusing many young children, he was doing it in our own home. It was my youngest sister who disclosed to me that she had been sexually abused by our dad for years. An entire family and community was clueless. We had no idea. And we are right in step with the rest of society. Dr. Gene Abel estimates that a child molester has less than a 3% chance of ever getting caught every time they create a hands-on victim. In my father’s case, he operated at a 100% success rate with every victim. In other words, he successfully abused all of his many victims without anyone ever suspecting that he was abusing children.

The one thing that kept coming up in every book I read was the concept of “grooming behavior.” It has become the universal language to describe what abusers do to both their victims and the community at large in order to sexually, physically, or emotionally abuse their victims. Darkness To Light describes grooming this way:

Grooming is a process by which offenders gradually draw victims into a sexual relationship and maintain that relationship in secrecy. At the same time, offenders may also fill roles within the victims’ families that make them trusted and valued family friends.

Darkness To Light continues:

The key is to recognize red flag behaviors and to minimize opportunity for abuse.

Here are some red flag behaviors to watch for:

  1. Targeting specific kids for special attention, activities, or gifts. Some offenders show preference for a particular gender, age, or “type.”
  2. Slowly isolating a kid from family members and friends: physically and emotionally. This could include finding reasons for isolated, one-on-one interactions (sleepovers, camping trips, day activities, etc.), or undermining relationships with parents and friends to show that “no one understands you like I do.”
  3. Gradually crossing physical boundaries. Full frontal hugs that last too long, making kids sit in their laps, “accidental” touches of private areas – all of these are causes for concern. In some cases, offenders have engaged in partially clothed tickle sessions, showered with kids, or slept in the same bed with them.
  4. Encouraging a kid to keep secrets from family members. The shame and fear associated with child sexual abuse make it easy for offenders to enforce secrecy in this area as well, keeping abuse “just between us.”

As the son of a pedophile who was learning and growing and questioning everything about my childhood, this notion of “grooming” victims into being abused just didn’t seem adequate to describe what happened between my dad and his victims. It’s close, but I think the terminology is too broad and descriptions of grooming are way too static. We can’t reduce what abusers do to a quick checklist of red flag behaviors.

Pedophiles are experts at deception. They are artists and therefore are incredibly creative in how they implement their strategies. They are adaptable and nimble. What they do is dynamic, always changing. Abusers are the definition of becoming all things to all people. They do heinous acts, and thousands of them to dozens or even hundreds of kids, without having anyone suspect it. In the rare case that someone does suspect it or a victim discloses, the abuser can easily explain the actions away. I know. I lived with one such abuser. They have already thought of and rehearsed every possible scenario. They think on their feet much better than most of us do. Much of the abuse pedophiles do is intentionally done right in front of us. In fact, the ultimate trophy is to be able to abuse their victims in plain sight of adults without their noticing it. Sure, they abuse in isolation. But they also abuse many of their victims within inches of our eyes. And we don’t notice!

Let me first walk through the four “red flags of grooming” mentioned by Darkness To Light above. If the key really is to recognize the red flags so we can minimize opportunity for abuse, the absolute most important question I can possibly ask is, Does it actually work?

First, targeting specific kids for special attention, activities, or gifts; showing preference to a specific gender, age or type–I have fond memories as a kid going on beach trips with just my dad and my brothers. We have a large family (11 kids) and I am the 5th boy in a row. My parents would split up vacations and the two of them would take the girls then just my dad would take only us boys on a separate vacation. None of us boys were abused.

Presents-I still remember one day my older brother Tim and I waking up to two brand new three wheelers parked outside in our driveway. One was for Tim and one was for me, bought by my dad. There was no special occasion. He was an impulse buyer and showered all kinds of people with all kinds of gifts. He was generous with his time and money. Even looking back now, I don’t think he used presents to “groom” victims into being abused. Furthermore, the segregation of kids based on gender, age, and type is too generic. This “red flag” describes my wife. It describes me. It describes just about everyone I know. This makes the needle-in-the-haystack-phenomenon even worse when we tell people that “abusers can be anyone.” Do you see why this language isn’t specific enough? I can’t overstate the fact that abusers are dynamic in the application of their techniques. What works for one victim may not work for the next. An abuser will adapt to find the proper techniques to match the specific vulnerabilities in each victim and their families. And they do this by testing.

Second, slowly isolating kids from family and friends: physically and emotionally; finding reasons for isolated, one-on-one interactions (sleepovers, camping trips, day activities)–Once again, this is too broad. Dad took us boys on camp outs often. He never abused us. He also took girls on camp outs. He did abuse some of them. I have camped out many times with just my kids and have never abused them. My wife doesn’t like camping so she happily stays behind, which could have the appearance of “isolating” my kids. There was one key difference that I can see between instances when my dad isolated kids: he acted too excited to take certain kids on trips or sleepovers. But even this is very subjective because there were plenty of times that he was excited to take us boys on camping trips. Some of my best memories are of overnight trips my dad and I took together–camping, sail boating, going to the beach, and on I could go.

Third, gradually crossing physical boundaries; hugs that last too long, sitting kids in laps, “accidental” touches of private areas–I can’t name a parent who hasn’t exhibited the above behaviors, with the exception of “accidental” touches to private areas. But still, these are considered grooming behaviors to manipulate a child into a sexual encounter. Larry Nassar is one case where we know for certain that his physical contact with victims was sexual. And he did much of it–with over 100 victims that we know of–just inches away from the parents. Kristen Chatman was one such mother who was in the room as her daughter was being sexually assaulted by Nassar. Here is her account:

She was fully covered – even wearing running shorts. I, unlike others, don’t remember him ‘blocking’ my view, but since she was covered, I was unaware of what he was doing under the sheet. After he was done, he washed his hands and I remember thinking “Did he just do what I think he did? Where are his gloves?” I immediately dismissed the thoughts as there must have been some good reason. This was Larry after all. No need to question him. I trusted him. We all trusted him.


Deb McCaul was another attentive parent who not only was in the same room as Nassar while he abused her daughter Morgan, but actually walked up to be near her daughter to comfort her during the “procedure”:

“I wasn’t somebody with, like, my nose in the phone,” McCaul says. “I was having conversations with them. And whenever Larry was doing something in that [pelvic] area, I would go up and stand by the table, because I wanted her to feel more comfortable.”

Nassar was not deterred by his victim’s mother walking up and standing right next to him! Did he groom Morgan and Deb or did he test them first to find out which deception techniques he’d use to pull this off? Sexual predators are artists of deception. They constantly test their victims and their families to see which techniques will work best. Nassar did not gradually cross physical boundaries with his victims. He knew what he wanted to do to his victims so he tested them and their parents to know how he could pull it off, then he just did it. Abusers are dynamic. When Nassar saw Deb McCaul walk up next to him, he didn’t “groom” her into believing he was trustworthy. Nassar already had her trust because he had authority as a doctor and respect as a friend. All Nassar had to do was simply test Deb to see how he could hold her spotlight of attention. Once he initiated conversation, he sexually assaulted Deb’s daughter as he was casually talking with Deb. This is the dynamic nature I talk about. Abusers test. They adapt. And they do it proficiently on the go. They never skip a beat. They can’t. Otherwise they will get caught.

Finally, encouraging kids to keep secrets from family members–Again, this is not something my dad did. Both he and his victims tell me that he never told them to keep the abuse a secret. He didn’t need to. That’s not to say that some abusers don’t because we know that many do tell their victims to keep it a secret. But should this be considered a “grooming” technique? Grooming, by definition, is preparation. Grooming gets ready or prepares someone for a specific objective. An abuser who tells the victim to keep the abuse a secret is not preparing them for abuse; he has already has obtained his objective. He is not grooming the victim into being abused; he is merely warning the victim not to disclose the abuse that has already happened.

I think it’s important that we shift our language to be more precise. The above four “grooming behaviors” miss the most important issue at hand–they don’t tell us how abusers abuse their victims. I don’t want to focus on static behaviors, I want to focus on dynamic techniques abusers use to deceive us. I confess that we are grossly inadequate at identifying abusers “out there” in the real world. Even those of us who live and breathe abuse have many vulnerabilities that abusers will see and exploit. Because they are so adaptable, they are really good at deceiving others. Yet the common phrases that are thrown around to help us “identify” abusers are:

  • Abusers can be anyone
  • It’s all about control
  • They are master manipulators
  • They groom both their victims and communities
  • They’re incredibly good at controlling narratives
  • Watch out for people who are too good to be true

The problem (and it’s a major problem!) with this is that it tells us nothing about their techniques. It tells us nothing about how they do what they do. Though some of the grooming lingo is helpful, if falls way, way short of being specific enough to pick someone out of a crowd. If we want to understand how deception works, we need to study deception. I wanted to know, step by step, how abusers test us, deceive us, and what it is that they are doing along the way. How do they adapt and blend in with the grace and natural blending of a chameleon? What I found is that they are not merely “grooming” us and their victims. Rather, the bigger part of what they are doing is testing us. They test us to know exactly what each of our vulnerabilities are and they instantly exploit those vulnerabilities.

The difference between grooming and testing may seem like a trivial difference, but I assure you it’s the most important distinction. If someone is skilled at testing their subjects and they know what works for different people, they will learn deception techniques and adjust them from person to person. They not only know who to exploit, but they know how to exploit each person and what technique works best to pull it off. This describes abusers much better. When people say that, for abusers, “it’s all about control,” my response is, “No, it’s all about technique.” You can tell me that someone is controlling but what does that actually tell me about how he maintained control?

My theory led me to the brilliant work of neuroscientists and deception experts Dr. Stephen Macknick and Dr. Susana Martinez-Conde. I ran my theories by them and we ended up collaborating and putting on a training together in my hometown last year. The videos below show how and why our human brains are constantly making up information and how abusers hack and exploit our brains.

Drs. Macknik and Martinez-Conde collaborated with magicians to understand how the human brain is so easily fooled. What is it about us that makes us so susceptible to abuse? Magicians and abusers alike know how to exploit our vulnerabilities. Magicians make a living fooling people and abusers spend a lifetime abusing children by fooling adults. Magicians don’t need to groom us into being deceived any more than abusers need to. Because it’s not so much about grooming. It’s more about testing and adapting. Magicians are experts at deception. And so are abusers. For both, it’s about testing people, reading them, feeling them out, and knowing which techniques work best for each individual. Once a deceiver knows how this all works, they don’t need to slowly groom someone along. They simply test each of us, then use whatever techniques are best suited for us. Below is one example of how Apollo Robbins exploits this woman’s confidence. And watch how quickly he does it:

I am not knocking our current training here. What I am saying is that I’m hopeful for where our research is headed. There is so much to explore and learn when it comes to deception and the testing techniques abusers use. If we want to keep pace with abusers, we need to understand deception as good as they do. And that’s not going to happen if we keep assuming that abusers simply groom people into being abused. No–there’s so much more to what they do and I hope to link arms with more people who have the same desire to understand deception techniques.

Photo by Gareth Newstead on Unsplash

Posted on

#ChurchToo and why leaders respond so poorly

poor leadership

Over the last few weeks, I found myself struggling to keep up with the ever growing inbox of messages asking for help. They weren’t from church leaders but from church members. In each of the messages, a few members found out that a registered sex offender was attending the congregation. Some of the offenders had been there well over a decade. Some were loitering near children’s areas and others were actually volunteering with minor children. In every case the church leaders were not only aware, but they chose not to inform the congregation. I looked up records for each of the offenders. Some were bad enough, but some were really bad. I’ve personally seen this scenario hundreds of times now. Churches almost never respond to abuse well.  When they do respond well, we should celebrate and let them know that they’ve done a good job. In about 98% of the cases I’ve seen, however, the churches failed to inform their congregations when a sex offender is attending.

I was lamenting this to a good friend of mine and I told him that the leaders are consistently making decisions that are the complete opposite of how they should actually be responding. They care for, protect, and nurture the wolf while the sheep are left out to fend for themselves unaware that a wolf is in the sheep pen eyeing the ewe lambs. I shared with my friend that I was driving down our one way main street in town the other day and a car was coming towards me in the wrong direction. We all slowed down but she kept barreling down the street even though a line of cars was facing her. She finally stopped just feet from my car but her face showed that she was visibly agitated with me. For a second I was pretty sure she was going to start ramming my car! She finally pulled off to the side to let us past but she made it known that we were the jerks for not letting her continue through in the wrong direction.

I was describing my analogy to him. “It’s like the leaders consistently drive the wrong way down Decision Avenue and get agitated when anyone confronts them. And all we’re trying to do is turn them around and minimize casualties,” I said. My friend reminded me of the scene in the 1987 John Candy and Steve Martin movie Planes, Trains, and Automobiles. The clip is a silly way to demonstrate a very real problem–many leaders are making uninformed decisions and doing it with complete confidence. They routinely shut down people who try to warn them that they are making dangerous decisions.

My purpose is not to poke fun at these leaders, but to plead with them to have the humility to listen to people who are warning them that their decisions are dangerous to the flock.   When I reported my father I surrounded myself with wise counsel.  My wife and I selected church members whom we felt had common sense, wisdom, and could help us make informed decisions.  When we shut out the voices of our congregations we no longer have leadership–we have dictatorship.

Here is a sampling of the most common statements concerned members hear from the leaders regarding registered sex offenders in their churches:

  • He (or she) did his time
  • We don’t want to bring shame on this brother
  • It’s not fair to publicize his past sins
  • He poses no threat to children
  • We’re keeping an eye on him
  • He’s not allowed near the children’s wing
  • We met with him and he’s very remorseful and repentant
  • We need to encourage him and his family and shining a light on his past sins will greatly discourage him
  • You’re not to tell anyone about this because you’ll be undermining the leadership

Perhaps I should use another analogy to describe why it’s unwise to fail to inform the congregation.  Suppose a person comes into a congregation who was recently released from prison.  She tells them that she spent some time in prison but it mostly was a “misunderstanding.”  She says they are free to look up her record if they want to know more (knowing full well that they won’t take the time to do so) and she assures them that she has learned from her dumb mistakes.  Two years later, and with their blessing, she volunteers to drive the church van on an overnight annual camping trip.  The parents load their kids up in the church van, snap some pictures, and wish their kids farewell.

The reality is that this volunteer had 5 D.U.I. charges and the final one that landed her in prison was a vehicular homicide charge for killing a teenage girl when she crossed into oncoming traffic.  My questions–Whose responsibility was it to actually look up her records before allowing her to drive a van full of kids?  Why did the elders take her word that she was in prison for a “misunderstanding” and that she has learned her lesson?  Did the parents have the right to know of this woman’s past criminal charges before packing their kids into a van with her behind the wheel?   And would it have been unfair to the woman for the elders to inform the parents of her charges or is it more unfair to the parents of the kids for their failure to inform?

Nobody in their right mind would allow someone convicted of 5 D.U.I.s and vehicular homicide to volunteer to drive a van full of kids, no matter how long ago the crimes happened.  Yet, surprisingly, with child rapists they consistently and intentionally hide their charges from the congregation.  Why?

I offer my opinion for why this is so:

  • Their theology is very bad.  There are loads of passages that speak to warning people of dangerous/violent people.  Consider Ezekiel 33:6: “But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, so that the people are not warned, and the sword comes and takes any one of them, that person is taken away in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at the watchman’s hand.”  They also believe that the oppressors, not the oppressed, are the ones who need time and attention.  This is the polar opposite of what the Bible teaches.
  • They lack humility.  Church members are routinely warned not to “usurp authority,” are not believed, are told that they are being overreactive, and told that it is at the leaders’ discretion as to whether the church is informed or not about an abuser’s record(in other words, church members are “not allowed” to inform other church members).  In many cases, members are dismissed from their churches and told not to come back.  This is exactly the abusive kind of leadership God warns about in Ezekiel 34.
  • They are not aware of their blind spots.  All of us have blind spots.  We have to be aware that abusers are incredibly skilled at finding them, exploiting them, and residing within those blind spots.  Abusers prey on the naivety and busyness of church leaders.  Never take an abuser’s word that there were “misunderstandings.”  Records are public for a reason.  Always look them up.  Know who you are dealing with, what their crimes were, and what their restrictions are as part of their probation or parole.
  • Facades are more powerful than reality itself.  When I hear leaders say that an abuser no longer poses a threat, I ask them whose professional assessment that is and if they are willing to put it into writing.  Abusers know that putting up a clean, pure facade is powerfully effective in winning the hearts of whomever is standing in front of them.   Humans have a bad habit of resisting or ignoring facts when someone is likable.
  • They believe warning a church is unfair.  They not only believe it is unfair to the abuser, but they wrongly believe that warning a church will upset the church or create unnecessary drama.  The reality is that parents will appreciate being warned that a serial pedophile, rapist, or violent person is in their midst.  They will appreciate it more if the leaders are proactive in developing a plan to protect the vulnerable and innocent from that person.  My advice–enlist the help of survivors to come up with a plan that both protects the flock and ministers to other survivors within the church.

One thing I would caution–sometimes it is the church who protects abusers. I highly recommend reading the following article: Us Too: Why the Problem of Church Abuse is Much Deeper than Church Leadership.

What would you add to the above list?

Posted on

#MeToo, #ChurchToo have sparked huge changes

#MeToo

Next month will mark seven years since I first heard from a victim that she had been sexually abused by my father. I was just barely two years in to my full time role at the church and that fateful day–July 29th, 2011, changed my family forever. Rather than defend my dad or come up with a myriad of excuses for how his victim sitting across from me could have been mistaken, I instinctively told her, “I believe you.” Little did I know how rare those words are when survivors get the courage to tell. It’s hard to believe that just seven years ago, few people were talking about sexual abuse, especially in the church.

I know that few were talking about it because I searched and searched for resources back then to help me navigate my family and church through the aftermath of my dad’s abuse. There was virtually nothing written at the time. There were almost no online support groups. There were only a small hand full of blogs. Jerry Sandusky’s trial had not taken place yet, the public hadn’t heard anything negative about Larry Nassar, Jared Fogle, Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, or Bill Cosby, and the Catholic church was living in quiet streams after the 2001 investigation by the Boston Globe had run its course.

Fast forward seven years and the #MeToo, #ChurchToo movements are sweeping the globe. We are not quite half way through 2018 and already we’ve seen Larry Nassar’s public sentencing, Andy Savage resigned from Highpoint, Paige Patterson fired by Southwestern Baptist Seminary, Bill Hybles and Willow Creek being investigated because of alleged sexual misconduct, Jordan Baird, former youth leader of a megachurch in Virginia, sentenced for indecent liberties with a minor by a custodian, megachurch (Highlands Church) founder Les Hughey admitted to having “consensual” sex with multiple women, including a minor, when he was a youth pastor. And all 34 Chilean bishops resigned in May because of a sex abuse scandal there. Pennsylvania is releasing an 884 page grand jury investigation into 6 dioceses this month. This investigation was sparked after the Altoona-Johnstown diocese, just a few miles north of me, was investigated and a damning grand jury report was released of a massive cover up of sexual abuse of minors. The list goes on.

The point is that survivors are coming forward in spite of the push back, and abusers and their protectors are being exposed. Survivors are fed up with being silenced and they are being empowered by other brave survivors who share their stories. It certainly helps that we have some incredible investigators across the nation who are validating survivors and working hard to seek justice.

But is the exposure of abusers enough to bring about meaningful and lasting change? I would argue that, while it’s a huge step in the right direction, there is more that we can do. Fortunately, survivors of abuse have gotten the attention of lawmakers. In a recent article by Hogan Injury, they note that “The movement has prompted the state of California to consider passing a bill that bans secret sexual harassment settlements. According to Sen. Connie M. Leyva (D-Chino), the senator who plans to introduce the bill, these secret settlements puts the public in jeopardy, especially potential future victims. These secret settlements also enable perpetrators to escape justice just because they have the money to pay for the cost of settlements.” Other states are passing laws that allow victims of abuse who fall outside of the statute of limitations to open new investigations. Pennsylvania’s attorney general, Josh Shapiro, has made it clear that he is listening to survivors of abuse and will make laws that improve the way our state handles allegations of abuse.

Hogan Injury goes on to say that “companies should also train their employees, supervisors, and managers about sexual harassment. For employee training, you aim to educate your employees what sexual harassment is. Take the opportunity to review your complaint procedure, and encourage your employees to use it to report sexual harassment.” I encourage churches and other organizations that do not have policies in place to make concrete policies that spell out clear boundaries for their employees and volunteers, and to also spell out the consequences for violating those boundaries. Someone who is being sexually, physically, or emotionally harassed, regardless of their age, should have an appropriate person or group of persons to report it to. They need to know that they can tell.

Our systems cannot keep failing victims. Ann Curry reported Matt Lauer in 2012, but her report fell on deaf ears. If we are going to protect vulnerable children and adults from predators, we need to have a written policy that spells out the reporting procedure and the policy cannot create a hierarchy where one person can override the policy. Nobody should be above the law. Nobody should have the authority to override other peoples’ decision to report an alleged crime. I think the tides are turning and as long as survivors keep speaking up, organizations will have no choice but to develop policies and training that actually protect the people who are in their care.