Posted On: October 31, 2008

Vatican Issues Guidelines for Psychological Screening of Priests: What took so long?

The Vatican has issued guidelines for psychological screening of new priests. The Associated Press has reported that the guidelines were issued in response to sexual abuse scandals that have cost the Roman Catholic Church hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements for victims of sexual abuse.

Weeding Out Psychopaths

According to AP, the guidelines are supposed to help church leaders weed out candidates with "psychopathic disturbances."

Scapegoating Homosexuals?

The BBC has reported that the voluntary tests should also aim to vet for those with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies". Of course being homosexual has nothing to do with whether someone is more likely to commit sexual abuse. Needless to say, Gay rights groups have denounced the guidelines as unfairly targeting homosexuals.

Is It Enough?

SNAP (The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests) has responded by claiming that the screening guidelines do not go far enough. SNAP has called for an end to what SNAP calls the church's "virtually unchanged culture of secrecy and unchecked power in the hierarchy" that left dangerous priests in parishes.

Is the Catholic Church the Problem?

I have posted before about research that suggests that the way in which the Catholic Church educates/trains it's priests may actually create sexual abusers.

Only the First Step

Screening out people who may be potential sexual abusers is a good first step. But the screening, which is now voluntary, needs to be mandatory.

But the bigger problem, one that the Church has so far failed to address, is the culture of secrecy that still permeates the Church. There are persons in authority throughout the catholic Church that will do anything to protect the reputation of the Church. Even at the expense of innocent victims of sexual abuse.

Continue reading " Vatican Issues Guidelines for Psychological Screening of Priests: What took so long? " »

Posted On: October 3, 2008

Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Burden of Proof for Sexual Abuse Victims

Yesterday the Supreme Court of Canada restored a finding of civil liability for sexual assaults committed by an Oblate Brother against a former Indian Residential School Student decades ago and confirmed the burden of proof that victims of historical sexual assaults must meet if they pursue civil claim for compensation.

In F.H. v. McDougall the Supreme Court of Canada upheld a finding of civil liability against Ian Hugh McDougall, a former teacher at the Meares Island Indian Residential school. McDougall was originally found liable in B.C. Supreme Court, but the judgment was overturned by the B.C. Court of Appeal.

The B.C. Court of Appeal ruled that the testimony of adult victims about sexual assaults that happened during childhood require independent corroboration.

“[t]o choose one over the other . . . requires . . . an articulated reason founded in evidence other than that of the plaintiff

The judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada was delivered by Rothstein J. He considered whether there was a shifting burden of proof in Canada or if allegations of criminal misconduct should carry a higher burden of proof similar to the burden in criminal prosecutions.

Justice Rothstein emphatically laid the debate to rest:

"...I would reaffirm that in civil cases there is only one standard of proof and that is proof on a balance of probabilities. In all civil cases, the trial judge must scrutinize the relevant evidence with care to determine whether it is more likely than not that an alleged event occurred."

With respect to the supposed requirement for corroborating witnesses, Rothstein J. said:

"Corroborative evidence is always helpful and does strengthen the evidence of the party relying on it as I believe Rowles J.A. was implying in her comments. However, it is not a legal requirement and indeed may not be available, especially where the alleged incidents took place decades earlier. Incidents of sexual assault normally occur in private."

The McDougall decision is incredibly important for those of us that represent victims of childhood sexual abuse.

Had the B.C. Court of Appeal ruling not been overturned it would have created huge barrier for victims of childhood abuse to receive justice. Childhood sexual abuse is a crime of secrecy. There are rarely any witnesses to childhood sexual abuse and to require independent corroboration from witnesses would, effectively, deny the rights of victims to pursue justice in the civil courts.

You can read more about the burden of proof in civil claims on my website www.apmlawyers.com.

Continue reading " Supreme Court of Canada Clarifies Burden of Proof for Sexual Abuse Victims " »