Category: Clergy Abuse Crisis

It’s like having a public swimming pool without a life preserver …

A story out of St. Paul, MN, is a latest example of why so-called “Safe Environment” programs create a false sense of security and may even protect child predators.

The predator in this case was Rev. Curtis Wehmeyer, a now-convicted child offender who is currently serving a five-year prison sentence for abusing the children of a parish employee. The victims have now filed civil suits, exposing that Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis church officials actually knew soon after Wehmeyer’s ordination in 2001 that he was a threat to kids. They cite police reports from 2004 and 2008 involving Wehmeyer and boys.

The mother of the boys has pursued the civil suit because church knew Wehmeyer was a risk and did nothing, both boys are in intensive (and expensive) counseling, and the parish where she is working has cut her hours.

But here’s the clincher:

From the Minneapolis Star-Tribune:

The mother said part of her job at Blessed Sacrament was to administer the parish’s Protection of Children and Youth Initiative, including doing background checks on volunteers. She said she allowed her boys to go camping with Wehmeyer and hang out with him because she hoped at least one of them would take an interest in becoming a priest. (emphasis mine)

As would be expected, the Archdiocese is fighting back, saying that the abuse was all the fault of the mother. They say that she should have done more to protect the boys from the priest.

Before everyone piles on about how the mother “should have known better,” we need to look at the reality of child sex abuse in institutions:

• Her Archbishop (her “spiritual father”) told her that her boys were safe,
• Her Archbishop told her there were no predators in ministry,
• Her Archbishop was also her boss, and
• She administered the safety program and assumed that Wehmeyer had never been arrested or suspected of abuse.

And then there is this reality: Most predators are never arrested, never caught, and, therefore, never in fingerprint databases.

The Protection of Children and Youth Initiative and other programs like it are a good FIRST step. But in this case, they are nothing more than a safety net for predators. Parents must not fall into a malaise of implied protection.

What should parents do? Well, the first things are education, using your gut, and being vigilant. A healthy distrust of the “safety” of institutions is another good step.

As Instapundit and law professor Glenn Reynolds often says: Someone should write a book about that.

Yesterday’s big settlement announcement raised a question for me: What about the wives?

One of the perpetrators who was a part of the settlement, Michael Nocita, has now been sued by four different women for sexual abuse. He was removed from ministry and laicized. The Archdiocese has paid out big money to his victims.

It’s also been reported that he is married.

Anton Smario, a former brother who admitted that he was often nude in front of young girls in the Native Alaskan villages where he taught religion classes, remained married after he was exposed in lawsuits and admitted his actions.

Thomas Hodgman—the man who admitted to abusing me and at least two other girls—is married with children. He also still hangs out on busses with girls (albeit not minor girls. This time).

I can’t help but wonder: What do the wives think? Do they not take their husband’s crimes seriously because the victims were girls?

“Straw men” would say that these women may believe that they are married “for better or for worse.” I tend to think that even the Pope would bless the divorce of any woman who discovered she was married to a child molester.

But there are other things to think about: if these women have children, how can they—in good conscience—allow those children to have friends over to the house? How can they be sure that their husbands are not still abusing?

It makes the prevention imperative even more important.