LDS Church buys the silence of another 100 sex abuse victims

[I Have Questions]

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has agreed in principle to settle more than 100 childhood sexual abuse lawsuits filed against it last year in San Diego and across California, according to recent court filings in the cases.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs and the Utah-based LDS church, often referred to as the Mormon church, have filed joint motions in dozens of cases in recent weeks informing judges that they “reached a settlement in principle” during a private mediation session on April 10. Each of the filings assert that the “proposed settlement includes global resolution of over one hundred other claims.”

The terms of the proposed settlement were not disclosed and may never be released publicly. Unlike settlements involving government agencies, which are a matter of public record, private organizations such as the LDS church can keep settlement agreements confidential.

Attorneys know that the Church will pay huge settlements to ensure these cases stay out of court and so that members and the public never find out just how big and widespread the problem is.

[Dr. Shades]

The financial aspect alone should convince the church to quit doing one-on-one Bishop's interviews with minors.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

The financial aspect alone should convince the church to quit doing one-on-one Bishop's interviews with minors.

It hasn’t made a difference at all. For every sex abuse lawsuit filed against the church there are several hundred that are settled confidentially, pre-litigation — at mediation or arbitration. The vast majority of sexual abuse claims against the church are settled without seeing the light of day.

At any given time the church is dealing with thousands of sexual abuse claims. It never ends and the church never learns.

[toon]

It’s my understanding that assault cases like this may no longer be settled with a non-disclosure agreement in many circumstances.

[I Have Questions]

It’s my understanding that assault cases like this may no longer be settled with a non-disclosure agreement in many circumstances.

Really? If both parties want to agree a non disclosure agreement I don’t see how a third party can insist they can’t. There are aspects of workplace NDA’s that have been barred, but not sure how that would apply to claims like this?

[Chap]

It’s my understanding that assault cases like this may no longer be settled with a non-disclosure agreement in many circumstances.

Really? If both parties want to agree a non disclosure agreement I don’t see how a third party can insist they can’t. There are aspects of workplace NDA’s that have been barred, but not sure how that would apply to claims like this?

There is a good case for holding that allowing an abusive institution to buy the permanent and legally enforced silence of its victims with a large sum of money is not in the public interest. If that is permitted, the rich will be often be able to get away with criminal acts that should be punished, and only the poor will be brought before a court.

[drumdude]

Really? If both parties want to agree a non disclosure agreement I don’t see how a third party can insist they can’t. There are aspects of workplace NDA’s that have been barred, but not sure how that would apply to claims like this?

There is a good case for holding that allowing an abusive institution to buy the permanent and legally enforced silence of its victims with a large sum of money is not in the public interest. If that is permitted, the rich will be often be able to get away with criminal acts that should be punished, and only the poor will be brought before a court.

Exactly.

[I Have Questions]

Really? If both parties want to agree a non disclosure agreement I don’t see how a third party can insist they can’t. There are aspects of workplace NDA’s that have been barred, but not sure how that would apply to claims like this?

There is a good case for holding that allowing an abusive institution to buy the permanent and legally enforced silence of its victims with a large sum of money is not in the public interest. If that is permitted, the rich will be often be able to get away with criminal acts that should be punished, and only the poor will be brought before a court.

There is. But doesn’t that exact situation currently exist, both for the Church and for wealthy individuals? The Church has escaped much publicity and public scrutiny into its child abuse problem simply by handing over lots of cash in return for the victims' silence.

[toon]

It’s my understanding that assault cases like this may no longer be settled with a non-disclosure agreement in many circumstances.

Really? If both parties want to agree a non disclosure agreement I don’t see how a third party can insist they can’t. There are aspects of workplace NDA’s that have been barred, but not sure how that would apply to claims like this?

Federal law prohibits the enforcement of NDAs that were entered into prior to the act. Some states go further. For example, Californian law prohibits the enforcement of most regardless of when they were entered into, and that prohibition is not limited to assault or harassment in the workplace.

I agree that this can tie the hands of survivors who may otherwise have been willing to enter into an NDA for additional consideration. The public policy, however, is to prohibit repeat conduct that could have been avoided had there been some disclosure.

[Dr. Shades]

The financial aspect alone should convince the church to quit doing one-on-one Bishop's interviews with minors.

It hasn’t made a difference at all.

I agree it hasn't. But considering how sensitive the LDS church is to losing money, I'm surprised it hasn't.

For every sex abuse lawsuit filed against the church there are several hundred that are settled confidentially, pre-litigation — at mediation or arbitration. The vast majority of sexual abuse claims against the church are settled without seeing the light of day.

All the more reason the LDS church should take Sam Young's advice and drop all one-on-one interviews with minors.

At any given time the church is dealing with thousands of sexual abuse claims. It never ends and the church never learns.

Again, I agree with you and was not arguing against this. My only contribution here is to express surprise at how out of character the LDS church is acting. We all know it doesn't do the right thing for the sake of it being the right thing; it only does the right thing to avoid bad publicity or to avoid losing money. The fact that they doggedly keep doing something that's causing them to lose so much money is a head-scratcher.