Re: “Diocese sees abuse claims proliferate in wake of changed law” (Jan. 8, Page A1):
In the article regarding older sexual-abuse allegations against the Portland diocese, the diocese claims: “The issue is more broadly about whether history can be rewritten because a current generation regrets what occurred in real time in a former generation.” But what does this mean?
My father was sexually abused by a school principal when he was about 6 years old. He told this to his parent, who dismissed the issue. My father replied that if he were to be sent back to this school, his parents would never see him again. I believe that this incident shows that a child knows that the sexual touching of a child is wrong. This has not changed over the course of a century.
How, then, are we to interpret these astounding words in defense of the Portland diocese? I suspect that there might be two aspects of such a defense. First, any organization does not want to pay damages for such incidents. More disturbing, though, is my suspicion that they, like many sexual-assault enablers, do not want to discuss their own role in protecting these employees. Unfortunately, they are not alone. Very few sexual predators or enablers are prepared to take such a step.
Rape and sexual molestation have a profound harmful effect on the victims, regardless of when they occur. Prosecution should always take place in response.
David Travers
Westbrook
Send questions/comments to the editors.
