There’s a long list of states where clergy are either not explicitly identified mandated reporters or are not at all- or it’s very convoluted. And in some cases where they are mandated, it’s limited to known abuse rather than suspected abuse. And it’s possible these laws would not hold up to Supreme Court scrutiny. Personally I think everyone has at a minimum the moral obligation to report abuse of minors and ideally a legal obligation.
On the other hand, I think on some level, protecting the confidentiality of clergy may have some benefit- so long as that clergy member does the right thing.
There was a mother in an affluent CT town that was murdered while jogging and the crime went unsolved for 2 years with no leads. The murderer ended up confessing to his pastor/minister who convinced him to turn himself in at the police station… and the police subsequently had him go home until they could investigate his claims and took him into custody a couple days later (WTF
)!!!
If someone who commits a crime is willing to confess to clergy, I think they are probably preparing to turn themselves in, but isn’t quite there yet. If they’re that committed to religion to believe in the need for absolution, they probably also know what they need to do to accomplish it. If clergy can act as a trusted resource to encourage people to do the right thing, I don’t think that’s a bad thing.
That said, I think where the problem arises is when it comes to abuse committed by members of the church clergy. From the research I’ve seen, Catholic Priests do not seem to commit child sexual abuse at a higher rate than any other religion and is similar to others in positions of power over children like boy scout teachers and teachers.
The Catholic Church for example I’m sure has recognizes the horrendous act that sexual abuse is, especially upon children. But they have in far too many circumstances put protecting the institution over protecting individuals. Sexual abuse obviously reflect badly upon the institution, thus the cover ups. You see this with private schools, mental health facilities, police departments, etc- and it’s not only limited to sexual abuse. Or perhaps most commonly sexual harassment in the workplace.
The confidentially laws in psych are a bit messy too. There is an obligation to report if we believe someone is going to harm another person. We are mandated to report abuse/neglect against minors or disabled people. We are also mandated to report anyone known to handle child pornography. Most forms of abuse against elders must be reported.
In most cases however, we are obligated to confidentiality regarding the admission of past crimes- so long as they’re not perceived to be at risk of harming someone presently. So if someone admits to raping a woman in the past, that is confidential. If someone admits to raping a minor or reports an insatiable urge to rape a girl, there is then a duty to report.
I’m not sure the rules for reporting as psych providers are necessarily optimal. I suppose I’d rather have someone talk about a past crime to address a problem that could result in potential future crimes. But that’s not fair to the victim if they don’t know who the perpetrator is and want justice.
I’ve been in the position several times of having to report incidence of abuse/neglect working in psych. I understand it’s not always easy knowing the negative implications (for the victims- especially when they oppose reporting or in some cases I even feel deep empathy for perpetrator due to their extenuating circumstances that leads to problems-ie parents who clearly love their children but suffer mental illness that untreated makes them unfit). But at the end of the day it’s the right thing to do and what must be done.
apnews.com
