Recently in Penn State Scandal Category

The Jerry Sandusky criminal trial is over; the civil lawsuits are in active settlement mode. Undoubtedly, the entire country is more tuned into child abuse than it ever was. The National Conference of State Legislatures reports that about 105 bills on the reporting of suspected child abuse and neglect have been introduced in 2012 legislative sessions in 30 states and the District of Columbia. ¹ All of them include a penalty for failing to report suspected child abuse.

Oregon is one of the states which recently enacted child abuse reporting legislation. It added to the list of mandated reporters any employee or volunteer of organization providing child-related services or activities, any employee of a higher education institution, and any coach, assistant coach or trainer of child athlete and individual who provides guidance, instruction or training in youth development activities and youth camps.

Overlooked in the wake of this new awareness is the sad reality of false allegations of child abuse. There is no disputing that child abuse is a serious and pervasive worldwide problem. ² In most situations, abuse allegations are made responsibly, based on actual abuse. Sometimes they are not.

To address this concern, Oregon also passed legislation regarding the false reporting of child abuse. The law ³ reads:

(1) A person commits the offense of making a false report of child abuse if, with the intent to influence a custody, parenting time, visitation or child support decision, the person:

(a) Makes a false report of child abuse to the Department of Human Services or a law enforcement agency, knowing that the report is false; or

(b) With the intent that a public or private official make a report of child abuse to the Department of Human Services or a law enforcement agency, makes a false report of child abuse to the public or private official, knowing that the report is false.

(2) Making a false report of child abuse is a Class A violation.”

In fact, most states ⁴ have similar statutes. For instance, Arkansas ⁵ provides that:

“(a) A person commits the offense of making a false report under this chapter if he or she purposely makes a report containing a false allegation to the Child Abuse Hotline knowing the allegation to be false.

(b) (1) A first offense of making a false report under this chapter is a Class A misdemeanor. (2) A subsequent offense of making a false report under this chapter is a Class D felony.”

Colorado ⁶ provides that “No person … shall knowingly make a false report of abuse or neglect to a county department or local law enforcement agency. Any person who willfully violates the provisions …commits a class 3 misdemeanor and shall be punished … [and] shall be liable for damages proximately caused thereby.”

The repercussions of false abuse allegations are traumatizing and stigmatizing to the child allegedly abused. The child may have to undergo unnecessary psychological and medical examinations. And commonly, rifts between the child and his or her parents and siblings may develop. In the divorce and custody context, an accusation of child abuse may begin in family court, but it can quickly wind up in civil, criminal, and juvenile courts.

When child abuse allegations are true, CPS must do everything possible to protect the child. When false accusations are made, the accused individual's morally upright reputation can be permanently damaged. CPS workers know that abuse allegations are difficult to prove. Learning to decipher false allegations from real ones is a demanding and perpetual challenge. In either case, they can lead to protracted and difficult legal battles.

1 http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/2012-child-abuse-mandatory-reporting-bills.aspx

2 See e.g. Lalor, K. & McElvaney, R. (2010). Child sexual abuse, links to later sexual exploitation/high risk sexual behavior and prevention/treatment programmes. Trauma, Violence and Abuse, (11), 159-177.

3 ORS 419B.016.

4 AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MA, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE, NY, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VI, WA, WY. A summary of state laws regarding penalties for the failure to report and false reporting of child abuse, written by the Child Welfare Information Gateway, is available at https://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/report.cfm.

5 Title 12, Subtitle 2, Chapter 18, Subchapter 2, § 12-18-203.

6 CRS Title 19, Article 3, Part 3, § 19-3-304.

Daniel Pollack is a professor at Yeshiva University’s School of Social Work in New York City and a frequent expert witness in child welfare cases. He can be reached at dpollack@yu.edu. This article originally appeared in Policy & Practice, 71(1), 30 (2013).

The Jerry Sandusky trial brought the issue of child sex abuse to light. It also highlighted several of the problems that occur when trying to prosecute these cases. One such problem is the statute of limitations that victims face. Most states provide victims with a five-year window to come forward with their allegations.

The statute of limitations should be done away with for a couple of specific reasons. The first reason is that the victims are often too scared or ashamed to come forward until they are adults. Kids who are abused at age 8 may not come forward until they are in their 30's or 40's.

Shame isn't the only reason why abuse victims may not come forward. As the Sandusky case showed us, people in a position of power may care more about their jobs than the victims. Victims may be intimidated or bought off with gifts and money. The victim may feel that telling the authorities could make the problem even worse.

Children who are sexually abused will never forget what happened while growing up. They will have poor relationships with others as adults because they will have a hard time trusting people. They may have repressed memories and nightmares about the events that took place for a long time. If a victim is forced to deal with the crime for their entire life, there should be no limit to when they should be able to press charges.

Nobody should be able to get away with violating a child's innocence just because too much time has passed. Not being able to punish the criminal is like saying that the crime is no big deal because it happened so long ago. Even the best criminal lawyer wouldn't want to defend that statement. Failure to prosecute also gives the impression that other victims should not come forward because there is no penalty for the abuser.

The only reason that there should be a statute of limitations is to protect people from fraudulent claims. A successful business owner could have a disgruntled worker who wants to get even for what he feels is an undeserved termination. Instead of telling people not to work for that company, he claims that his son was sexually abused on company property.

The business owner doesn't want his company dragged through the mud even though the allegations are false. Instead of facing possible jail time on top of a ruined reputation, the owner pays a settlement to keep the story out of the media. If there is a statute of limitations, it could cause someone to think twice about following through on a phony court claim.

A child who claims sexual abuse should always be taken seriously. Parents should not look the other way if they notice signs of abuse. The police should be contacted right away to start a criminal investigation. Victims should have an unlimited amount of time to come forward because it can be hard to do so. Society should not turn a blind eye to any victim willing to face his accuser and his past.

This article was contributed by Jenny Kim. Jenny serves as Client Manager for Price Benowitz LLP criminal attorneys.

From a special edition of Centerpiece, the official newsletter of the National Child Protection Training Center:

The recent child sexual abuse scandal at Penn State University, in which multiple, well-educated professionals declined to report clear evidence of maltreatment, is not an isolated instance. Twenty years of research documents what every child protection professional in America already knows—that most people most of the time won’t report even clear evidence of maltreatment or otherwise intervene to save a child.

Although less clear, the Penn State scandal also draws attention to an equally disturbing problem—that even when reports of abuse are made, these reports are often handled ineffectually if not incompetently. According to media reports of the Penn State scandal, investigators and prosecutors did review a 1998 report of inappropriate intimate contact with a boy.

The alleged perpetrator, Jerry Sandusky, even admitted to two university detectives that he hugged the boy while both were naked and stated, “I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won’t get if from you. I wish I were dead.”

Although this recorded admission of Sandusky’s is an incriminating if not out-right confession of indecent contact with a boy, no charges or additional actions were taken.

The inability, even failure of criminal justice authorities to take meaningful action to protect a child is also not an isolated anecdote. Indeed, a large body of research and the universal experience of the nation’s child protection professionals confirm inadequate training at the undergraduate and graduate level—a woeful lack of preparation that increases the chances children will fail to be protected or that false accusations will be made.

In the past eight years, the United States Department of Justice has begun to address both of these issues through the rapid development and dissemination of model undergraduate and graduate curricula that will better prepare mandated reporters to fulfill their responsibilities to children and that will also better prepare criminal justice, social work, mental and medical health professionals to respond appropriately to instances of maltreatment.

These related reforms will reduce, if not rid the country of “on the job training” as the primary means of educating both mandated reporters and the child protection professionals who investigate or otherwise respond to reports.

This paper details these reforms and calls for an expansion of these initiatives.

As many of you know, The Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute’s (CCAI) Angels in Adoption™ Program provides Members of Congress the opportunity to honor an individual, couple, or organization from their district that have made an extraordinary contribution on behalf of children in need of homes. I have long supported this effort and any effort to raise awareness about the needs of foster and adopted children.

Back in November, I discovered that none other then Penn State child molester Jerry Sandusky was honored as an Angel in Adoption back in 2002. And quite appropriately, on November 10, 2011, the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute rescinded the award with the following statement:

For 13 years, the Angels in Adoption™ award has honored more than 1,800 selfless individuals, couples and organizations who have made extraordinary contributions on behalf of children in need of loving families. In light of the serious allegations against him, and to preserve the integrity of the Angels in Adoption™ program, the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute today announced it has rescinded the award given in 2002 to Jerry and Dottie Sandusky, who were among 142 awardees that year. As an organization that fights to stop child abuse, our thoughts and prayers are with the children harmed and the families affected by his alleged actions. This tragedy underscores how important it is to have a foster care system that ensures our most vulnerable children have a safe and stable environment in which to grow.

No reason a few bad apples should spoil the bin, and Sandusky was one rotten apple operating, as most pedophiles do, in plain sight but under the radar, ensconced in a false veneer of respectability and trust.

Imagine my surprise then, when I popped over to the Angels in Adoption website and found Masha Allen's adoptive parent, Faith Allen, proudly listed as an "Angel Alumni."

Back in 2006, Faith got her angel wings when Senator Johnny Isakson and Congressman Phil Gingrey, nominated her (at the same time Georgia child welfare officials were investigating Faith for abuse and the Cobb & Douglas Public Health Tuberculosis Clinic was searching for Masha in order to treat a nasty case of tuberculosis).

According to Isakson, “[a]fter a lifetime of unimaginable hardships, Masha now has a safe home filled with compassion and love thanks to her Angel in Adoption, Faith Allen.”

Gingrey crowed, “Faith Allen is a shining example of the selfless love adoptive parents give their children. Faith is more than just Masha’s adoptive mother; she is her pillar of support, providing encouragement as Masha bravely shares her story. Everyone who spends time with Faith and Masha feels the warmth and kindness that make Faith an Angel in Adoption.”

Both these tributes remain on Mssrs. Isakson and Gingrey's Congressional websites today.

Over two years ago, Maureen Flatley revealed on PoundPupLegacy.org the extent of the cover-up in this case. An excerpt:

As the point of contact between Masha's team and Mr. Gingery's office I want to further clarify Michael's comments, which are on point.

Mr. Gingery, who is was a licensed physician in Georgia when Masha's case began to play out, was held as a professional to an extremely high ethical standard on the issue of mandatory reporting of alleged child abuse or neglect. 

…When I contacted Mr. Gingery's office to bring them into the loop on the developments of the previous 24 hours during which the allegations of abuse and neglect by Faith Allen were surfaced, I was angrily confronted by his staffer who had already been in touch with Faith and her erstwhile attorney who provided rather alarming safe harbor for Faith (despite her position as a nurse/attorney who should have recognized a child in danger rather than simple a parent whose rights were under siege.)

Rather than objectively sort out the issues, putting the best interests of the child in the forefront as the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act dictates, Gingery's staff immediately defaulted to the defense of Faith's parental rights and most especially the acceptability of her discretion to engage "faith based" interventions rather than conventional mental health treatments. …

…there had been on going discussion between Mr. Gingery's office and the outside experts for MONTHS that Faith had not been able, for whatever reasons most obviously financial, to meet Masha's needs and that the family was in crisis. Gingery's staffer, furthermore, knew a.) that Masha had been hospitalized at least once for a suicide attempt and that the clinicians involved had questioned Faith's parenting and b.) Faith had "paraded" Masha on the Oprah Winfrey show against advice of all outside counsel, again creating psychological stress for a vulnerable child.

…If anyone had been able to put this case into a "fair and balanced" position in which all the issues on both sides of the case could be sorted out in an objective and responsible fashion, it was Mr. Gingery. As doctor, Mr. Gingery was in fact uniquely positioned to both understand and sort out the desperate needs of this family and most especially a vulnerable child whose interests he had purported to defend. …

…to allow a vulnerable child whose needs were well know not just to the Member but to the entire world to go unmet in what was by then an obviously life threatening situation is not just curious, it's an outrage.

Like Sandusky, everyone knew something was wrong with Faith's care of Masha. Many, many people suspected something was just not right with the whole scenario. Some very powerful people knew much more, and yet, the situation persisted year after year after year just like Penn State's cover-up of Sandusky.

Former United States Attorney (and recent Congressional candidate) Mary Beth Buchanan started the spin early on when she declared on national television in 2005: “Masha has been adopted by a very loving family who has changed her name and moved her to another part of the country, where she can make a new start and have a very, very wonderful life ahead of her.”

The press had it's own unique role in perpetrating the fraud. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reporter Barbara White Stack, who later admitted that "everyone in Pittsburgh knew Faith was mentally ill," wrote in 2004 that "Faith believes God placed Mea with her because she could understand her pain and her needs. It is so awesome for her to be matched with a little girl of similar background who she is able to parent and minister to. I think it was by divine orchestration that it happened that way."

Post-Gazette reporter Torsten Ove intoned, "[Masha's] family is her other rock. All it took was love from someone who cared, Faith Allen."

Even United States District Judge Terrence McVerry declared that “I'm so happy, Masha, for you and I hope and pray for you to have a happy life with Faith, and I'm sure that that will come to pass.”

Masha's pastor, Winnie Pollard, was probably the most prescient when she declared, “Faith is a blessing. There is, without any question, that the two of them are going to be a story worth watching to see how their lives are going to effect so many others. They are a sign of hope in the City for everyone that has struggled liken unto Faith and every child that is in need of help liken unto Masha.”

Perhaps the biggest spin, however, was perpetrated by Masha's own legal team, the very lawyers who were charged with ensuring her best interest. According to Masha's First Lawyer, Linell Lee, “I only see a bright future for [Masha] with Faith. Kid's Voice is happy to see this day!”

Masha's Third Lawyer, Diane Sternlieb, declared “I have spent many, many months with Faith and Masha and have witnessed a bond of love between these two. Masha is lucky to have Faith in her life!”

Masha's most recent lawyer, David S. Bills, defending Faith's questionable care of Masha, trumpeted: "Faith received a major award as an Angel in Adoption™ for her outstanding contributions toward the welfare of children in the United States foster care system and orphans around the globe. U.S. Senator Isakson proclaimed: “Faith Allen, who adopted her daughter, Masha, last year, is a truly amazing woman who embodies the spirit of the Angels in Adoptions program. Masha now has a safe home filled with compassion and love thanks to Faith Allen.” Representative Gingrey added: “Faith is her pillar of support, providing encouragement as Masha bravely shares her story. Everyone who spends time with Faith and Masha feels the warmth and kindness that make Faith an Angel in Adoption."

Which naturally brings us back to the Angel in Adoption program. When I read about Sandusky's fall from grace, and saw that Faith was still an Angel in Good Standing with CCAI, I decided to perform a public service and let everyone know that Faith's parental rights to Masha were involuntarily terminated years ago.

I sent the following email to Senator Isakson (on December 13, 2011):

I read with interest this article from last month.

I noticed that Faith Allen is still listed as a 2006 Angel in Adoption sponsored by the Senator and this press release remains on your website:

http://isakson.senate.gov/press/2006/092006allen.htm

In 2008, just two years after she was named an Angel in Adoption, Faith Allen…parental rights were involuntarily terminated by the State of Pennsylvania. …

I worked closely with Sen. Isakson on Masha’s Law. The situation with Faith Allen was almost as bad as Sandusky. You might want to consider taking appropriate action.

Saturday, November 12, 2011
Adoption group rescinds award given to Sandusky

---

and Congressman Gingrey (on December 13, 2011):

I read with interest this article from last month.

I noticed that Faith Allen is still listed as a 2006 Angel in Adoption and her picture remains on your website:

http://gingrey.house.gov/Photos/?PhotoID=50407

In 2008, just two years after she was named an Angel in Adoption, Faith Allen…parental rights were involuntarily terminated by the State of Pennsylvania. …

I worked closely with Rep. Gingrey on Masha’s Law. The situation with Faith Allen was almost as bad as Sandusky. You might want to consider taking appropriate action.

Saturday, November 12, 2011
Adoption group rescinds award given to Sandusky

---

and CCAI (on November 15, 2011):

I read with interest this article from Saturday.

I noticed that Faith Allen is still listed as a 2006 Angel in Adoption. In 2008, just two years after she was named an Angel in Adoption, Faith Allen…parental rights were involuntarily terminated by the State of Pennsylvania.

Saturday, November 12, 2011
Adoption group rescinds award given to Sandusky

---

Not surprisingly, no one has responded, although CCAI did remove the list of Alumni Angels from its website.

Pedophilia occurs with disturbing frequency in athletic programs, churches, Boy Scout troops, and youth organizations—places that children congregate, including the homes of trusted family members.

Professor Daniel Pollack, a frequent contributor to ChildLaw, has co-authored a social work textbook called How to Screen Adoptive and Foster Parents: A Workbook for Professionals and Students. If you read this blog regularly, you'll know all about this book which we profiled earlier this year.

A recent op-ed written by the book's co-author, James Dickerson, highlights this important work:

It is accepted in professional circles that you can help child sex abuse victims with appropriate therapy, but there is little that you can do to help pedophiles. They will offend again and again if they are not incarcerated. Someday there may emerge an effective treatment for them.

Today it does not exist.

The best way to protect children, boys and girls, from abuse is to properly screen individuals who apply for jobs that will require them to work with children, just as you would individuals who apply for foster and adoptive children.

It will not come as a surprise to mental health professionals that Sandusky was married and had adopted six children, along with opening his home to an unknown number of foster children. It is a recognizable pattern.

Although the science does not exist to treat pedophiles, the science does exist to screen them for abusive tendencies. I deal with this in a social work textbook that I co-authored with Professor Daniel Pollack of Yeshiva University, and Dr. Mardi Allen of the Mississippi Department of Mental Health, on the subject of screening for abusive tendencies in adoptive and foster parent applicants.

In the book, we point out in a chapter devoted to the subject that pedophiles are naturally attracted to positions that require them to be around children. Of course, most Boy Scout leaders, church youth group leaders, and teachers are not pedophiles, but those categories are a natural draw to pedophiles and that is where you are most likely to find them.

What are some of the clues that should be recognized by social workers, parents, and employment screeners?

For the answer, buy the book at Amazon, Barnes and Noble, or directly from the NASW Press.

In the best and most enlightening interview on the Penn State scandal to date, Dr. Eli Newberger, a renowned expert on child abuse and pedophilia, talks about what Sandusky said in his interview and the victims of Sandusky's alleged abuse.

Watch this great interview here.