AIBU to think the CofE should be forced to have independent safeguarding

[Grumpyoldpersonwithcats]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98y011dy0yo
I don't think the CofE should have a choice in this. History would suggest they are completely untrustworthy to manage it themselves.

Why particularly the CofE?

There's lots of other institutions that aren't as big or as visible that have issues that they can keep hidden because they don't hit the headlines in the way the CofE does.
What about the Scouts, for example? Or local theatre groups? After school clubs? etc.

I think that the denominations should have one independent group between them that anyone can go to with concerns, because some of the smaller denominations can smugly know that they probably won't hit the headlines because the general public hasn't heard of them but they're so small that any investigating body if they don't know the person they are investigating well, they know several people who do. Which means it's easy to sweep under the carpet, and the victim has nowhere to go.

It’s a good idea if it safeguards and protects children and vulnerable adults.

Do you think this should be implemented across all religions or are you specifically concerned about Christians?

I would have thought it was fairly obvious that I raised this as a result of the current news surrounding the CofE.

But yes - I believe exactly the same should apply to any other Christian denomination, any other religion, or any other organisation with a heavy involvement with children or vulnerable adults.

However my AIBU is specific to this particular item of news from the CofE.

You're quite right that they're unfit to monitor themselves of course, though they're not the only religion that applies to, but realistically they were always going to refuse a genuinely independent safeguarding body for the same reason they tried to keep all the abuse "in house" in the first place

Of course YANBU.

While you're right that this should apply to all similar groups, in the case of the CofE it's not a private club. It's the 'established church', part of the state. It has automatic seats in the House of Lords despite showing itself to be a corrupt organisation palpably unsuitable to be any sort of national moral authority...so wtf is it there for?

Dead right Grumpy.

TBH all churches need it.

The church of England should be forced to have independent safeguarding The fact they don't means vicars stay in their jobs when there are concerns Why are the church uñ willing to do what schools hospitals nurseries other religions hopefully do What is so difficult that the church can't be investigated by people not connected. To the church What is so special about the synod that they can break rules kept by other organisations and cover up abuse

Abuse is devastating to the victims and ruins life's when will the church care and stop caring about protecting the abusers

I note that the BBC is the most vociferous in reporting this.

Oh look over there, a squirrel.

Who is asking questions about their independent safeguarding?

Idiotic to make it look as if they’ve rejected independent safeguarding. ‘Eye wateringly complex’ sounds like a drippy excuse.

More idiotic if they don’t start planning it publicly. Tomorrow.

If the archbishop who covered up abuse now becomes a lord as well it's like condoning the abuse

I'm sure newspapers such as the Times will be all over it tomorrow.

Mind you look at the Police - judgment in
papers now.

YANBU, and today the focus is on the CofE because of the cowardly way they have bottled out of making the right decision.

Speaking more widely, of course there should be independent safeguarding everywhere that vulnerable people are present.

Hopefully all the papers will be all over this itoghy give victims some hope

The structure around safeguarding in the CofE is already massive and thorough. It’s so upsetting for people on the ground floor that despite all that, it’s still going wrong and people aren’t safe.

I truly can’t see how it happens.

I don’t know which part needs changing. It’s the step after the safeguarding investigation that needs changing, I think.

Whatever change needs to start straightaway, which I think is what the suggested delay is- to make the switch.

Should say it might above

The problem surely is the safeguarding mentioned above is a massive structure It should be simple you abuse someone within the church lose your job and are investigated by the police Not cozy chats with the bishops

And the bishops who turn a blind eye made lords the church is sick

My real issue here is that the CofE had the opportunity to do 'the right thing' in terms of having fully independent guard rails - but instead they still wish to prioritse protecting themselves as an organisation. As someone who sings every week in a CofE choir I'm just hugely disappointed that the church leadership still gets things like this so wrong.

It's good to know someone who is a c of e member isn't afraid to speak out who are the synod members who couldn't make a caring decision Have their lives been so fortunate that they can't act with kindness and think about the victims ruined lifes

I do t know the answer either.

Safeguarding is run by volunteers in each parish and it's a HUGE responsibility to take on for free.

A lot of the cases are historical, and how the church deals with historical abuses. We will never know how many abuses the current processes have stopped, it doesn't work like that.

At the first question raised, the person is suspended and off for between 3 months and 2 years depending what’s found.

The police are involved if there is a crime. I know a suspension that led to a prison sentence, and a suspension that led to a reinstatement and extra training- there was nothing criminal in that case, it was more about poor judgement.

The huge amount of work comes in with the belt and braces to be sure abuse can’t happen- systems about never being unsupervised with anyone vulnerable, training, follow ups when a concern is raised. Checking everyone is up to date on training. It’s continuous.

If you are not part of it, I don’t think you have any idea of the amount of work and effort involved. Often in a tiny church. That’s not an excuse or a winge or anything- it’s just a description of the situation.

The best bit about going independent would be someone having a better way of doing it- but I don’t think there is one.

Whatever the problem is, it’s not happening on the ground floor where ordinary churches work and where safeguarding happens.

It is happening somewhere else, and it’s awful.

I completely agree and in fact all institutions. I genuinely don't understand how people are letting their children attend things like Sunday school or going to church regularly and befriending vicars and priests when it is so poorly managed. It's like sending your child to a private school or scouts in the 80s when all the rumors were going around and nothing done. I think it is heartbreaking the amount of children who have been raped and assaulted and then nothing done to prevent it happening again and again and again.
I have actively insured my children have no links to churches or other religious institutes because they do not have their houses in order.