Mishandled reports of molestation in '80s
By Eric Moskowitz, Globe Staff | October 14, 2008
The administration at a prestigious Cambridge private school has apologized to alumni and the school community for mishandling reports of sexual abuse of students by a middle school teacher more than 20 years ago.Complete article from Boston Globe
Writing on behalf of the Buckingham Browne & Nichols School and its board of trustees, the school's leader apologized to the victims and the entire BB&N community and encouraged any victims of former teacher Edward "Ted" Washburn who have not come forward to do so, offering anonymous, school-funded counseling for all abuse victims.
In a letter mailed Thursday, head of school Rebecca T. Upham said she hoped to "begin a long-delayed process of healing." She pledged BB&N's commitment to student safety and swift, open action in responding to any future allegations of abuse.
"Today we must confront and acknowledge that the school failed to respond to those awful events in an appropriate way, as they unfolded and in the intervening decades," Upham wrote in a four-page letter sent to 5,600 alumni as well as the 800 families of the school's current K-12 student body. She acknowledged that "BB&N did not undertake timely or effective efforts to determine whether Washburn victimized others. Consequently, we could not offer to those students the services essential to begin a healing process."
Upham, head of the school since 2001, acknowledged that the letter came after a campaign by an alumnus and Washburn victim, Daniel Weinreb, to seek an apology from the school and support for victims. "I admire the tenacity, courage, and commitment" he showed, Upham wrote.
Weinreb, who lives in Vermont, called the letter "a good start by the school."
A hurdle to recovering from the abuse has been removed," said Weinreb, a 1989 graduate who approached Upham's predecessor privately in the 1990s without success. He contacted Upham last year and also went public with his campaign, creating a website and soliciting letters and e-mails of support from alumni. "What Upham has done, it appears at least, is create an opportunity for healing."
After meeting Weinreb, Upham immersed herself in the history of the school's handling of the Washburn case and sought advice from a number of specialists on preventing and responding to sexual abuse of children, said Joe Clifford, a BB&N spokesman.
Upham could not be reached yesterday but she issued a statement about her letter through Clifford: "All great institutions need to take responsibility for their past, even as they focus on their future. We care deeply about any alumni/ae who have been hurt by Washburn, and we want to foster a healing process for them and our community."
Washburn, a school alumnus who holds two degrees from Harvard, taught middle school English from 1965 until 1987, when he was dismissed quietly after the school received allegations that he had sexually abused several adolescent boys. Washburn was not prosecuted until his sister - whose son had been sexually abused by Washburn, the boy's uncle - contacted the Department of Social Services and the district attorney, frustrated that the BB&N administration had failed to do so. In December 1987, Washburn pleaded guilty to one charge of raping a 13-year-old boy and two charges of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
Middlesex Judge J. Harold Flannery gave Washburn - who was also a Harvard crew coach and the son of Bradford Washburn, an explorer and founder of the Museum of Science - a suspended sentence and ordered him to perform 1,000 hours of community service, stay away from adolescent boys, and undergo continued psychotherapy.Washburn, who lives in Lexington, did not return a call seeking comment.
Weinreb said school administrators two decades ago treated abuse as something that doesn't happen, or should not be discussed, in elite circles. That attitude harmed victims and kept the full extent of the abuse from being uncovered, he said. ...
(A link to the full text of Upham's letter is on the BB&N website.)
-ConcordPastor
Father, I often read, enjoy and am enlightened by your blog. I cannot however understand why this post was made, with no comment other than the title. I feel like it implies: "See other institutions have the same problem" As if that exonerates all that took place on our Church. Why did you post this?
ReplyDeleteThank you for all you do to spread the Gospel.
I think Anonymous may be unfamiliar with what I've written about this since the January 2002 exposing of this cancer within the life and ministry of the Church. There is absolutely NOTHING that could "exonerate all that took place in our Church." A million such stories about abuse in other institutions would not exonerate the Church of anything.
ReplyDeleteWhat strikes me about the article (and Upham's complete letter) is the sad similarity between that story and the Church's story.
I have been asked hundreds of times, "Father, how could the Church have let this happen? allowed it to continue? be swept under the rug?" My response has not been unlike Upham's response. Without defending (or exonerating) anyone or any institution, it's important to understand that we did not know how to speak about these realities (even only 50 years ago) and our lack of vocabulary led to a paralysis of action that fed a vicious cycle of abuse.
It's especially important to understand this when there are those who are still afraid to speak of such things and who would keep children from being informed. (See the refusal in some Catholic parishes and dioceses to implement programs designed to help children, parents and the faith community insure the safety of our youngsters.)
Exoneration? Not for a moment.
Education and transparency? Yes!
Father, I disagree with this statement of yours:
ReplyDelete"It's especially important to understand this when there are those who are still afraid to speak of such things and who would keep children from being informed. (See the refusal in some Catholic parishes and dioceses to implement programs designed to help children, parents and the faith community insure the safety of our youngsters.)"
Being "afraid" isn't always the reason programs are rejected.
The Virtus program has been controversial, for example.
Much of the criticism boils down to certain factors: a) the claim that forcing children to attend these programs introduces them to sexual information at an inappropriate age; b) the programs don't properly address the fact that most of the victims of priest-predators were pre-teen and teenage boys c) the programs undermine the authority of parents; d) the programs are about PR and distraction from the real issues facing the Church. (Some say VIRTUS is "What to do so the Church doesn't get sued for any reason.")
I doubt anyone wants more children to become victims! Questions of how to proceed in accomplishing this are another matter.
Surely if there are groups of Catholics who have serious concerns about a sex-education/abuse prevention program, the Church should respond to those concerns with sensitivity, which may take time.
That's not the same as bad faith.
Duly noted, Anonymous.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't my intention to attribute bad faith to anyone and I apologize if that's how it came across. Just as I'm sure others wouldn't attribute bad faith to pastors who implement the programs their bishops have given them.
I for one am grateful that the church is participating in educating our children for their safety. I'm grateful it is coming from the church because the program is respectful and takes our religious beliefs into account. The program uses language we're all familiar with and Jesus' love for us as its context. I don't think first grade is too young to start learning to protect our bodies and spirits and be safe in our world. My husband was molested at age 9 by a camp counselor and we never want this to happen to our children.
ReplyDeleteThere is one key, poignant difference in the BBN story, which, I agree, is tragically similar to what has happened in the Catholic Church here in Boston and throughout many U.S cities:
ReplyDeleteOn of the victim's greatest supporters was a woman (of whom there are far too few in the Catholic chuch, and virtually none in its hierarchy). And who was the woman? None other than the perpetrator's sister! Hallelujah. Praise her for her courage, her moral sense, and her instinctual caring.
I have to wonder...if our church had encouraged more women to serve, and placed them in vital roles, would predator priests have been able to line up their victims by the scores, for decades? I sincerely doubt it.
Please, more women, at EVERY level....and may they have the eye, courage and sensibilities of the woman in charge of BB&N today, and the sister of the ex-teacher pedophile.
-x-
With due respect to anonymous "X" the notion of women in the hierarchy (as bishops) is a non-starter, for theological reasons that go to the heart of the Roman Catholic faith.
ReplyDeleteWhy not more whistle blowers, men and women? Surely fellow priests along with nuns, schoolteachers, administrators who served in parishes saw some questionable behavior. Why didn't they speak out? For a whole bunch of sad reasons, most likely. Some were ignorant of predator behavior (who ever heard the term "grooming" in the '70s?). Some must have been in denial. Many probably deferred to higher-ups, who wanted to sweep things under the carpet. Some in authority may have bought the "it's a treatable illness" idea and opted for rehab. Others listened to the lawyers...
(There is a side argument to be made as to the role of women in the church. Today is the feast of St. Teresa of Avila, a doctor of the church and reformer of the Carmelite order. Earlier this month we honored Teresa of the Child Jesus, the Little Flower, another doctor of the church. Arguably, Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta was the best-known Catholic of the second half of the last century -- so I wouldn't say women have no authority or honor or role to play.)
The role of women is something personally important to me as a committed, but always questioning Catholic.
ReplyDeleteAnd I do believe that if women were equal to me in the church hierarchy, things would be very different in many ways... and that certainly includes the tragic history of abuse.
That said, I think of the many actual mothers, in families of abuse, who dynamically are part of the family system in a way, that keeps them blind and or silent in their own homes.
Would church be different?
A rhetorical question from someone who grew up in such a home and with such a mother.
Anonymous 'x' here...
ReplyDeleteUnderstand your points, and they are well taken, but I believe they only underscore my stated need to have more women in the process.
You'll differ, I suspect, but having 'empowered' women up and down chain of authority would have vastly bettered the odds of calling out predator priests. Remember what this became: an institutionalized, professional society of pedophilia. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Yes, many remain guilty for saying nothing of what they witnessed. But when so many of the witnesses were also the practicing pedophiles, what were the chances of a committed watchdog, whistleblower stepping up? Very slight to non-existent, with an emphasis on the latter.
I'm not saying this is the only reason for women to be more embraced, engaged, enlisted, trusted respected and valued in the Cathoiic chain of command/hierachy. I'm just saying it vividly underscores the need. Some of those women would have been mothers (by my encompassing vision of their involvement, anyway)...and I'm betting a few of those moms would have acted on their motherly instincts.
I also know, based on a lifetime of watching this professioanlized bunch of good 'ol boys in red hats and ornate robes (can we hear Jesus chuckling?, the chance of that is 0.00 percent.
-x-
With regard to the mishandled cases. We can I'll learn from these mistakes.
ReplyDeleteWith mistakes, even serious ones, there is always a chance to do right. What I call a failure is not the falling down but the staying down. ROB
Anon above,
ReplyDeleteIt's Thérèse de Lisieux, but she definitely is a doctor of the church, and a role model!
I think that BB&N probably put the institution ahead of the safety of its students. Sound familiar? In addition, the perpetrator's father Brad Washburn was well known and highly respected. Perhaps BB&N did not want to embarrass him.
ReplyDeleteAnon x- I think we are probably actually very close in thought. And trust me- I am very much about the idea and the subsequent actions of having women on par with men in the church hierarchy.
ReplyDeleteThere are many ways in which whistleblowers should have been calling things out. That said, the entire power structure was geared to the secrets... so sometimes whistleblowers were ignored and the message was often to "shut up."
I don't want to hijack these comments. I have a lot of thoughts about power, hierarchy, obedience in the more contemporary sense and the many reasons why no one spoke up.
That said, I also have a lot of thoughts about how the primary church of incarnational theology is very body-fearful and sexually dysfunctional.
Today I was teaching a class about "the woman who showed great love" found in Luke 7:36-50 (also see Mark 14:3-9, Matt 26:6-13) and what a conversation ensued about the sensuality of a woman swathing Jesus feet with oil and her hair.
We are not at home in our bodies, yet Jesus came to us as God in a human body.
OK, I will shut up now. I would love to write more about this but have yet to come up with a venue. My church blogging is not the right spot nor is my personal blog.
Anyway, I am grateful for the prayerful and respectful interaction and the environment provided her by Fr. Austin.
I agree with anonymous 1 regarding parents and faith communities not implementing programs.
ReplyDeleteThe programs are not completely explained to the parents of the children that will be part of this program.
-The parents have to choose to opt out rather than opt into the program.
-The program used in the parish is the same used in the public school system.
-It does not use the language that is familiar with children in that one scenario talks about the boyfriend of a mother touching the child and recommends using specific body part names that are not taught in sex education class until 5th grade, yet this was the third grade curriculum.
- It is taught by volunteer parents, not trained professionals which means if a child reveals something the volunteer parent has to try to deal with the situation.
- What one parent feels is appropriate to talk to their child about may not be what all parents are comfortable with
I too have seen several of these news reports posted on the Blog Father and I have had the same feelings as anonymous one- "see it's not just us- lots of us are messing up" I think that we need to tread very carefully with this issue. Words need to be carefully chosen and excuses not excepted.
Anon 1:58,
ReplyDelete"That said, I also have a lot of thoughts about how the primary church of incarnational theology is very body-fearful and sexually dysfunctional."
I fear we are getting into word salad territory here. This surely is better left for another time and place.
Rather than criticize one another's vocabulary here, it would probably be more helpful to inquire of one another, "What does that mean?"
ReplyDeleteI'd say this is a good time and a fine place to ask such a question.
I'll begin!
What is meant by the phrase "word salad?"
Concord Pastor,
ReplyDelete"Word salad" is geek-speak. It's a way to turn "spam" into "ham." (Software programs attempt to evade spam filters by generating word strings that pass muster but don't have real meaning.)
It is a snarky way of agreeing that a discussion of "primary church of incarnational theology" isn't relevant to the topic at hand.
Word salad - I had never heard that before.
ReplyDeleteIn a rare moment, I am at a loss as what to say, so I will simply say thank you always for the forum Concord Pastor.
If I can further elucidate something I said for anyone, simply ask, I will continue to follow these comments.
If not, thank you and peace.
"Anon 1:58"
Can we start using names instead of anonymous? It is gecoming far to difficult to differentiate one from another.
ReplyDeletePatricia: I couldn't agree with you more. It's virtually impossible to differentiate all the anonymouses (sp?) and adding post times to anonymous is not very helpful either.
ReplyDeleteWe would have a much better thread of conversation in the comboxes if we could follow who's writing what and in response to whom. Commenters could sign in with any screen name (made up ones are fine!) and that would
solve the problem.
Just for the record: The identity of "Patricia" is just as unknown to me as the blogger as she/he would be if commenting as "anonymous."
Father Flemming:
ReplyDeletethank you for having the commitment to the issue that you would post information about the abuse at BB&N.
If for any reason you would like to, don't hesitate to contact me (information is on my website
Regards,
Daniel Weinreb