MEDIA AND ABUSE: Why all the 'awful, negative' stories?

Under the headline, “Diocese mismanages moral crisis,” in the March 9 issue of the Times Union, columnist Fred LeBrun asks what he terms “a fair question.” Here it is, exactly as he phrased it: “Why is the [Albany] diocese perpetually in the news in an awful, negative way over ancient abuse cases?”

Mr. LeBrun deserves credit for being so remarkably candid in accurately describing his own newspaper’s articles (“awful, negative” coverage of “ancient” cases); it’s too bad he got the answer to his own question so wrong. He places the blame for the coverage on “an incredibly artless strategy for dealing with the evolving scandal” on the part of the Diocese.

Here is that diocesan strategy:

* to apologize publicly and often for its failures,

* to revise its abuse policy,

* to encourage all victims of sexual abuse by clergy to come forward,

* to permanently remove from ministry any employee - religious or lay - against whom an allegation of abuse is substantiated,

* to appoint a counselor to ensure that all forms of help are offered to victims,

* to hire a senior investigator from the New York State Police to conduct investigations into any new allegations of abuse,

* to train thousands of employees and volunteers to recognize and prevent child abuse in the future, and

* to create a safe environment for children in all parishes, schools, and other agencies of the Diocese.

What part of that comprehensive strategy is “artless”? We might also ask, “How many parts of that strategy have been covered in a positive, perpetual and front-page manner by the Times Union? What part of it has been praised in a TU editorial or, for that matter, by a TU columnist?”

Mr. LeBrun colorfully (albeit gruesomely) describes the effect of each of his newspaper’s stories on readers “as having a scab ripped off.” It would be interesting to learn why the TU believes that doing that repeatedly is a public service. Does it tell uninformed people that the Church mishandled this issue? Every-one knows it did and has known it for a year. Will it force the Diocese to change its policy? It already has. Will it lead the Diocese to care for victims in a more sensitive way? It does that through the victims’ assistance coordinator. Will it cause the Diocese to investigate complaints more thoroughly? It has been for months. Could it inspire the Diocese to train its workers to prevent or spot child abuse? It is in the process of doing so.

If Mr. LeBrun is not aware of all of the above, it could be because his newspaper, so avid about running “awful, negative” stories about “ancient abuse cases,” never has room for the many positive ones that are occurring right now.

The Diocese has been at great fault; Bishop Howard J. Hubbard has admitted that several times over the past year and does so again this week in The Evangelist. But the Diocese is also committed to healing the harm and protecting children while continuing its mission of bringing the Good News to all.

The Times Union has reminded (and re-reminded) the public of what went wrong in handling abuse cases 20, 30, even 50 years ago, and apparently considers that to be a worthwhile aim. If it is, the TU is a large enough newspaper that it could add some other aims: providing balance, for example, and helping the healing process in the community.

Perhaps it is time for the newspaper to become part of the solution by promoting that healing process, instead of opting only for “awful, negative” coverage that will perpetually rip off scabs.

(03/13/03) [[In-content Ad]]