In the Wake of the Sandusky Case: Lessons Learned and Hope for Victims of Child Abuse

The Jerry Sandusky case, and the Penn State handling of the disclosures of sexual abuse, have opened a national conversation around child sexual abuse in some unique ways. In the wake of the verdict, we have all been presented with lessons for victims, organizations, and society as a whole.

First and foremost, because the abuse involved young boys, this case shed light on an under-reported aspect of child sexual abuse. Children's Advocacy Centers around the country report that 35 percent of child victims of sexual abuse interviewed in the course of criminal investigations are boys under the age of 18. However, boys (especially teens) are less likely to report abuse than girls.

Abuse victims of both genders often erroneously carry feelings of shame and embarrassment about the abuse that are truly only the offenders' to bear. These feelings can be exacerbated in boys because of cultural and societal messages young men should be "strong;" as a result, unrealistic expectations persist regarding male victims' ability to protect themselves from offenders. We should take this teachable moment to be clear as a society that no child is expected to protect him or herself from the predatory sexual behavior of adults. It is the individual and collective responsibility of every adult to protect children from harm. The lesson to previously silent male victims of child sexual abuse is: Come forward to be believed, and seek justice and healing.

The second lesson learned is that all organizations with children on-site are potentially vulnerable to the inappropriate and criminal actions of a staff person or volunteer. These individuals may use the organization or facility as a place to identify children to victimize. Because of this, policies and procedures must be enacted to ensure proper background screening, reduce or eliminate one-adult/one-child contact, establish appropriate boundaries between staff/volunteers and youth, and ensure any one-adult/one-child contact is observable and interruptible. Moreover, all staff/volunteers must be trained in the recognition of abuse and how to report abuse directly to authorities. We can learn from the failures of the Second Mile charity and Penn State to better safeguard children by enacting common-sense policies and procedures around their care.

Finally, child sexual abuse creates immense suffering in its victims. The victims of Jerry Sandusky who bravely testified at his trial demonstrated tremendous courage. These individuals were undoubtedly further traumatized by both the intense media spotlight and an investigative process that did not have the benefit of a Children's Advocacy Center.

We can do better for victims. In 750 communities, serving more than 2,000 counties across the country, we do.

Children's Advocacy Centers provide a child-friendly setting in which victims can be professionally interviewed, receive medical care, and mental health treatment. The foundation of every Children's Advocacy Center is its multidisciplinary team comprised of law enforcement, child protective services, victim advocates, prosecutors, medical providers, and mental health professionals who coordinate interventions, thus reducing trauma to victims.

Research demonstrates that child abuse investigations handled through a Children's Advocacy Center have a shorter length of time to disposition, better prosecution outcomes, higher rates of caregiver and child satisfaction, more referrals to mental health services, and better access to medical care than those in non-Children's Advocacy Center communities. Efforts are now underway to establish a Children's Advocacy Center in Happy Valley -- but the lessons learned from this scandal should be the establishment of Children's Advocacy Centers in the remaining 1,000 counties across the country that lack them. Let's ensure that the legacy of this terrible case is one that gives hope and help to all victims of child sexual abuse.

 

Comments

[KidsFirstInc]

10:19 AM on 06/29/2012

This case also highlights what those of us working with abused children see every day: child molesters are most often people trusted by other adults. They groom families, churches, communities first...then the children...so the children will be less likely to tell and more likely to feel responsible for the adult's crime. Carla Van Dam has written a remarkable book entitled, "The Socially Skilled Child Molester" that brings to light these issues in a very succinct, eye-opening, effective manner. It should be required reading for every parent.

[Ryan Kanagy]

09:14 PM on 06/28/2012

In Australia, there is a document called the "Working with Children's check." It is an ID card required of all individuals who want to work closely with children. It provides picture, birthdate, the state where it is valid, notice number, plus it has the person's signature on it. If you don't have one, you CANNOT volunteer to work closely with children. That means, if you don't pass, you don't play (with children at daycare, school, etc.). The details are on the front. On the back it says that, if you pass, the card is proof that you have undergone your check and, "together with good supervision, training, and recruitment processes improves the safety of services and activities for children." I don't work exclusively with kids, but there are many young children allowed. I am never allowed to be in a room alone with a child with the door closed or in a room at all. I must have one other adult be able to be with me or see me. Why the United States doesn't have a "Working With Children's Check" is beyond me, but every state should have one and that would further prevent predators like Sandusky from preying on children. I am a survivor and the hardest part was telling my mom what happened. But because I did, no other kids in my neighborhood were harmed. I only hope my abuser is now behind bars elsewhere.

[SeanSurvived]

03:36 PM on 06/28/2012

I am a survivor of sexual abuse. The details are normal to me, and all victims, but hopefully, are abhorrent to society. In order to understand how people cannot take action I came up with the following theory.

I believe when people are witnessing or experiencing abuse or trauma they are biologically predisposed to flee, hide, fight, AND forget.

The avoidance of trauma is critical to survival and therefore when we see trauma we are compelled biologically to leave the situation and it is only after we process, usually starting with, “was that real, did I see/hear what I think I did?” To counteract instinct and place ourselves in danger takes an active willingness to believe. It also will trigger empathy with the victim, and becoming emotional vulnerable.

[Ryan Kanagy]

09:21 PM on 06/28/2012

I agree with your theory. I think it is up to the individual who witnesses a crime in progress to act and at least call the police or step in where necessary. The problem is: people, especially in large groups, have the "someone else will stop it" mentality and if everyone has that thought, the no one will call the authorities. Action must be taken in the face of traumatic events. Being a survivor myself, I remember what went on in my head and the ways I initially tried to justify letting what was happening to me occur. But once it escalated, I acted and defended myself. People must help victims understand that abuse is never, EVER their fault and the blame rests on the perpetrator and those who stood by and let it happen.