Discovered something awful that my dead father did, should I share with my family?

[Black51]

My elderly father died earlier this year. I have since discovered some official letters in his desk saying that when he was a young teacher he was banned from teaching due to sexually abusing some of his male pupils (in the 1950's). I have taken the paperwork away. Please let me know whether I should share this information with my mum and brothers, destroy the paperwork, or keep it private. I don't know what the best thing is to do here.

No abuser should be hidden for any reason. I’m disgusted at the many posters suggesting you should do so.

It’s a burden to keep it to yourself and it’s not your responsibility to keep it a secret. It must be a terrible shock. Secrets like this are very dangerous.

How awful for you to find this out.

I think there might be victims who are keeping secrets too , they might be family. I think this is too much for you to bear on your own.

You don’t have to answer these questions on a public forum, but in your position I’d make the decision around the answers to the questions:

Was there any abuse in your own childhood growing up with him. Do you have any memories of him being unusually close or boundary crossing or “fun uncle” vibes with other children? Were there any other parents who banned their kids coming over? We’re all your cousins left unsupervised with your dad? Are there any family estrangements in their generation or the one below?

Are you male or female? Was your brother’s relationship with your dad similar to your own or very different? Is your brother’s adult life stable, happy, meningful? Does he suffer from any mental illness or have any issues with drink or drugs (abuse is a huge risk factor for all three). If he has his own children, were they allowed access to your dad during his lifetime?

Do either of you have kids? And have they ever been alone with your dad? Are there any other young children in the wider family or in your parents friendship groups who could have been at risk?

What are the risks regarding disclosing the documents? What age is your mum? Does she have a strong support group around her? What do you think is the likelihood that she already knows? We’re she and your dad together and living in the same house? Were the papers somewhere she could have stumbled across them?

These are hard questions to answer and in your position I would probably tell either a therapist or my own spouse/close friend so that there is one person I trust who I can chat this through with.

My instinct is that you should destroy it and not say anything, but maybe that's a bit much for you to carry alone - could you share it with one of your brothers?

You don’t have to decide right now. Take your time to process your thoughts.

You've posted in the first 5 responses without reading the OP. The man is sadly deceased.

I'm sorry for your loss OP. Homosexuality was illegal until 1967 your father may well have struggled with his sexual identity may have fallen foul of cruel retribution or may, just may, have been an abuser. Gay and bisexual men suffered terribly in the 1950s so please don't be too quick to judge Personally I'd chose one of the better options to believe. You knew and loved this man and should just shred this information and try to be as understanding as possible.

They may be evidence as sometimes once abusers die the victims start coming forward

Whether people already know or not, it's going to be an awful conversation. It might ruin the rest of your mum's life, or she might have known about it and minimised it all along.

Personally something that serious I wouldn't be able to keep to myself. I wouldn't be able to sit listening to people sharing happy memories of someone who did something so awful.

Your family have a right to know. If one of them were to find out independently and it transpired that you'd known for years, that could be a relationship breaker.

I think you should share with siblings and shoulder the burden together

I would want to know, it would take the burden of grieving for “a lovely dad” off me and although I’d be sad my illusions were shattered I could put my energies elsewhere, it also might confirm suspicions your brothers and mum have about his behaviour. don’t give him the benefit of hiding his behaviour in death

I wondered that too.
I think I would tell your brothers but not your Mum.
If she didn’t know it would or could be a terrible shock for her and change her perception of her life, but on the other hand it could answer questions she had about their life together.
It’s a difficult one @Black51and I’m sorry this has happened to you.

Do the papers give details? Is it possible this was a gay relationship? Given the time period involved and that he must have been very young himself? Overall I think I would share this with your brothers because at the moment you cannot be sure they haven’t been harmed by him and they, and any other victims deserve to be free of that. He kept the papers for a reason.

He's dead. He won't be doing anything to anybody.

OP I don't think I would say anything, I don't think anything good would come from it.

I wonder how old he was back in the 1950s? Is it possible this was a gay relationship? Back then it was illegal to be gay you see.

Nothing good can come of telling your mother.

You clearly haven't read the post you've quoted.
@Bobiverse refers to the man in the past tense so obviously has read the OP and knows he's dead!
She is making the extremely valid point that it's vital for people to know of historical abuse because family members or friends of the family might also have been victims who have never received the help they need because they've kept their abuse hidden.
That's a much more likely scenario than these being false allegations based on homophobia. If the man had been 'outed' he would have been much more likely to have been reported to the police, because, as you say, it was illegal at the time.
I can understand a family member trying to contort their thinking about a person they've loved all their lives. But objectively the likelihood of his teaching ban being the result of false information is extremely low.
It staggers me that your response is to assume innocence in the face of a professional body's outcome.
Sharing the information allows the family to make informed decisions. Even try to find out more about the circumstances of him being barred from teaching if they wanted to.

Someone else not understanding the need to consider the possibility of historical abuse. The man's dead but there's the possibility of living victims who have kept their abuse hidden.

I’m actually speechless at just how terrible the reading comprehension is of adults. Do you understand that people can speak in the past tense? Do you understand that when someone does, their actions still have an ongoing impact? His death is irrelevant. I’m talking about what he had the opportunity to do while alive, and why there should be a gently and open chat with family, especially anyone he had access to when they were a child.

Another adult who cannot understand what they are reading but feels qualified to comment. This thread is eye opening at the level of comprehension of so many adults.

Do you actually think I didn’t know he was dead? You actually think I was talking about him being alive? Seriously?

Quote from you, the first line.

Do any of your siblings have children? I would want to know if I had kids, so I could make sure he never did anything to them.

You use the present tense so yes it does read like you think he is still alive.

Do any of your siblings have children? I would want to know if I had kids, so I could make sure he had never done anything to them.

That would make sense but hey you do you.

"Never did anything" is the past tense not the present tense.

It's not 'hey, you do you'.
It's simple, clear, grammatical English.
The reference to having children is present tense because they are still alive and the concern for them is current.
The reference to potential action of the man is in past tense because he is dead and the acts were in the past.
You have used the presnt tense in your example too! You have simply rephrased the past tense element. 🙄

He was a teacher and was accused of abusing pupils. That's not the same thing as a clandestine relationship in a time when it wasn't possible to be openly gay. You may be trying to present the "least worst" scenario to the OP, but I don't think that minimising sexual abuse has a place.

I think the OP should at least have a chance of seeing her father in the best possible light