T2T:
You wrote: “So you sgree we should take them to court if we believe they were psrt of the abuse?
Well how do u propose a victim take them to court without suing them first?”
I am declaring that yeshivos, rarely if ever, have responsibility for the crimes committed. If you can prove they do, with policies that are the structure of the yeshiva, you have a case. Meanwhile, you have individuals who are committing crimes that are outside of their job description, whether the abuse or the protection. Your second sentence is hardly coherent. There are criminal matters, and there are compensation lawsuits. If a crime is proven, throw the book at ’em. If liability is proven, award them. The question is whether old cases can be proven with anything beyond a verbal claim. The “metoo” movement states that anyone that claims anything should get millions. I say that true victims might deserve something, but that this “window” just invites false claims. I also question whether monetary awards accomplish anything but damaging the alleged perpetrators and the yeshivos.
Syag:
Why insult yourself? Have you any clue what scientific research is? Any study requires a research design that is crafted, modified and improved, and passes review by several experts. Conducting the study, providing everything needed to replicate it, analyzing the results, and drawing conclusions are all complex processes that bear no resemblance to the impulsive comments that appear in the CR. The questions you ask have been asked before, and the studies bear out that there is no meaningful clinical benefit from the negative consequences to the abusers. No one conducts studies with the conclusion predetermined, and you may be saddened that they do not support your belief. Do you really think the researchers did not study the victims?
You are correct that encountering the molester would be painful to the victim. Incarceration, as wonderful as it might be, is not the only answer to that. How about if the alleged abuser moved away and they would never meet again? I’m not looking to protect anyone, just to ficus on the question. No, I’m not insulting victims/survivors, and I have made my observations from having spent many, many hours with them. Difference is that I am making logical and intellectual observations, and you are speaking from passion. That’s why I won’t make the “breath of air” the punishment of the abuser. Both have merit, but are not connected. The scientists studying the matter also believed, in their hypothesis, that you were correct, but the results indicate otherwise.
places:
The studies I saw focused on children who were abused. I do not recall, without reviewing them, what the top age was. It may have included adolescents, but I do not remember. That relates to the subjects of the abuse. As far as the ones studied, they were adults at the time of collection of data, and there was plenty of time passed during which there were observations of those whose abusers received consequences versus those who did not.
What is important is that we are all entitled to our feelings and passions. When we are addressing how to act on them, we must always allow facts to be the guide. I hate molesters as much as anyone here, and I have nary a good word to defend them or their protectors. There is an obsession by many to punish, punish, sue, incarcerate, and punish some more. That focus comes from passion, not logic. If we focus on what truly helps, there is a very different picture. I do not support any statute of limitations. But I also cannot support the “metoo” delusion that allowed for women to fabricate lies to block Kavanaugh, that brought experienced politicians into the delusion. Victimization happens, and our community is not exempt. Now, what will help? We disagree on whether this legislation helps or hurts. I recognize the need for something. I believe this is not it.