 |
 |
Having not had time to read through a lot of these threads I now find myself compelled to post something that is slightly tangential but nonetheless relevant to the topic. The topic of Ritual/Satanic abuse is the one that is really avoided, snubbed, denied by people right up to the top and is generally left to fester as an abomination that is going on on the edge of many institutions, especially and regrettably police forces, NHS establishments and other public authorities – or should I more accurately suggest that some professionals from these organisations engage in it with impunity. It’s bad enough for the alleged historic (we hope historic only and not current) MP child-abuse scandals to be buried just as Lowell Goddard tried to get the national abuse enquiry going but even they would have no hope of getting anywhere near the Ritual/Satanic Abuse stuff. This is known about by many people who, like me, keep their views and knowledge to themselves as nobody would believe us. Regards, Neil Neil Sanyal Social Worker/AMHP Adult Mental Health New Forest Substance Misuese Social Care Team Lymington Area Office Lymington Hampshire SO41 9YB Tel: 01590 625120 [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> From: Health of minority ethnic communities in the UK [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Truswell Sent: 26 July 2017 12:13 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: article attached on child sexual abuse in Orthodox Jewish communities Hi Richard I see your point but would challenge its explanatory value. In an institutional setting when an allegation of abuse is raised the moral and legal obligation is to investigate. This does not presume innocence or guilt. I'm proposing that institutions historically often taking a position that certain kinds of allegations will not be investigated is a strong institutional dynamic in both secular and non-secular institutions. In the cases raised in this discussion thread we are looking at the evidence indicating an entrenched refusal to consider a substantial number of claims and testimony evidence and the essentially life destroying attempts by institutions to silence or otherwise invalidate the victims. So this in my view is far beyond what may be the initial shock that challenges favourable assumptions about the personality of the abuser but trying to look at, both in the secular and non-secular situations, the authorised mobilisation of institutional resources to protect the abuser and vilify the victim. Because sadly this happens repeatedly and it seems to me more toxic and relentless as a process than simply the reluctance to think the worst of fellow human beings. What is quite disabling, and we saw this in the BBC responses to the Saville case reported in the media, is the simplistic idea that the people institutionally defending the abuser must be bad or incompetent or naive men or women. The defence adopted by the institutional spokesperson is often along the lines that since we are both good and competent authorities how could anyone think we would have supported this abuser had we known about, perhaps we were naive but we will be wiser in future. This deflects any attempt to examine the culture of institutional collusion. Often they did not want to know about something that was informally commonly suspected or common knowledge. In non-secular institutionalised abuse I would anticipate it is quite likely that institutionalised collusion is supported by men and women who feel they are both good and morally right and I suspect pursue the persecution of the victims with a degree of moral fervour. If it were simply a case of a benign preconception about the accuser then there is nothing to explain the institutionally zealous punishment and ostracism of the victim. Often the victims in these situation are already powerless, socially marginalised or highly dependent on the favourable opinion of the abuser. For useful examples of the latter we have the recent media cases of abusive football coaches and also a steady stream of stories about professional athletic coaches across a number of sports. I think it's so much harder to look at situations were people who may be both good and competent do bad things for what they think are good reasons. In so far as institutionalised collusion with abuse in non-secular settings has a distinguishing set of narratives from that in secular settings it might lie in these 'good reasons' being theological and social/cultural exculpatory narratives. In non-secular settings this is no doubt in defence of the the 'good name' of the organisation be it the BBC or the football club. I'm labouring the point at length because I think it's very difficult to analyse what's happening in institutionalised abuse and how it often gets sustained through years of collusive practice by people who really do not see themselves as being collusive, but doing the work of the institution and saving its name from being reviled by the victim, not the abuser. The abuser and the institution are both invested in the silencing, the victim is not. Betrayal of the faith of the victim is no doubt part of the worst last twist of the knife and in severity of that a distinction might be drawn between secular and non-secular institutional abuse. Kind Regards David Truswell Sent from my iPad On 21 Jul 2017, at 17:32, richard bryant-jefferies <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Hi David, This is a compelling discussion. I find myself wondering how much of the denial is simply underpinned by a human reaction of just not wanting to believe that certain things are happening. It is like at some deep level there is a perhaps unconscious sense that our belief in human goodness, our sense of humanity, or self concept as human being, is under attack. We don't want to believe certain things are happening because it is difficult to be open to a deep visceral reaction that may want to arise within us. Then overlaying this are the issues being raised in the discussion where conscious beliefs identities norms and agendas add further barriers to acknowledging and drawing attention to abuse. I don't know if these thoughts help but it is simply what is present with me at the moment. Regards Richard Bryant-Jefferies On 21 Jul 2017 8:38 a.m., David Truswell <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Thanks Lisa I have worked, albeit some time ago, in a counselling role in therapeutic settings with both abusers and abused so my views on this are developed I trust from a more nuanced perspective than simply equating alienation from the BBC with alienation in institutionalized abuse in religious institutions. What I would say is that I think the dynamics of ideology and context are more blurred than a simple distinction between institutional abuse in religious communities and other sorts of institutional abuse would allow for. Many of Saville’s victims for example were not simply silenced by the BBC but were living within institutional settings e.g, hospital or care settings, and their silencing involved a complex interaction of collusion between the institution they resided in and the status the institution perceived it gained through having a powerful figure from the BBC associated with the institution. In secular settings, for example if you look at institutional abuse in care homes, extremely powerful narratives defining the ‘otherness’ and guilt of the victim are in play. These narratives in defense of the institution invariably allude to the 'faith' and trustworthiness of the abuser and the institution. Abusers with high social status such as BBC presenters, doctors, teachers and other high value social roles have both an institutional and social status that is an important factor in mobilizing the institution in their defense. The abused person may well feel everything they had faith in their life is lost as a result of the abuse. I think the extent to which this is intensified will be variable and not necessarily primarily as a result of their having a formal faith and being abused within that faith compared with having no formal faith and being abused by a secular figure everyone around them is saying is someone they should have faith in. Social isolation and marginalisation of the victim can be very severe outside of faith communities. For children I don’t think that faith or the collapse of faith when they are abused by figures who they have been told to have faith in is a matter of formal religious adherence. So for me there is no fine line necessarily to be drawn between institutional abuse within a religious institutions and in secular institutions. I appreciate that there is something instructive to be learned from the social responses and institutional narratives used to sustain and support the abuser and marginalize the abused as they play out differently in religious and secular institutions. However my view is that the institutional dynamics are the same, protecting the abuser has primacy not investigating the allegation of abuse. Regards David Truswell On 21 Jul 2017, at 2:06 AM, Lisa Fontes <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Many thanks to David and Ghazala and others who commented thoughtfully on this piece and--specifically--on the concept of insularity. David addresses INSTITUTIONAL abuse. And this is important regarding what has occurred in institutions (religious, sports, boarding schools, scouts, detention facilities, the BBC, etc). But not all institutions are identical, and different types of institutions merit special attention if we want to be able to prevent further abuse and promote recovery. Religion sometimes affects abuse not just in institutions but also provides IDEOLOGIES and CONTEXTS that can be used to justify abuse within the family. And religious teachings can increase a child victim's suffering--or relieve suffering. Also, the harms a child who is sexually victimized experiences if alienated from his/her faith through the abuse is quite different from a child who may be alienated from the BBC....I think it is important to discuss the specifics of these various contexts in addition to the universals. Best wishes, Lisa For those who had trouble accessing the original article, the reference is: Katzenstein, D. & Fontes, L.A. (2017). Twice silenced: The under-reporting of child sexual abuse in Orthodox Jewish communities. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse. [so far, it as only been published online, but I can send it to you. contact me at [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> if you want a copy] ________________________________ From: "David Truswell" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 4:48:54 AM Subject: Re: article attached on child sexual abuse in Orthodox Jewish communities Lisa Really valuable as there is so very little research on Orthodox Jewish community, and if anyone has any research on dementia in this community then please let me know. On the wider debate this seems to have sparked on the list, I can't see that 'insular' has much descriptive utility in this context. The institutional defence of abusers and silencing of victims seems to be a common theme from the Catholic Church to the Rochdale child abuse ring. While institutionalising the defence of the abusers might typify the reaction of a host of religious institutions, it's also a wider institutional characteristic, one just has to look at Jimmy Saville and the BBC. I'm not convinced that the 'closed knit religious community' provides sufficient perspective. Institutionalised abuse has to develop over time with many a blind eye being turned to the extent that both the abuse and the ignoring of it are 'business as usual' for the institution involved. One can see this dynamic being questioned in the increasing concern about sexual harassment in academia. What I don't get much sense of it the report, although it's touched on a bit, is a look at how power and its use and abuse work. In my view sexual abuse is primarily about power relationships so the ability to silence the victims is really an important way of sustaining the power of the abuser over the abused. Who gets silenced and who has the power to silence others I think takes us out of simply looking at this as an issue for 'religious communities' and something I think less palatable and less well examined, which is how does institutionalised abuse get enabled. Often in these cases the definitive silencing of the victim is not by the abuser but the person with the power to halt the abuser. Kind Regards David Truswell Sent from my iPad On 19 Jul 2017, at 16:21, Qassim, Taher <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: I found the article useful. Thank you Lisa. I hope the academic community will look into other similar communities who use religion to intimidate, create fear, and as a shield to protect perpetrators and shame the victims in child sexual abuses and forced marriages. We need the evidence to support community groups who have taken this subject seriously but lack the resources to do more. They are doing good work to safeguard children. The public organisations such as the police, education, and local authority started to recognise and promote this community work. The so called honourable killing is an example where the victim is almost always women. When the family decides to kill their own daughter, sister, or other female member in the name of their honour being violated and the loss of life of a woman in the affected family is totally disregarded. Regards Taher Qassim MBE I Public Health Neighbourhood Manager- Public Health Department Liverpool City Council I 4th Floor Cunard Building I Pier Head I Water Street I Liverpool I L3 1DS T: 0151 233 2818 E: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Online: www.liverpool.gov.uk<http://www.liverpool.gov.uk/> Postal address: Public Health Team I Liverpool City Council I Cunard Building I Water Street I Liverpool I L3 1AH <image001.jpg><http://www.liverpool.gov.uk/> From: Health of minority ethnic communities in the UK [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lisa Fontes Sent: 19 July 2017 03:49 To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Subject: article attached on child sexual abuse in Orthodox Jewish communities Colleagues, perhaps the attached will interest you. Feel free to PM me about it. I think it has relevance for a variety of minority religious and other insular communities. My best, Lisa Lisa Fontes, Ph.D. ______________________________________________________________________ Take care when opening email from unknown senders. This email has been automatically scanned for viruses and malicious content by Symantec Cloud Security. No email filtering system is 100% effective however and this is no guarantee of safety or validity. Always exercise caution when opening email, clicking on links, and opening attachments. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ DISCLAIMER: The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be read, copied or used only by the intended recipient(s). If you have received it in error please contact the sender immediately by replying to the e-mail or by telephoning a number contained in the body of the e-mail and please then delete the e-mail without disclosing its contents elsewhere. No responsibility is accepted for loss or damage arising from viruses or changes made to this message after it was sent. The views contained in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of the authors employer. This email has been automatically scanned for viruses and malicious content by Symantec Cloud Security for your protection, but this is no guarantee of safety ______________________________________________________________________ *** This email, and any attachments, is strictly confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender. Any request for disclosure of this document under the Data Protection Act 1998 or Freedom of Information Act 2000 should be referred to the sender. [disclaimer id: HCCStdDisclaimerExt] ***