CHURCH BOARD GUIDE TO A CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE PREVENTION POLICY Accountability involves justifying one’s actions. Since sexual moles-


tation cannot be justified, the perpetrators of abuse avoid settings in which they must give an account of their behavior. That’s why they seek isolated settings, act in secrecy, and attempt to maintain power and control over their victims. In addition, workers with no prior intent on engaging in misconduct


may nevertheless cross a boundary under certain circumstances. One pur- pose of accountability is to make sure that those circumstances do not occur. Three factors that affect the accountability of supervisors in church


programs involving children include: (1) the personal character and integrity of the adult worker; (2) the number of people present for the activity; and (3) the degree of openness and approval associated with the activity. Let’s look at each factor.


1. Personal character and integrity Clearly, a person’s character and integrity affect risk, and that is why screening workers is a vital part of a prevention program. Parents assume that their children will be safe when they leave them in the care of another adult at church. Embedded in that assumption is that the adult is trustworthy and has the best interests of the children at heart. Unfortunately, as the events of recent years have demonstrated, the


assumption that at church adults are trustworthy is not always true. As a result, reasonable care means that individuals who work with chil- dren need to be screened. Leaders need to examine both the past and current conduct of the prospective worker. The goal is twofold. First, on the positive side, we seek information that confirms an individual has the knowledge, skills, temperament, and values to do a good job. Second, we want to make sure that no misconduct has occurred that would disqualify the worker. We want assurance individuals have been accountable in the past, and are likely to be accountable in the future. A person with a history of being unaccountable poses a higher risk. From an administrative standpoint, screening workers requires a formalized plan as noted earlier in this book.


2. The number of people present The second factor in assessing accountability is to examine the number of people who are present for an activity. The general rule is the more adults the better. Accountability increases when two or more unrelated


33


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74