Jump to content
JWTalk - Jehovah's Witnesses Discussion Forum

annakot

Limited Access Users
  • Content count

    159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About annakot

  • Rank
    Veteran Member

Personal Details

  • Gender
    Sister
  • First Name Only
    Anna
  • Displayed Location
    USA
  • Publisher
    Yes
  • Baptized
    Yes

My Hobbies & Interests

  • My favorite quotes
    "For I am convinced that neither death nor life nor angels nor governments nor things now here nor things to come nor powers nor height nor depth nor any other creation will be able to separate us from God’s love that is in Christ Jesus our Lord".

Recent Profile Visitors

412 profile views
  1. I agree with you a 100% but unfortunately those few "disobedient individuals" are seen by opposers as THE organization, and as Jehovah's people, (since in actuality they are Jehovah's people), so that's where the problem lies. You and I know the facts about this, but try explaining to opposers that a few individuals do not represent the whole. In any case, they are not interested an explanation I'm sure! So yes, I don't think we are disagreeing, just looking at the same subject from various perspectives 😊
  2. Indeed not. And I am fully aware of that. In fact I take a gamble by saying the following, because it could be misinterpreted by some that I am somehow minimizing the trauma that the victims have suffered, but I feel the biggest problem with later adult survivor disclosures and their subsequent interpretation by others, including the media, is that those survivors who go to the media are those who hate the organization regardless, not entirely because of what happened to them, but because they no longer want to be a part of it. They want to live a different lifestyle. They feel their life was wasted as a JW, and on top of that they have received unsatisfactory (to them) closure to their bad experience as victims of sexual molestation while in the organization. An explosive combination! In contrast, those who want to remain loyal to Jehovah might bring the perpetrator to justice by means of secular authorities, (police, courts etc.) but they do NOT take their story to the media. It seems like I am stating the obvious, but it appears like this is not being fully understood even by some government officials; that it is a matter of fact that you are going to hear embellished bad stuff from someone who holds a grudge for whatever reason. There is very little objectivity to be gleaned from that kind of a situation. And the media is of course more interested in a sordid story than they are in facts. It would be great if some of those survivors who are still JW would step forward to counteract the false claims, and tell their story. But of course this won't happen, and it's understandable. It would just become a kind of tit for tat scenario. Our way is to sit tight and let the truth speak for itself. The truth always comes out in the end. As Lance says, and he has 30 years of experience as an elder, these situations are not clear cut and dry, but can be very complex, sometimes there is no satisfactory solution for all, due to extenuating factors he describes. Many can sit in judgement but have actually no idea of the facts. Pedophiles are very clever and will usually target victims who are less likely to talk. Unfortunately this means that children of dysfunctional families or children in a divided household and those who are not close to the congregation will become "ideal" candidates. You can already see how this is a recipe for disaster..... For my part, I am grateful for this consolidated information because it will help those who may be getting twisted information from other sources, and also it will make those who have never suspected anything like this in our organization be less naive and able to protect themselves and others if the situation arises. Forewarned is forearmed. And I am sorry if I sounded unfair, it was a misunderstanding.
  3. Bob and Carlos, yes, of course we would never deliberately cover up child abuse, but mistakes were definitely made. You may be right in saying that the primary reason for this packet is to counteract the misinformation in the media, and that the points underlined have been in practice for decades, but how would you explain situations where the perpetrators went on to molest more children after the first victim, despite the elders knowing about the first victim? I am sure you will agree this should have never happened. But it did. This is no media exaggeration, those are facts. A true pedophile does not stop, he merely finds more devious ways. But with this new packet the likely hood of this happening are much slimmer now, because all relevant persons will be duly informed and the perpetrator no longer able to hide under the guise of "repentance". So I do think that as well as being relevant to those in the media, it is also very helpful for all members of the congregation.
  4. We have talked about this before I think Bob; that Counsel Assisting was influenced by apostates. He didn’t know any different, but I think we both agreed that in the end even he realized it for what it was, JW- bashing on their part. However, and since you ask, I see several areas where the ARC had direct influence where it actually mattered (I listened to the whole thing). Here underlined are the areas where I see change. Please, any Elders on here correct me if I am wrong. 5. Even if the elders have no legal duty to report an accusation to the authorities, the branch office of Jehovah’s Witnesses will instruct the elders to report the matter if a minor is still in danger of abuse or there is some other valid reason. 9. Elders never require victims of child abuse to present their accusation in the presence of the alleged abuser. However, victims who are now adults may do so, if they wish. In addition, victims can be accompanied by a confidant of either gender for moral support when presenting their accusation to the elders. 10. Child abuse is a serious sin. If an alleged abuser is a member of the congregation, the elders conduct a Scriptural investigation. This is a purely religious proceeding handled by elders according to Scriptural instructions and is limited to the issue of membership as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. A member of the congregation who is an unrepentant child abuser is expelled from the congregation and is no longer considered one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. (1 Corinthians 5:13) The elders’ handling of an accusation of child abuse is not a replacement for the authorities’ handling of the matter. 11. If it is determined that one guilty of child sexual abuse is repentant and will remain in the congregation, restrictions are imposed on the individual’s congregation activities. The individual will be specifically admonished by the elders not to be alone in the company of children, not to cultivate friendships with children, or display any affection for children. In addition, elders will inform parents of minors within the congregation of the need to monitor their children’s interaction with the individual. 13. This document is available upon request to members of the congregation. It is reviewed at least once every three years. (of course now it’s available as a download) But even if we were already doing these things recently, the number one, and single most important thing, and you mention this yourself is that; it made us become more transparent. In the past, the elders were informed about what they were supposed to do via letters to the BOE, however “ordinary” witnesses really had no clue for the most part. This is the first time that everyone; elders, min servants, publishers and basically anyone in the world who has access to our web site can be on the same page. I do not insist that the ARC was some kind of corrective tool from Jehovah, but it definitely helped highlight the need for transparency in this area, which I am sure will further help in protecting our children. And that's our ultimate goal of course 😊
  5. P.S. Because I don't have the option to edit my post, I just wanted to add that I was perhaps being unfair in saying that "many" criticized the ARC, I should have said "some".
  6. I think this problem of not following guidelines was only an issue for a minority of elders, and unfortunately they are the ones that got us into trouble. But as you say, and I forgot to mention this so thank you for bringing it up, that the big difference with this document is that now not only the elders have it, but it is available to anyone, so it is this transparency that will be a protection for all. That's the biggest difference and that is why I said sometimes the superior authorities are needed to make Jehovah's people do the right thing. I know many on here have criticized the Australian Royal Commission, but without it, would we have made this change in transparency I wonder....Just my thoughts...
  7. Very true. However, paragraphs 4, 5, 9, 10 and 11 are clearly an adjustment to how some cases of child abuse were handled in the past according to the findings of law courts, and commissions in Australia and Great Britain. This was evidently because there were no such clear guidelines for elders, such as "the victims right to report to authorities" and disclosure to elders with the "support of confidante of either gender" and the disclosure of the actual name of a perpetrator to a family with children or "The elders’ handling of an accusation of child abuse is not being a replacement for the authorities’ handling of the matter".
  8. Glad to see this. Sometimes it takes the "superior authorities" to highlight a need in Jehovah's organization, and it takes Jehovah's organization to act upon it.
  9. When brother Splane talked about that we would never deliberately misquote anyone, he was referring to an actual mistake that did happen in one of our publications a while ago, where we quoted a scientist as someone who did not believe in evolution, when in actuality he did. I think we got into trouble for accidentally misquoting him. Scientists who believe in evolution get really upset when someone says they don't....
  10. Good question! I was hoping someone might have something up to date, like that they spoke with him recently and he confirmed that he was...... Thanks for your reply in any case!
  11. That is precisely why I asked the question. Anyone?
  12. Is there any proof that Gerard Gertoux is one of Jehovah's Witnesses?
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

JWTalk 18.5.26 by Robert Angle (changelog)