Category: child abuse

Sexual abuse coverup by Anglican Church includes the former Archbishop of Canterbury

June 26, 2017 • 11:30 am

Religious coverups of sexual abuse of children aren’t limited to the Roman Catholic Church. As the Guardian (Andrew Brown!) reported Friday, the Church of England engaged in this kind of coverup in the 1990s, and it extended all the way up to a former Archbishop of Canterbury.

The abuser was Peter Ball (born 1932),and he was a sexual predator while both Bishop of Lewes and Bishop of Gloucester—a period of 15 years. The story is familiar: exploitation of boys who were impressed with Ball’s position and apparent empathy. A few things he did (from the Guardian):

At Lewes:

[Ball] had connections with numerous public schools, and at least one of them offered counselling for boys who were suffering from homesickness. Those who were especially spiritually favoured would be invited to shower with him, pray with him naked, massage his legs for phlebitis (he wore nothing under his habit) and occasionally be beaten by him. One of his victims was the chaplain of a neighbouring bishop, but this was not what brought him down.

What caused a “problem” was that one of Ball’s victims tried to commit suicide three times, succeeding on the last attempt. Ball’s fellow bishops knew about much of this, but kept silent. That led ultimately to complaints and Ball’s arrest, but only after he’d been moved to a position as Bishop of Gloucester. More of his misdeeds:

Both Ball and the evangelical QC John Smyth would get their victims to admit to masturbation and then beat them – though Ball made one of his roll around naked in the snow first. But the outward absurdity, and the elaborate justifications for the violence, can only have increased the humiliation and the sense of powerlessness of the victims. The spiritual abuser is in a unique position to manipulate the emotions of the victims, and to promote their own self-hatred.

It’s hard to imagine that a human can be so sadistic and horrible, but easier to imagine how his position of power, and the availability of trusting boys, gave him room to abuse.

Altogether there were many victims, but in 2015 Ball was charged only with misconduct in public office and indecent assault on one man and one boy. After a reported secret deal involving the Church, Ball was sentenced in October, 2015 to only 32 months in prison. He was released this February after having served only half his sentence. A year and a half in jail for a decade and a half of sexual abuse! Even to a determinist like me that sounds like a lenient sentence, since the man drove a child to suicide and several of his victims have claimed lifelong harm. It’s not much of a deterrent, and was there any attempt at reformation?

In the Guardian article, Brown links to an independent report commissioned by the present Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby. You can find that report here, and though I’ve not read all of it, it’s sickening in both the details of the abuse Ball inflicted and the many Church officials who tried to cover it up. One of these was a former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, who resigned any connection with the Church after the report came out (he was “honorary assistant bishop of Oxford”). As the report states, Carey (now a Lord), was complicit in the Ball affair on several ways:

Lord Carey was significantly involved in:

  • The events leading to Ball’s resignation;
  • The way in which the Church treated Neil Todd in 1992/93;
  • The failure to ensure that complaints about Ball’s conduct were adequately followed up or passed to police;
  • The failure to take action under the Measure after Ball’s resignation;
  • The decision not to include Ball’s name on the List;
  • The provision of funds to assist Ball;

Wikipedia characterizes the report further:

An independent review in 2017 found that the Church hierarchy, notably former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, colluded in concealing abuse by Peter Ball over a 20 year period. Carey had seven letters from individuals and relatives after Ball was cautioned by police in 1992 but passed only one (of least concern) on to the police. Carey did not put Peter Ball on the ‘Lambeth List’ of clergy whose suitability for the ministry is questioned. Concealing abuse was given higher priority than helping victims. The review claims, “The church appears to have been most interested in protecting itself.” The report stated further, “progress [towards dealing satisfactorily with claims of abuse in the Church of England] has been slow and continuing, faster improvement is still required”. Current Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby said the C of E, “colluded and concealed” instead of trying to help, “those brave enough to come forward”. Welby has asked Carey to step down from his role assisting the Bishop of Oxford. Rowan Williams was also criticised.

Abuse survivor, Graham Sawyer, said the C of E treated him and others with contempt. Sawyer said, “The church continues to use highly aggressive legal firms to bully, frighten and discredit victims … In my own case, I continue to endure cruel and sadistic treatment by the very highest levels of the church”. Sawyer wants the police to investigate Carey’s part in the Ball case.

One can’t exculpate religion here, for it gave Ball the power and cachet to abuse young men, and also the access to them. It further provided a powerful and respected institution, to which secular authorities deferred, that could help cover up Ball’s abuse.

Kudos to Justin Welby for commissioning the independent report. I wonder if Lord Carey, though, will suffer any repercussions beyond resigning as a titular official.

The predator: former Bishop Peter Ball, who often dressed as a monk
George Carey, former Archbishop of Canterbury

h/t: Paul

Oranges and Sunshine

March 17, 2016 • 9:36 am

By Grania

A few weeks ago I wrote about a fundraising initiative supported by Tim Minchin to help Australian survivors of abuse perpetrated by Catholic clergy travel to Rome to witness the evidence given by Cardinal Pell about the extent to which the Church facilitated and protected the abusers.

Somewhere in the reading I did I came across the movie Oranges and Sunshine with Emily Watson, Hugo Weaving and David Wenham. The movie tells the true story of Margaret Humphreys who was a social worker and set up the Child Migrants Trust in Nottingham, UK once she discovered that there were many people in Australia who – now adults – wanted to trace their families. She could have had no clue as to the scale of what she would uncover, nor the damage that had been wreaked on children who would carry these brutal scars into adulthood and for the rest of their lives.

The scandal is not Australia’s alone, but rather that of the then British government who exported vulnerable children in care to Canada and Australia where they essentially became child slave labor. Many of them had been told they were orphaned even though they were not. Thousands of children were exported in this manner right up until 1967, with the government turning a blind eye to the fate of the children that they were “helping”  to a better life.

The ones who landed in Catholic orphanages such as Bindoon Boy’s Town, were particularly unfortunate. Rather than receiving what was no doubt advertised as superior care from their religious guardians, they were treated as slaves and used for hard manual labor. Many of them were raped and beaten savagely, and when they reached the age of maturity were told that they had to repay their “debt” of care. They were promised heaven on earth when they left the UK, and were sent to hell.

bindoon-1

I highly recommend the film, it is neither sensationalist nor does it try to sentimentalise the survivors.  You can view the trailer here.

More on the Makayla Sault affair: mother tries to exculpate herself by pinning her child’s death on her child’s wishes

February 27, 2015 • 9:19 am

I’ve posted several times on the Makayla Sault affair, in which an 11-year-old Canadian First Nations child, stricken with leukemia, was allowed by the government and child protective services to stop her chemotherapy treatment (which in all likelihood would have cured her) in favor of “traditional” medicine—said medicine including a visit to the quackish Hippocrates Health Institute in Florida for a useless dietary regime and “cold laser” treatments.

Makayla, of course, died. And now another 11-year-old Canadian First Nations girl with leukemia, identified only as “J. J.”, has also been allowed to forego treatment, and was also taken for woo-treatment to the Hippocrates Institute. (The head doctor there, Brian Clement, has since been ordered to stop practicing medicine without a license.)

I regard this—and all government exemptions allowing parents to refuse proper medical care for their children on grounds of religion, faith, or “ethnic tradition”—as unconscionable, a privileging of religion over science, and faith over reason. But it’s far more reprehensible than other such clashes, like that between evolution and creationism, because medical-care exemptions, like vaccination exemptions, actually kill children.

There is no reason for any such “philosophical exemptions” in a modern world; the only justifiable ones are when the treatment would be more likely to hurt the child than the faith-based alternative of prayer or cold-laser treatment—a very unlikely situation!—or when conventional medical care would injure the child on genuine medical grounds, as when vaccination could hurt an immunocompromised child. It’s time to end, for once and for all, all religious, faith-based, culture-based, and “philosophical” exemptions from scientific medical care. There is no good justification for such exemptions. They are murderous and, in the case of vaccination, harmful to others who don’t opt out.

I received a link to a Globe and Mail piece about Makayla and her family from reader “lancelotgobbo,” a physician who has developed leukemia and has been public about it on this site. Lancelot sent the link to the article, “Aboriginal girl begged parents to stop chemo treatments, mother says,” with this note:

I’m afraid the family are beginning to cover up their poor decision.

And that’s what the article suggests. Makaya’s mother, Sonya Sault, is now giving public lectures, which I interpret as her trying to justify her decision to stop her child’s chemotherapy in the face of severe public criticism.  The article notes:

Doctors gave [Makayla] at most a 72-per-cent chance of survival even with an aggressive chemotherapy treatment, her mother, Sonya Sault, told an audience at McMaster University.

“She became so weak so she couldn’t even stand or sit at times,” she said.

Mr. Sault said the treatment took a heavy physical and emotional toll on the little girl.

“Are you sure I’m getting better? Are you sure we’re doing the right thing? I feel I am getting worse,” she recalled her daughter asking.

Makayla said things like “the chemo is going to kill me,” the mother said, adding that finally she begged the parents to put an end to it.

“Mom, if you have the power to get me out of here, then you have to get me out of here.”

. . . “We know that chemotherapy is not easy for anyone, but for Makayla it was devastating,” she said.

Makayla, she said, understood the “harsh reality of stopping chemotherapy,” but she wanted to try traditional medicine.

“I don’t care if I’m going to die, I don’t want to die weak and sick in a hospital,” Ms. Sault remembered her daughter telling her.

Only a 72% chance? Well, with no treatment Makayla’s chance of surviving acute lymphoblastic leukemia is 0%. What decent parent would accede to their daughter’s request to stop chemo (even if the child did make the request), if the chance of surviving was as high as 72%?

The Saults’ public breast-beating serves no purpose except to exculpate the mother and defuse public criticism.  Such talks are in fact harmful, for they may persuade other parents to do the same stupid thing to their kids. Ms. Sault’s talk is unseemly and offensive, although, of course, she has the right to say what she wants.  The Globe and Mail piece continues:

Ms. Sault spoke at an event organized by McMaster University’s Indigenous Studies Program in an effort to understand the problems between First Nation peoples and the health-care system.

“Our hearts are broken by the passing of our daughter,” an emotional Ms. Sault said before composing herself – her husband by her side.

Good going, McMaster University! Did you, by the way, counter Ms. Sault’s talk with one by a doctor, laying out the alternatives, their probabilities, and the uselessness of “alternative medicine” for curing leukemia? After all, it was your hospital that tried to insist on continuing the child’s chemotherapy.

I have little sympathy for the Saults’ grief when they had a substantial chance of avoiding their daughter’s death by allowing her chemotherapy to proceed. What they did in fact guaranteed that their daughter would die.

And this strikes me as simply disingenuous:

The mother also said she wanted to clarify “misinformation in the media” about her daughter’s treatment.

The medical staff at McMaster Children’s Hospital in Hamilton threatened to get the authorities to apprehend the girl and her two brothers and force chemotherapy treatment upon her, Ms. Sault said.

Makayla started to feel better once the chemotherapy stopped, Ms. Sault said, but she didn’t stop treatment altogether. She continued to receive treatment from her family physician, Dr. Jason Zacks, as well as an oncologist at McMaster hospital. She also received traditional medicine from a healer near her home on the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation.

Then the family went to the Hippocrates Health Institute in Florida to get away from the brewing media storm over her case, Ms. Sault said.

Florida’s Department of Health recently issued a cease-and-desist letter to the man who runs the spa, Brian Clement, for practising medicine without a licence.

Ms. Sault said Makayla didn’t go to the Florida spa for cancer treatment, only to try out a new diet that might boost her immune system. Plus, Ms. Sault said, Makayla got to relax and be a kid again, soaking up the sun and swimming in the ocean.

If the diet didn’t constitute “cancer treatment” (and she didn’t mention the cold laser treatment and vitamin injections), what is? The bit about “getting away from the brewing media storm” really incensed the reader who sent me the link, and I agree. It was a way to avoid guilt, and to pretend that they really were trying to cure their daughter. Granted, perhaps Ms. Sault didn’t understand or believe the doctors who gave her the odds that her daughter would die, but how savvy do you have to be to understand the difference between 72% survival and 0% survival? In the face of such obtuseness, the government should have stepped in and tried to save the child’s life.

 LancelotGobbo sent me these comments in an email (indented):
You might have gathered from my comments as Lancelot Gobbo (look up your Shakespeare for the character with an angel on one shoulder and a demon on the other!) that I am not only a physician, but one with leukemia. It really irritates me to see people make such cowardly choices for their children, especially when primary chemotherapy isn’t so very hard to go through these days, with the availability of ondansetron. I learn this week that my chemo has only given me a partial remission, so my future is changing. Nonetheless, I would already be dead if I hadn’t done it, so I’m ahead of the game.
I replied to the [Globe and Mail] article with:
Screen Shot 2015-02-26 at 6.26.26 PM
Do, please, continue to highlight the dreadful situation that children with inadequate parents find themselves in. It’s an everyday occurrence that incapable parents provide sub-standard parenting. Teletubbies are not the same as involved and competent parents, and this seems to be an issue for an enormous number of households. But letting a child decide what treatment to accept for a life-threatening disease is an abrogation of parenthood that I can’t quite seem to swallow. That wretched couple must feel dreadful, and if they don’t they ought to!

Yes, of course I’ll continue to highlight the unnecessary deaths of children due to unwarranted respect for faith. Children should not become martyrs to their parents’ religion. But we all should pitch in here—Canadians and Americans alike—for both of our countries are afflicted with this problem. The vast majority of American states, for instance, have religious exemptions for children’s medical care. Call it out when you see it, write letters to newspapers and legislators, and just do what you can. What’s at stake here are the lives of innocent children, brainwashed by their faith-addled parents. Let us not forget that this is not an abstract philosophical issue, but involves people like this:

o-MAKAYLA-SAULT-facebook
The late Makayla Sault

 

Another child killed by faith

November 25, 2013 • 7:23 am

This time the faith is not religious, but faith in homeopathy and herbal remedies; and the child is not from the U.S. but Canada.

According to both the National Post and the CBC News Calgary, a 44-year old mother, Tamara Sophie Lovett, was charged two days ago with both criminal negligence and “failure to provide the necessities of life” to her 7-year-old son, Ryan, who died in March of a streptococcus A infection. Such an infection is almost invariably curable by penicillin (the bugs, surprisingly, haven’t evolved resistance to that old antibiotic, even over many years).  It’s possible that Ryan had necrotizing fasciitis, the so-called “flesh-eating bacteria,” but in a child that is also treatable if caught early.

From the National Post:

According to police, the boy was bedridden for 10 days before his death, however, the mother declined to seek medical treatment, relying instead on homeopathic remedies, including herbal medicines.

“It should absolutely serve as a warning to other parents,” said Calgary Police Service Staff Sergeant Michael Cavilla. “The message is quite simple: If your child is sick, take them to see a doctor.”

Police said they arrested the 44-year-old woman on Friday; charges are pending. She cannot be named until she is formally charged. [Note: the CBC names her since she has been charged.]
According to Sgt. Cavilla, the boy looked poorly before he died and several of the mother’s friends had advised her to seek a doctor. In the early morning on the day of his death, she phoned 9-1-1; paramedics arrived to find the child in cardiac arrest. He was later pronounced dead.

. . . An autopsy concluded he had a Group A streptococcal infection that could have been treated with penicillin.

The police said they have no medical records for the boy prior to his death. The child had recently been enrolled in a local school. Prior to January of this year, he had been home-schooled.

The law violated was this one:

Under the Criminal Code of Canada, it is a legal requirement for a parent or guardian to provide the necessaries of life, which are defined by the courts as food, shelter, care and medical attention necessary to sustain life and protection from harm.

“If you do not provide medical attention to your sick child, you will be held accountable,” Staff Sgt. Mike Cavilla said at a press conference Friday afternoon.

From the CBC:

Police allege the victim’s mother ignored pleas from friends to seek medical treatment for Ryan.

“There were a number of people that had contact with the child during the period of illness,” said Cavilla. “These people did approach the mother and suggested that she do take him to see a medical professional.”

The definitive assessment appears in the Post (my emphasis):

Tim Caulfield, a scholar and Canada Research Chair in Health Law and Policy, said cases like this are tragic and increasingly common.

“The interest in and demand for complementary and alternative medicine continues to grow. There are many factors driving this trend, including suspicion of conventional medicine and ‘Big Pharma.’”

He said this has resulted in an increase in measles outbreaks due to vaccination fears, and the growth in popularity of naturopathic practitioners, who often prescribe ineffective homeopathic remedies.

“Alternative medicine is associated with many risks,” he said. Supplements often don’t contain what they proclaim on the label and herbal remedies can interact with conventional medicine.

Further, alternative therapies can induce patients to avoid effective, conventional treatments, he added.

“We don’t need alternative medicine and conventional medicine. We need science-based medicine. Period,” he said.

Indeed, for how can you show that something works unless it’s scientifically tested? Such tests of homeopathy show no effects; likewise with intercessory prayer. And although the Christian Science Church publishes testimonies of healings, they don’t mention the number of time prayer didn’t cure.  And even if they did, such reports are anecdotal.

The CBC notes that this situation is not a one-off, even in Canada:  “Juliet Guichon, a medical ethicist and an assistant professor in the University of Calgary’s Faculty of Medicine, says it’s not uncommon for the medical profession to run into parents who don’t believe in conventional treatments.”

The fact that Ryan was abused by dosing him with useless herbal and homeopathic treatments shows that the problem here—like the problem with all the children I’ve described who succumbed to religiously-based medical neglect—is ultimately not religion but faith. Faith in alternative medicine shows many of the same pseudoscientific traits as does faith in religion, the main difference being that religious child abusers see the judgment of God hanging over their actions.  But in both cases child abuse results from a rejection of modern medicine and an unwarranted faith in unevidenced remedies, whether they be prayer, herbs, or water placebo. Religion, like homeopathy, is a pseudoscience, resting on faulty but strongly held statements about reality. And in this case the conflict between science and faith—a conflict that we’re repeatedly assured is not real—proved fatal.

It’s not rocket science to see this, as did one Canadian police officer:

“We have no direct information that religious beliefs factored into this, but there was a belief system and homeopathic medicine did factor in,” Sgt. Cavilla said.

The CBC site has a video of Ryan dancing around: a lovely and lively child. Here he is:

ryan-lovett
Ryan Lovett.
His grandfather also said the boy was a gifted artist, and frequently participated in community art shows. “[He] was one of the most wonderful little boys you can imagine. I did spend a lot of time with him. I have a baseball that I gave him, which I asked my daughter to give back to me to carry in the car. I speak to him every day. He was full of life.”
Over at Science-Based Medicine, Harriet Hall has a new article on the dangers of faith healing.

h/t: Royce, Don