Catholic Abuse Rates

[Chopstick]

I'm trying to critically evaluate the Catholic representation of sexual abuse of minors in the Catholic church. There are a few articles that I could use some help evaluating, or getting a wider scientific context to:

Since I can't post links yet- a google search for "Catholic League Abuse in Social Context" leads right to the article.

This article, by the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, is making the point that sexual abuse in Protestant circles is higher than among Catholics, abuse within schools is much higher then in either religious group, and most abuse is by family members, therefore pairing up child molestation with Catholicism is unfair.

There is nothing implausible about this assertion, so I certainly want to be fair to the issue. A few comments I can make about this article:

1. Teachers and family members spend a lot more time with kids, and there will be many family members that come into contact with a child, versus one priest that comes into contact with a child each week. If one priest has one hour with a child per week vs. 8 family members and 5 teachers spending many more hours with the child, it would seem that if the priest abuses that child, it reflects more badly on the priesthood statistically than if a family member or teacher abused that child.

2. Also, equating abuse of adolescent boys with being homosexual seems to be a disingenuous attempt to place blame on homosexuality. Men attracted to other adult men are distinct from men attracted to boys (who are often straight) whether those boys are pre-pubescent or adolescent.

I plan on posting up two other articles shortly. Concerning this one: Is the Catholic League citing studies selectively to promote his own view? Is there wider scientific literature that contradicts the particular studies cited, or does the CL have a point?

 

[Chopstick]

So there are two more articles that say pretty much the same thing.

One (google "newsweek mean men") is a little more trustworthy since Newsweek is not a Catholic source, although I don't know about the author. The point that insurance companies, who have a stake in keeping good statistics, didn't find a difference among denominations seems to be a good piece of evidence.

Second (google "Psychology today six points") makes the same sorts of claims, that according to "the best available data" clergy members do not have higher rates of sexual abuse than other denominations. Although Psychology Today is a crappy, psuedoscientific magazine, the point itself seems worth answering.

So what are good sources of some perspective on this? Is the consensus that abuse rates are the same, but that the real 'sin' of the church is the cover up? Or is there a muddling of bad studies and statistics that are being used to make invalid apologetic arguments for the Catholic Church?

 

[Marduk]

I think youre approaching this the wrong way, you can't compare paedophiles like some sort of football league. They are all bad, its the fact that the Catholic church has tried to cover up the abuse and protect the abusers that is the issue. None of the other groups you have mentioned have procedures in place to do that officially

 

[blutoski]

I think youre approaching this the wrong way, you can't compare paedophiles like some sort of football league. They are all bad, its the fact that the Catholic church has tried to cover up the abuse and protect the abusers that is the issue. None of the other groups you have mentioned have procedures in place to do that officially

My impression is that Chopstick is trying to evaluate a claim made by the Catholic Church.

Certainly, it's true that public attention is focussed on the Catholics, and they are dealing with a reputation for being pedophiles that other religions appear to be immune from - at least for now.

John Cornwell attempted to build a comparison framework and discussed it in "Breaking Faith: The Pope, the People and the Fate of Catholicism" back in 2001. (pedophile scandals are not new to the Vatican)

Cornwell's system was to compare percentages of the clergy that were pedophiles. He felt that 8% of Catholic priests were pedophiles, and compared that to less than 1% of the general male population, and less than 1% of male pastors in protestant/anglican denominations. His conclusion was that the Catholic church attracts, fosters, and protects pedophiles more than other large denominations.

It's hard to compare with smaller denominations, as there may be only one pastor, for example. Or no pastor, say, with MB congregations.

 

[Chopstick]

I think youre approaching this the wrong way, you can't compare paedophiles like some sort of football league. They are all bad, its the fact that the Catholic church has tried to cover up the abuse and protect the abusers that is the issue. None of the other groups you have mentioned have procedures in place to do that officially

Thanks for your responses

As blutoski said, I am just trying to look at a specific claim made by Catholics, and I'm not approaching this whole scandal as a whole. The Catholics make a sort of cumulative case in defense of the church, and I'm trying to look at each claim by itself. If the rates of the abuse are similar in different places, then it is not reasonable to criticize the church for "attracting pedophiles" or "creating pedophiles." If the rates of abuse are higher among priests, then I am able to make more reasoned case against the church, if need be. Just trying to stay intellectually honest.

Of course, even if the rates of abuse are lower within the Catholic Church, a cover up would still render the church blameworthy. But that's a different question which I hope to evaluate at some point.

 

[Chopstick]

Cornwell's system was to compare percentages of the clergy that were pedophiles. He felt that 8% of Catholic priests were pedophiles, and compared that to less than 1% of the general male population, and less than 1% of male pastors in protestant/anglican denominations. His conclusion was that the Catholic church attracts, fosters, and protects pedophiles more than other large denominations.

Thanks for the info. That sort of statistical response is what I am looking for as a potential counter case.

Does anyone know if there are any other studies that analyze the issue this way, or in a way that contrasts with what the Catholic apologists say? I think it would take a lot more than Cornwell's book to make a convincing argument. I'll try to take a closer look at the book at some point.

 

[shandyjan]

I think one criticism you can make against the catholics is that not only is a priest in a trusted position but he is also teaching sex is wrong, masterbation is wrong, impure thoughts are wrong. It is another level of wrong on top of the paedophilia!

 

[I Ratant]

100% of the priests I encountered as a Catholic, both in grade school (4 years) and college (4 years) failed to abuse me.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

I don't have any statistics on this, but I just wanted to voice my agreement with your assesment that of course teachers and especially family members have a higher rate of abuse simply because of opportunity.

I wonder if there has been a comparison between incidents of abuse that occur at Catholic schools and secular schools, or schools run by other religions? That would be very interesting to me.

Though incidentally, I actually agree with the statement, "therefore pairing up child molestation with Catholicism is unfair" if by that the Church means int's unfair to make it seem like Catholics are synonymous with child abuse. The priests I grew up with were wonderful, and I certainly don't think "molestor" when I think "Catholic priest."

But their handling of the abuse crisis, the cover ups, etc, has left me with zero sympathy for the church as a whole, or the Vatican. Of COURSE the way they have handled things have made people think molestors and Catholicism go hand in hand.

I do feel bad for Catholic priests and congregations on an individual level. The ones who had nothing to do with any cover ups or any of the Vatican's countless misdeeds. They are certainly hurting - in terms of membership, donations, reputation, etc, even when they had nothing to do with any of this.

 

[Trakar]

...He felt that 8% of Catholic priests were pedophiles, and compared that to less than 1% of the general male population, and less than 1% of male pastors in protestant/anglican denominations...

Any idea what led him to these feelings?

 

[Resume]

The nuns were the abusers in my parish and school; not sexually but physically and psychologically. Not that we boys didn't deserve some form of punishment.

 

[blutoski]

Any idea what led him to these feelings?

Well, exactly... I'm not 100% confident in his estimates. I was really using his example as a way to build a comparison.

The estimates are derived from both public verifiable conviction rates and his impression as an ex-priest regarding the ratio of these convictions compared with suppressed cases of which has been made aware after-the-fact through colleagues in the hierarchy.

I believe he was only providing estimates for the US, UK, and Italy, plus a South American country that I don't recall (Brazil?).

 

[Trakar]

Well, exactly... I'm not 100% confident in his estimates. I was really using his example as a way to build a comparison.

The estimates are derived from both public verifiable conviction rates and his impression as an ex-priest regarding the ratio of these convictions compared with suppressed cases of which has been made aware after-the-fact through colleagues in the hierarchy.

I believe he was only providing estimates for the US, UK, and Italy, plus a South American country that I don't recall (Brazil?).

I'm aware of no significant or compelling studies which indicate any significant difference between the percentages of pedophiles in the Catholic church and pedophiles in other brands of clergy, and I'm not sure that there is even any variance between clergy in general and any other male dominated professional occupation/life devotion. I would imagine there is some gender variance, so any gender homogenous profession would probably present skewed results,...but that is more guess than firm knowledge.

 

[Chopstick]

I've been looking as much as I can for data that may contradict the claim that Catholic Church abuse rates mimic the rates of many other groups, but there doesn't seem to be much out there. There are problems with coming to a conclusion, since reporting rates are never 100%, and different religions/institutions may have different reporting rates due to some confounding variables, among other problems, but despite the reasonable critiques of some of the data, I think it would still be reasonable to either conclude that the abuse rates in the Catholic Church are not higher than in other institutions, or that more data would be needed to come to a decent conclusion.

So, unless some more evidence is provided, it seems unfair to characterize child abuse or pedophilia as a 'Catholic problem' and it wouldn't seem reasonable to feel more endangered by a priest than by an authority figure from a different institution (although there should always be methods in place to prevent even the opportunity of abuse to occur). Is that a reasonable conclusion, or am I missing something?

Of course the Catholic Church may be culpable for a lot more than just having a 'higher rate of child abuse'. I'm going to take a look at a few other portions of Catholic apologetics, and see what the common responses are.

 

[pgwenthold]

I don't have any statistics on this, but I just wanted to voice my agreement with your assesment that of course teachers and especially family members have a higher rate of abuse simply because of opportunity.

This is really a challenging question. You can't just look at the extent of child abusers among the various subgroups because you have to account for opportunity, as SC points out. For example, the most common child abuse that occurs (sadly) is by parents on their own children. Since Catholic priests aren't supposed to have kids (some do, but that's a different story), you can't compare their abuse rates to those for men who DO have children.

One thing that could be investigated is how many of those "protestant" abusers are abusing members of their church and how many are abusing their own kids?

 

[pgwenthold]

The nuns were the abusers in my parish and school; not sexually but physically and psychologically. Not that we boys didn't deserve some form of punishment.

I had the same experience. I'm sure I deserved SOME form of punishment, for sure, but I'm not sure that being hit over the head by a ruler or the handle of a scissors or public humiliation and taunting is the proper punishment for coloring outside the lines in art class or having my printed letters dip below the line in handwriting class.

OTOH, does pulling down a student's pants and spanking his bare butt with a ruler count as physical or sexual abuse? That's what my brother got.

 

[catsmate]

Bump.
Some details of sexual abusers in the Boston Archdiocese and penalties applied to them.