The Samaritans: a "Specific Demographic"

Oxfam is similar, or actually bigger, in having offices worldwide and vast numbers of volunteers as well as staff worldwide.

The main thing is to be open about it.

Look at Oxfam. Child rape became undeniable in Haiti, then it turned out it was worldwide. The key thing was that the media caught wind of it, and Oxfam is a big name. They had to come clean. They responded to media questions. They set up a full enquiry. Penny Lawrence resigned.

The whole thing was media driven, and the Oxfam Press Office did the right thing by insisting on action and change.

There is no telling whether the Samaritans Press Office will be as honorable.

I would like a full investigation to be opened, inviting women who have been abused by Samaritan men to come forward and share their story, along with the many, many people who must have witnessed the early grooming and manoeuvres.

Yes I believe them.

Charities as well as many other institutions will hopefully have learned from what happened with JS and others. I'm sure it's a process of continuous improvement.

What do you want to happen?

Previous posters have said they were told to keep quiet. And that is a particular problem with charities - "they are doing their best, don't complain". Jimmy Savile got away with repeated child rape because he did so much for charity.

It's not right that survivors and whistle blowers are required to shut up.

Is anyone saying it is? Do you think that is a current concern? There is a complaints procedure, and presumably the safeguarding concerns arose from a process of some kind to identify/respond to issues

I believe people here who say they have had bad experiences in the past. Not every organisation gets it right all the time, especially one of this size, that relies so much on volunteers and is made up of independent local branches.

My (limited) understanding was that Chad Varah set up the Brenda Line so sex callers didn’t take away time/volunteers for genuine callers. Also, because if they got their ‘thrills’ that way they were less likely to commit sex offences.

If that was the case, I can understand to a point. It’s not addressing the root problem but was trying to protect women in its own way 🤷‍♀️

And a valuable access to the vulnerable for abusers.

It's not right that survivors and whistle blowers are required to shut up.

There’s something rotten in the DNA of this organisation.

I'm no expert but that change was made 34 years ago, and its had plenty of new people in that time to develop the organisation, and it is obviously bringing in new measures now to address recent issues which suggests a lot of reflection. I'm not sure judging it by its history in this way is hugely helpful.

It's a valuable service for many people.

OMG the “Brenda Line.” They kept that going till 1987? That’s horrific. There’s something rotten in the DNA of this organisation. (Aside: it’s interesting how often “crossdressers” are mentioned in the context of the Brenda Line when you Google it.)

I wonder about this “specific demographic” of abusers. The demographic seems to be more specific than “men.” I have to wonder if they all came up with it independently or if there’s a forum somewhere where men are giving each other tips on how to exploit women as a Samaritans volunteer. With it being so widespread, you have to wonder if there’s an organised quality to it.

Well yes, and it’s stopped. Over 30 years ago.

Yes, the Brenda line was closed in the 80s, but huge numbers of sex calls continue to be made. When I was a volunteer two years ago, around a third of the calls I received were sex calls.

Shortly before I left a new system was introduced whereby if a caller made 25 sex calls in a 30 day period they would be banned for a few months then reinstated. Better than nothing I suppose but still totally insufficient.

I suspect they may lose some brilliant volunteers because of the change to a very corporate approach. Which, IMO, is utterly wrong for a charity and particularly one that deals with daily contact about people’s feelings, which are too nuanced to fit in a box.

How infuriating and frustrating it must be for those wanting to give up their time to help truly desperate people in very great need to also have to deal with volume of sex callers

(almost exclusively men) they get.

Apparently, yes. From their website:

The Samaritans Radar Twitter plug-in was closed permanently in March 2015.
What was 'Samaritans Radar'?

Samaritans Radar was a free Twitter plug-in which used an algorithm to allow Twitter users to monitor each others’ posts. It was launched on 29 October 2014 and suspended on 7 November 2014. It was closed permanently on 10 March 2015.

Samaritans Radar used a list of keywords and phrases to identify tweets that indicated someone might be struggling to cope.

It then sent an email alert to users who had signed up to monitor that account, flagging the tweet or tweets in question and linking to guidance on the best way of reaching out and providing support.

The idea was to give Twitter users a second chance to see potentially worrying tweets from friends, in case they missed them when they were originally posted.

Samaritans Radar was designed to provide an online safety net, after a 2013 study found an association between rates of tweets per users determined to be at risk for suicide, and actual suicide rates.
Why was it suspended?

Samaritans Radar was suspended following negative feedback and advice, including serious concerns raised by people from the mental health community who use Twitter.

This feedback included concerns about privacy – as people being monitored were never notified or asked to consent – and concerns that the use of Samaritans Radar would people to censor their tweets, making Twitter a less safe space for people who were struggling, and seeking support and community.

The potential for Samaritans Radar to be used, not only by friends but by bullies, was also raised.

All data associated with Samaritans Radar was deleted.

Well yes, and it’s stopped. Over 30 years ago. Lots of things have changed since then I imagine, including that the number is now a National number.

It’s obviously horrible and worrying to hear about these incidents but I imagine most volunteers are decent people who give up their time with no thought of exploiting vulnerable people.

It’s distressing to hear stories of people having bad experiences in the past. I hope systems have improved since then .

I had never heard of the Brenda line. This article about the manual is really disturbing

wellcomecollection.org/articles/XqKkYxAAACMATUnN

The ‘Brenda’ service was stopped in 1987.

I left Samaritans over safeguarding issues in our branch that weren't being dealt with. One of the old men had abused a new volunteer and, even when he admitted it, was allowed to carry on in his role, having unsupervised contact with vulnerable women and girls. Another female volunteer was told that if she didn't shut up and stop talking about it she'd be asked to leave.

I was told that in another branch, male volunteers were receiving nudes from young female callers. The managers were aware but I doubt much was done about it.

Also, the permissive attitude to sex calls was disgusting. A very disturbing and threatening call I received from a trans woman was the final straw for me.

Wrote a letter of complaint but was told to mind my own business, or words to that effect.

The charity was set up by a total pervert, the CofE vicar Chad Varah. He styled himself as a sex educator and was involved with organisations that were linked to Paedophile Information Exchange. He set up the Brenda Line, a subsection of Samaritans, which men were allowed to call for a wank.

It is, and always has been a men's asexual rights organisation.

Yes @rabbitwoman, Bundy volunteered at a suicide prevention hotline. He worked with a woman named Ann Rule who went on to write an autobiographical true crime book about it called The Stranger Beside Me. It's an interesting read if you're into that sort of thing.

"they’d have to give a shit about protecting women, which seems like a bar that big name NGOs can’t clear." - too true. Because they like to bully their own female staff. If the development NGOs are a guide.

I think Samaritans have gone about this all wrong. They should have been up front with their findings and what they do moving forward. Now they seem like they've been caught with their trousers down and saying what will appease. It may well truthful but because it's come after the leak it puts Samaritans in the defence position rather than directing the narrative.

What a shame that as all this comes out they are in the process of diluting their recruitment process and considering volunteers working from home. Surely, they should be looking to bolster these at a time like this?

BTW there are female sex callers too. They are much rarer (the men are dime a dozen) but they target male volunteers.

I think the official line of never putting the phone down is bollocks ... in reality actual Samaritans can and do terminate calls. The organisation does however need to do much better on banning persistent sex callers - at the minute it takes 10 reports, it should be dropped to 3 max. However many persistent callers simply change their phone sim and start again. Abusers gonna abuse.

I think in branch people ignore the don't hang up nonsense because there is a tacit recognition that this issue isn't treated seriously enough.

That's horrific, but I guess unsurprising.

It really does show the efforts men will go to to abuse though. You don't just turn up and ask to volunteer and that's you. There's an interview and really rigorous training and lots don't make it.

And at least in my branch if the other Sam on duty wasn't on call they'd be able to hear you, so there's an element of risk.

Given that the vast vast majority of the volunteers are women, that makes the likelihood hood of men being abusers even greater.

Female GPs have a v high suicide rate. Lots of stuff on it. One theory is that with a male GP it's hello this is wrong. Business like chat. Thanks bye.

With women patients start offloading other issues/ disclosing big problems at home etc.