Priests must report child abuse confessions or face jail.

Run_to_da_hills

"Priests could face ten years in prison if they fail to report child sex abuse revealed in confession.

In a move which will further sour ailing relations between church and state, new laws requiring priests to break the seal of the confessional are expected to be enacted by the end of the year and are one element of a suite of legislation to protect children and vulnerable adults, said the Republic's Justice Minister Alan Shatter"

I hope that this doesn't end up as another Catholic Bashing thread.

I am glad to see the law of the land superseding the corrupt untouchable inflammable law of the Church that has in many ways f**ked up this country as Ray Darcy would have correctly put it.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/priests-must-report-child-abuse-confessions-or-face-jail-16150303.html

prinz

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I hope that this doesn't end up as another Catholic Bashing thread.

Yes you do Either way the confession thing is a big red herring.

dirtyden

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

"Priests could face ten years in prison if they fail to report child sex abuse revealed in confession.

In a move which will further sour ailing relations between church and state, new laws requiring priests to break the seal of the confessional are expected to be enacted by the end of the year and are one element of a suite of legislation to protect children and vulnerable adults, said the Republic's Justice Minister Alan Shatter"

I hope that this doesn't end up as another Catholic Bashing thread.

I am glad to see the law of the land superseding the corrupt untouchable inflammable law of the Church that has in many ways f**ked up this country as Ray Darcy would have correctly put it.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/priests-must-report-child-abuse-confessions-or-face-jail-16150303.html

I like the juxtaposition/irony of those two statements.

Dudess

Ray D'Arcy does nothing but whinge and wait for others to do something. He's no different than a member here, except it's ok, he's on de radio. I prefer Joe Duffy to him. Thought Ray was leaving Ireland? Oh wait, salary he's getting in this "f'ucked up" country too sweet?

This recommendation is just championing scapegoating.

mikemac1

The new provision will require anyone with knowledge of child abuse to report it or face ten years in prison

Not just priests, applies to everyone

So how does it work?

A wife is aware her husband [or indeed the other way around ]is abusing the kids and so gets punished if they don't come forward?

And what happens if the wife/husband comes forward, says the abuse has been going on for years and the Garda asks well why didn't you come forward before??? Law broken, possible ten year sentence

It's a strange one, going to be lots of debate over it

Run_to_da_hills

dirtyden wrote: »

I like the juxtaposition/irony of those two statements.

Edited.

admiralofthefleet

about time. sadly i dont believe the pure evil and utter scum in the catholic cult will pay any heed to the law

prinz

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

about time. sadly i dont believe the pure evil and utter scum in the catholic cult will pay any heed to the law

Lol. How do you feel about the vast majority of child abusers who aren't members of the Catholic Church? For a bit of perspective..

A FORMER Army sergeant has been sentenced to 12 years with six suspended after pleading guilty to raping and sexually assaulting his daughter for more than a decade.........Ms Mulvey told her mother about the abuse in 1997. When her mother confronted her estranged ex-husband, he admitted the abuse. She went to gardaí three years later and the man told them the abuse happened at least once a month..

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0313/1224313201165.html

Six years max prison time for the actual rape and abuse. That's how we deal with sex abusers in this country... and it took the mother three years to report it?

admiralofthefleet

prinz wrote: »

Lol. How do you feel about the vast majority of child abusers who aren't members of the Catholic Church? For a bit of perspective..



http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0313/1224313201165.html

Six years max prison time for the actual rape and abuse. That's how we deal with sex abusers in this country... and it took the mother three years to report it?

the same applies

Dudess

Personally I'd just like the actual abusers to go to jail...

Logical Fallacy

Dudess wrote: »

Ray D'Arcy does nothing but whinge and wait for others to do something. He's no different than a member here, except it's ok, he's on de radio. I prefer Joe Duffy to him. Thought Ray was leaving Ireland? Oh wait, salary he's getting in this "f'ucked up" country too sweet?

This recommendation is just championing scapegoating.

Ray might be a clown but he was right to speak his mind, and he was right to not back down.

oppenheimer1

Dudess wrote: »

Ray D'Arcy does nothing but whinge and wait for others to do something. He's no different than a member here, except it's ok, he's on de radio. I prefer Joe Duffy to him. Thought Ray was leaving Ireland? Oh wait, salary he's getting in this "f'ucked up" country too sweet?

This recommendation is just championing scapegoating.

I have a lot of friends that have left the country, generation emigration and all that, it is quite depressing at times. However if the "casually swearing to be cool" (like when he was punctuating his sentences with "rad" and "cool") Ray D'Arcy had kept his promise and left the country not to return, I'd have gladly paid for his ticket, and left him to the airport.

There is no one else as annoyingly smug on Irish radio.

woodoo

10 years in jail for the priests withholding the info. The abuser would hardly get 10 years.

My name is URL

How could such a thing possibly be enforced? Seems like a bit of a diversionary tactic to me. Surely any decent priest would report such things regardless of whether or not a law exists? And how many people would actually confess to such a thing in the first place?

This is nothing more than a move to make people feel better about living in a world where abuse takes place. I can't imagine it having any real effect on the statistics of child abuse.

Maybe the clowns should be looking at mandatory and harsher sentences for abusers..

This guy only got 7 years - http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/eyqlqlgbqlcw/

Morag

The confessional seal only apples after a priest as administer the rite of absolution, up until that point he can stop and report on the person.

Lapin

How do they plan to enforce this ?

Are undercover Gardaí going to fabricate stories in confession boxes and then wait and see if the priest reports what he has heard ?

dirtyden

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Ray might be a clown but he was right to speak his mind, and he was right to not back down.

The only reason he spoke his mind is because he knew he was preaching to the converted. He is a preachy populist twat, with no moral conviction.

prinz

My name is URL wrote: »

How could such a thing possibly be enforced? Seems like a bit of a diversionary tactic to me. Surely any decent priest would report such things regardless of whether or not a law exists? And how many people would actually confess to such a thing in the first place?

Sadly true. Not to mention the priest not actually being able to identify anyone, unless you have to produce some ID to get into a confessional booth from now on. It might prove useful in preventing people from remaining silent in the future though, so applied to everyone it may well prove to be very useful.

They'd be better off giving real sentences to abusers, priests included. Abuse is happening all the time.. probably happening tonight somewhere in the country :mad: Not much use focusing on threatening people with reporting when abusers are getting off lightly... and doubly so the media focusing on priests.

Giselle

Dudess wrote: »

Personally I'd just like the actual abusers to go to jail...

Thats a tough one. If someone is aware of a child being abused, and does nothing, does that not make them in some way culpable?

Obviously people who don't report because of intimidation, or some genuine fear of something worse or more immediate shouldn't be victimised.

But if, for example, one neighbour is aware of another beating his/her kids senseless regularly, and simply decides to ignore it, then perhaps the threat of some legal consequence will encourage them to get involved for the sake of self-preservation.

Or if someone passes a car crash in an isolated area and doesn't call for help, should that not be legally recognised as wrong and punishable?

I'd like to see something like the Good Samaritan laws that have been passed in many US and EU member states. Its a shame some people need a legal threat to behave decently though

Avatarr

Can we really trust the same church that systematically covered up child abuse, with the reporting of cases, when oats of secrecy was its primary method of silencing victim.

Min

Ten years in prison?

You'd get less for abusing the child in question.

Anyway when I go to confession I go to where I am not known, if I was somebody who did terrible things the priest in question wouldn't have a clue who I was.

mylastparadigm

hmmm, it seems like an uninforcible law in fairness.

if you envisage a genuinely possible case where the mother knows the husband is abusing the child but she is scared that he'll kill her if she speaks out (has threathened as much...) does she get ten years? and he'll be out before her.

so the kids lose both parents.

ah its just another one of these things that the anti catholic brigade jump on. if you look at the law with any logic, 1. the confessional is annonymous. 2. who in their right mind tells anyone they are abusing a kid.
there has been a law for years saying that the priest must report if someone confesses to a murder - not one case of a priest being prosecuted yet. this will be the same. its just flavour of the month/year/decade to attack these guys, with some justification in fairness.

i mean, if someone on boards annonymously posted that they abused a child and 200 people read the post, are they guilty of breaking the law if they cant tell who that person is?

i dono. i dont think it'll be used much to prosecute priests or doctors. it'll be used to hammer the wife who knew as explained above. whether that is a good thing or not is difficult.

or actually, itll be used to get the bishop that tries to move around the abusive priest. thats what its about id say. nothing to do with the confessional.

celticcrash

Its a step in the right direction. It will make it harder for pedo priests to communicate and protect one another.
No turning a blind eye like they did in the past.
Its their own fault for protecting their pedo buddys.

Fratton Fred

mylastparadigm wrote: »

hmmm, it seems like an uninforcible law in fairness.

if you envisage a genuinely possible case where the mother knows the husband is abusing the child but she is scared that he'll kill her if she speaks out (has threathened as much...) does she get ten years? and he'll be out before her.

so the kids lose both parents.

ah its just another one of these things that the anti catholic brigade jump on. if you look at the law with any logic, 1. the confessional is annonymous. 2. who in their right mind tells anyone they are abusing a kid.
there has been a law for years saying that the priest must report if someone confesses to a murder - not one case of a priest being prosecuted yet. this will be the same. its just flavour of the month/year/decade to attack these guys, with some justification in fairness.

i mean, if someone on boards annonymously posted that they abused a child and 200 people read the post, are they guilty of breaking the law if they cant tell who that person is?

i dono. i dont think it'll be used much to prosecute priests or doctors. it'll be used to hammer the wife who knew as explained above. whether that is a good thing or not is difficult.

or actually, itll be used to get the bishop that tries to move around the abusive priest. thats what its about id say. nothing to do with the confessional.

It's not about being enforceable, it is about telling everyone what their responsibilities are.

If some tells you of an abuse taking place, it is no longer up to the individual to decide whether or not it is true and therefore worth reporting. The decision is taken out of your hands as you are legally obliged to report it.

it's a good move. the confessional stuff is a sideshow.

Dudess

dirtyden wrote: »

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Ray might be a clown but he was right to speak his mind, and he was right to not back down.

The only reason he spoke his mind is because he knew he was preaching to the converted. He is a preachy populist twat, with no moral conviction.

It's ironic that someone so dead against the catholic church is so fond of pontificating.

mylastparadigm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

It's not about being enforceable, it is about telling everyone what their responsibilities are.

If some tells you of an abuse taking place, it is no longer up to the individual to decide whether or not it is true and therefore worth reporting. The decision is taken out of your hands as you are legally obliged to report it.

it's a good move. the confessional stuff is a sideshow.

yeah the confessional stuff is just a distraction.

but, the person who has come upon the information still has to chose to obey the law. this idea that one must obey the law is nonsense. one can do whatever one likes but then deal with the consequences.
i mean, proving someone knew something after the fact is very difficult -> see mahon tribunal...

Firegaurd

My understanding of this law is it makes it an offence not to report abuse of a child.

It is certain priests that said they won't break Cannon law by reporting child abuse if the admission is made in the confessional.

We live in a country that is not governed by Cannon law.

If they break the law of the state they deserve to be dealt with like any other criminal.

But it makes you think, do the church consider breaking the confidentiality of the confessional a bigger sin than that of protecting a child abuser ?

prinz

Firegaurd wrote: »

My understanding of this law is it makes it an offence not to report abuse of a child.It is certain priests that said they won't break Cannon law by reporting child abuse if the admission is made in the confessional.We live in a country that is not governed by Cannon law.
If they break the law of the state they deserve to be dealt with like any other criminal.But it makes you think, do the church consider breaking the confidentiality of the confessional a bigger sin than that of protecting a child abuser ?

..and this is why the confessional nonsense is a red herring.

user098

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Ray might be a clown but he was right to speak his mind, and he was right to not back down.

All ray did was utter some empty popular dj brainfart and then failed to back it up with any fact.

prinz

user098 wrote: »

All ray did was utter some empty popular dj brainfart and then failed to back it up with any fact.

Tell us what you really think :pac:

GarIT

Does this apply if the confession is not true? Could I make a false confession and then report the priest. I'm not thinking of doing this just want to know.

dirtyden

This government has done a lot of shouting (Inda on the Ryan report) and now speculating about leigislation about abuse and protection of children.

But why dont they just charge some people with the crimes they committed? Just put a bishop in court, they have the reports, what is stopping them.

This law is PR. It looks incredibly difficult to enforce. I would be surprised if anyone is ever charged on the basis of a law like this.

Dudess

Giselle wrote: »

If someone is aware of a child being abused, and does nothing, does that not make them in some way culpable?

Obviously people who don't report because of intimidation, or some genuine fear of something worse or more immediate shouldn't be victimised.

But if, for example, one neighbour is aware of another beating his/her kids senseless regularly, and simply decides to ignore it, then perhaps the threat of some legal consequence will encourage them to get involved for the sake of self-preservation.

Or if someone passes a car crash in an isolated area and doesn't call for help, should that not be legally recognised as wrong and punishable?

I'd like to see something like the Good Samaritan laws that have been passed in many US and EU member states. Its a shame some people need a legal threat to behave decently though

I know you're a rational person G but I reckon something like this would just get hijacked by people with a witch-hunt mentality. Then there's the issue of someone being on a position where they're intimidated into not telling - how can it always be proven this is or isn't the case? It just makes examples of softer targets IMO and panders to the mob. Blame in the wrong direction can be very dangerous...

Run_to_da_hills

dirtyden wrote: »

This law is PR. It looks incredibly difficult to enforce. I would be surprised if anyone is ever charged on the basis of a law like this.

Not if they start fitting covert devices into confessionals.

billybudd

Not one priest will adhere to this, expect alot of shouting and no action.

Sadly the CC like to educate children but they are not very open to protecting them.

user098

GarIT wrote: »

I'm not thinking of doing this

Sure but why not ?

user098

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Not if they start fitting covert devices into confessionals.

and solicitors offices

prinz

billybudd wrote: »

Sadly the CC like to educate children but they are not very open to protecting them.

The CC currently has better child protection policies than the Irish state has.

billybudd

prinz wrote: »

The CC currently has better child protection policies than the Irish state has.

In theory.

prinz

billybudd wrote: »

In theory.

So in theory the State isn't interested in protecting children whatsoever.

user098

billybudd wrote: »

In theory.

And now in practice. They have not had a single new child abuse case in the last 10 years. So at least they can learn from their mistakes. So do you find that fact encouraging or disappointing ? Personally I find it encouraging.

Yet 37 children have died in state care since 2000. But hey, lets not talk about that, it does not suit the agenda

blackdog2

user098 wrote: »

And now in practice. They have not had a single new child abuse case in the last 10 years. Yet 37 children have died in state care since 2000. But hey, lets not talk about that, it does not suit the agenda

No agenda, both models are outdated and completely unsuitable for use. God help a child who reports abuse on a friday, because unless they report to a hospital they won't see any movement until monday. Inconvenient Baxtards

prinz

blackdog2 wrote: »

No agenda, both models are outdated and completely unsuitable for use..

Not according to the Cloyne Report.

steddyeddy

user098 wrote: »

And now in practice. They have not had a single new child abuse case in the last 10 years. So at least they can learn from their mistakes. So do you find that fact encouraging or disappointing ? Personally I find it encouraging.

Yet 37 children have died in state care since 2000. But hey, lets not talk about that, it does not suit the agenda

I dont find that credible. Im not doubting you but how do we know cases are being reported at all?

user098

steddyeddy wrote: »

I dont find that credible. Im not doubting you but how do we know cases are being reported at all?

Find one for us then, the papers are full of family child abuse cases every day of the week.

steddyeddy

user098 wrote: »

Find one for us then, the papers are full of family child abuse cases every day of the week.

and reality is full of unreported child abuse cases every day. The people most guilty of concealing child abuse have been the catholic church.

user098

steddyeddy wrote: »

The people most guilty of concealing child abuse have been the catholic church.

Where do you get this stat ?

Most abuse is carried out by Irish parents, grandparents, uncles, neighbors etc. but sssshhhh don't mention that fact right ?

Headlines like pedophile fireman, pedophile plumber, pedophile parent, pedophile manager, they don't sell papers or fit the agenda.

user098

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

A priest convicted of Child abuse is just as guilty as anyone else in society that was caught for the same crime,

These people have put themselves high up on moral pedestals, even having the audacity to call themselves "Catholics" while at the same time were knowingly harboring their vial abominations.

FYP. Lots of other peope in Ireland put themselves up on pedestals and call themselves things they are not.

Run_to_da_hills

steddyeddy wrote: »

and reality is full of unreported child abuse cases every day. The people most guilty of concealing child abuse have been the catholic church.

user098 wrote: »

Where do you get this stat ?
.

A priest convicted of Child abuse is far more guilty than anyone else in society that was caught for the same crime.

These people have put themselves high up on moral pedestals, even having the audacity to call themselves "Christians" while at the same time were knowingly harboring their vial abominations.

Matthew 23:27 could not be more clearer: .

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited tombs, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.

puzzle factory

put a coin box at the door

humbert

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

A priest convicted of Child abuse is far more guilty than anyone else in society that was caught for the same crime..

A priest is not more guilty because a priest is not special. A priest(a catholic priest, that is) is just a sexually perverted, possible delusional, but otherwise normal man.

The confessional is just a vacuous catharsis for the delusional.