Incest and Gods Justice / Forgiveness

Incest and Gods Justice / Forgiveness
Ask the Rabbi
© (1998) By Rabbi Daniel Kohn

Q: My father is a religious man. He attends synagogue every Fri. night and Saturday. Lights candles, reads torah, but is also a man who is a pedophile.  He sexually abused me nightly for eight years. I've had to work through my anger and pain on my dollar, and without any assistance from him. He denies his actions and will not speak of it. Every Rosh Hashana he calls and begs me to go to synagogue with him. I will not. My question is.. If there is a god, will he/she/? forgive him?? And how do I forgive god for bringing me into this horrifying experience of childhood. Am I supposed to believe that everything has its reason?

A: You are certainly entitled to never forgive this man who caused you such pain. As for whether God will forgive your father, I just don't know. Our tradition holds that somewhere, somehow, there is and will be divine, exact justice for all sins and crimes in this world. But how this judgment will be exacted is beyond me--or any other human being. All I can tell you is that I believe that the spiritual fate after death of any victim of a crime cannot be the same as the perpetrator of that crime. I desperately want to believe that the evil suffer for their crimes, whether in this world or somehow after this life. While I may not see this justice exacted, I certainly want to believe that God will ultimately seek recompense for all sins and crimes committed by humanity. While our tradition holds that God is merciful, justice is a far greater priority--this is how the Jewish tradition understands God.

Understanding and Helping The Suicidal Person

Understanding and Helping The Suicidal Person

American Association of Suicidology - October 23, 2002

Be Aware of the Warning Signs

There is no typical suicide victim. It happens to young and old, rich and poor. Fortunately there are some common warning signs which, when acted upon, can save lives. Here are some signs to look for:

A suicidal person might be suicidal if he or she:

1. * Talks about committing suicide
2. * Has trouble eating or sleeping
3. * Experiences drastic changes in behavior
4. * Withdraws from friends and/or social activities
5. * Loses interest in hobbies, work, school, etc.
6. * Prepares for death by making out a will and final arrangements
7. * Gives away prized possessions
8. * Has attempted suicide before
9. * Takes unnecessary risks
10. * Has had recent severe losses
11. * Is preoccupied with death and dying
12. * Loses interest in their personal appearance
13. * Increases their use of alcohol or drugs

What To Do

Here are some ways to be helpful to someone who is threatening suicide:

1. * Be direct. Talk openly and matter-of-factly about suicide.
2. * Be willing to listen. Allow expressions of feelings. Accept the feelings.
3. * Be non-judgmental. Don't debate whether suicide is right or wrong, or feelings are good or bad. Don't lecture on the value of life.
4. * Get involved. Become available. Show interest and support.
5. * Don't dare him or her to do it.
6. * Don't act shocked. This will put distance between you.
7. * Don't be sworn to secrecy. Seek support.
8. * Offer hope that alternatives are available but do not offer glib reassurance.
9. * Take action. Remove means, such as guns or stockpiled pills.
10. * Get help from persons or agencies specializing in crisis intervention and suicide prevention.

Be Aware of Feelings

Many people at some time in their lives think about committing suicide. Most decide to live, because they eventually come to realize that the crisis is temporary and death is permanent. On other hand, people having a crisis sometimes perceive their dilemma as inescapable and feel an utter loss of control. These are some of the feelings and things they experience:

1. * Can't stop the pain
2. * Can't think clearly
3. * Can't make decisions
4. * Can't see any way out
5. * Can't sleep, eat or work
6. * Can't get out of depression
7. * Can't make the sadness go away
8. * Can't see a future without pain
9. * Can't see themselves as worthwhile
10. * Can't get someone's attention
11. * Can't seem to get control

If you experience these feelings, get help!

If someone you know exhibits these symptoms, offer help!

Contact:

1. * A community mental health agency
2. * A private therapist or counselor
3. * A school counselor or psychologist
4. * A family physician
5. * A suicide prevention or crisis center

Case of State of Israel Vs. a Sex Offender - Father / Grandfather

Case of State of Israel Vs. a Sex Offender - Father / Grandfather

Haifa, Israel

A 68 year old Israeli religious man pled guilty to repeated rape and forced molestation of his granddaughter, now an adult, when she was 7-10 years old, and was sentenced to 19 years in jail. In a landmark judgement, the judges call his crime and any sexual assults on children "a soul murder in a body that keeps on living."

____________________________________________________________________________________

Disclaimer: Inclusion in this website does not constitute a recommendation or endorsement. Individuals must decide for themselves if the resources meet their own personal needs.

Table of Contents:  

2001  

1. The District Court in Haifa  (12/06/2001)

____________________________________________________________________________________

The District Court in Haifa
(Unofficial translation from Hebrew)

S. Jobran - Head Judge

Y. Grille - Judge

R. Shapiro – Judge

The State of Israel against: (name withheld for protection of the victim's—his granddaughter's—privacy)


Ruling:

1. The offenses the defendant was convicted of:

The defendant, born in 1933, was convicted through his own guilty plea of felonies referred to him in a revised accusation, of forced molestation, rape, and sexual assault. The victim of these felonies the defendant was convicted of was his granddaughter, born in 1980 ("the complainant"). The felonies were done in the complainant from the time she was 7 years old to the time she was 10. According to the Accusation, there were many incidents in which the defendant did the felonies he is accused of in his granddaughter, the complainant, felonies of which he pled guilty.

Let it be noted that the accusation refers to several different laws, due to changes in the penalty law regarding sexual offenses. The most severe charge referred to the defendant is a rape offense of inserting a finger into the complainant's genital, and this is a great number of times. It should be noted that the accusation does not relate to the popular term of rape (i.e. with a penis), but the actions admitted by the defendant are considered rape according to the law.

2. The victim:

Before we detail our considerations regarding the appropriate penalty in this case, we find it important to bring up some facts that are relevant to our decision, as related to the victim of the felonies as well as the defendant.

These facts, along with the total of facts presented to us, which we will not fully detail, faced us with a difficult deliberation regarding the severity of the penalty in this case. An unusual and a severe case in which a grandfather attacks his granddaughter and does in her sexual offenses of the kind the defendant plead guilty for.

Since the defendant pled guilty, it spared the complainant the need to testify. As noted, this is to the defendant's credit that he spared the granddaughter further suffering. At the same time, because of the guilty plea, the court did not hear the complainant's voice and we were not presented with the full factual picture, as it related to her hurt. Nevertheless, the prosecution presented to us evidence from which we learned to know the complainant, even if just a little bit. Under these circumstances, the court acquainted itself with the victim through the victim's report, the video confrontation, and other documents we received for review.

The complainant grew up in house next to her grandfather's house, the defendant. Life wasn't peaceful in her home. Her mother divorced twice. The conflicts in the mother's house included violence. Under these circumstances, the grandfather, who was a neighbor, was the dominant figure and a substitute father figure and a shelter in time of trouble. This is at least how the complainant felt until she realized that the grandfather, whom she loved and admired, made her into a service tool for his deviations.

The grandfather/defendant was a dominant and appreciated figure in the community where the family lived. We shall say more of his character later. It be noted that this is a lawyer who was one of the top lawyers in the North. In addition, the defendant is a learned man with many academic degrees in various topics, and was a teacher of the Bible, and a guide for many, in the legal community as well as outside of it. Under these circumstances, the grandchild's admiration of him was great. And as great the admiration and love, is the greatness of the loss, when she realized as a child that she was sexually exploited by the admired figure she loved most.

Later on, and as a result of many events, the mother left the town where she lived next to the grandfather, and moved with her children, including the complainant, to a near by Kibbuz. Where she created a warm home, and where the complainant matured.

The defendants' schemes and his hurt of the victim were already exposed in 1990. At the time, the committee that dealt with the case through the department of social services ("Ptor Committee"), decided to transfer the complaint to the police, and following the district attorney's office an investigation was launched. However, for various reasons it wasn't possible to take a deposition from the complainants, and as a result the investigation did not progress.

Although the defendant tried to repress the events she lived through in the presence of her grandfather/the defendant, she did not succeed. The emotional damage from the criminal actions of the defendants seeped through her and haunted her. On the night of 10/27/96, when she was about 16 years old, she decided to end her life. Before she attempted suicide, that luckily was not successful, she wrote in her diary a chapter of farewell from her family, and sort of a will. From her words, which make the reader shudder, it can be seen and understood how much damage the deeds of the defendant did to her:

"I stayed until the last night was swollen by the night. There is no symbolism in it. My colors faded and did not get swollen, but it doesn't matter. I am calm now, I have no anger at anyone and I hope that I brought the best and as much joy as possible to whoever I could. I am saying goodbye and asking that you not be angry. It is no one's fault. I have never seen myself being an adult, and now I know why. I will never be one. In spite of what I wrote earlier, I am not departing in sadness and pain, this is not a moment's decision, but something that has been in my for years and today reached it's end. I feel that I have finished my job and that there is not reason to linger in this borrowed time, happy I will never be. I am going happy now. I am filled with peace and I am feeling complete with myself. The only thing that I am sad for is that I will not be able to say goodbye to everyone, but I want to say thank you from the bottom of my heart...."

Later on, the complainant bids goodbye to her family members, and in the end, she addresses the defendant:

"And finally, I just wanted to tell my grandfather: I wanted you to know that I forgive you. I don't know, maybe this is just a generous moment before the end, and maybe it is my famous forgiving nature. But I forgive you. I hated you for a long time, I thought of sweet revenge, toyed with ideas about placing complaints and hate letters, but no more. You did something that cannot be forgiven, a terrible, horrible thing. I want you to feel the deep pain of my parting. I want you to feel the deep and painful disgust of your deeds. That you'd ask yourself every morning how could you do what you did, But you are my grandfather, and in spite of it all I love you. Although you do not deserve it, I lighten your punishment and forgive you. Know that I dies with no hostility toward you. Now I will finish the book I am reading and take all the pills I have and some others I will find in the room—Acamol and Aspirins of kind. I am not sure where, but it will be tonight."

In the end, the complainant writes things (as she saw them then):

"Farewell to you, I lived with you like a wild flower,

I took the pills and it was so easy and simple.

Now I am going to sleep, good night world."

From the multitude of problems that accompanied the complainant through her childhood, it can be assumed that not only the deeds of the grandfather and his hurting of her were damaging. Her mother's double divorce, her violent stepfather, and the many hardships of the family contributed their own damage. However, it is especially in such a situation that the defendant, who raised the granddaughter as a child and father figure, had to know that he is the man she trusts and therefore that his hurting her and his exploiting her intensify the damage he did to her.

From looking at the multitude of evidence presented to us and from watching the confrontation video, a little of the terrible fracture in the complainant's soul can be felt, and one can try to estimate the intensity of damage that the defendant did to her in his deeds. We are talking about a youngster whose world was in ruins so much that she was ready to end her life. For all these years she needed various psychological treatments, and it seems she'll need support in the future as well. We are talking, and this is without exaggerating, of a soul that was murdered in a body that goes on living.

3. The defendant's character:

The defendant in this case is a special character. We are talking about a father of seven girls from his first marriage, and a grandfather to grandchildren, one of whom is the complainant. A learned man, with a BA and MA in law, degrees in literature, mathematics and philosophy. A second degree in bible, and a Ph.D. in Theology. In the past he was a known lawyer. He was a teacher and educator. In his past he served—before the state was established—in the Lechi, and in the army, in many public roles, some undercover. And more and more. No wonder that the learned defense attorney described him as "Ish Eshkolot."

According to him, the defendant was a victim of prolonged sexual abuse as a child. He claims that he did not know the impacts of his childhood events until, of his own will, and after he ceased contact with the complainant, he went for lengthy psychological counseling during which various events from his childhood were uncovered, including felonies that happened to him. And that maybe created what he calls "his soul corruption", and resulted in his hurting the complainant whom he defined in the confrontational video "a victim of a corrupted man who loved her."

From the facts as they were presented to us, it is seen that during the time the defendant sexually hurt his minor granddaughter, he developed a relationship with a young woman who was several years before that his student in school where he had taught. Later on, he separated from his wife and the mother of his daughters, and married that woman who testified before us. From his second marriage he has two children: A girl about 12 years of age and a boy whose 4th birthday will be celebrated in a few days. During his second marriage he underwent the lengthy psychological treatment, the same one he says uncovered the hurts he claims to have absorbed in his childhood.

The defendant does not try to reduce the severity of his deeds. According to him, he has no explanation to the hurt he inflicted in her granddaughter. He defines himself as having a corrupted soul and refers his deeds to the hurts he had as a child and which corrupted his soul. He does not wish this to be seen as justification, but an explanation. Otherwise, he says, he cannot explain how he—a man of law and books—who knew the severe taboos in the bible and in the religion and the law, would do the things he did.

To the defendant's credit, it should be noted that even at the opening of the confrontation with the complainant and before the accusation was presented to court, the defendant told the complainant that he will not make her be interrogated in court. His specific declaration that he believes her and will not put her through a cross-examination, stands to his credit when we come to judge him.

At the same time, we would like to press that while watching the video, we could not avoid feeling that even at this stage the defendant is trying, in a manipulative, complex way, through use of ambiguous language, to have his granddaughter, the complainant, to change the way she relates to him. It seems that the defendant is trying, along with taking responsibility for the complainant's loss, to place on her and on society the responsibility for his fall. It seems that he puts himself in the shoes of Jan Batist Klemens, the hero of Alber Kami's book "The Fall", where he desperately calls:

"Oh, young woman, throw yourself into the water again, so that I can have a second chance to save us both."

In fact, the defendant is asking, himself and through his wife who testified before us, that when we come to state his sentence, we think not only of his granddaughter as a victim, but also of him as a victim and of his two children from his second marriage. These children, too, are victims, having their father picked at noon from his family, without any previous planning and no explanation (as far as it such sad circumstances can be explained to children).

4. The court's considerations regarding the severity of punishment:

Sentencing is always hard, and ten times harder this time. As we said, the evidence is complex and we need to judge between options that each come with a heavy price and have painful impacts on the souls connected to the defendant, and who all will be, against their will or fault, victims of his criminal deeds.

In her opening for her statements regarding sentencing the defense attorney attempts to say, without reducing from the severity of the felonies committed by the defendant, that the defendant's deed might be a step less than those of other rapists. As said above, this is not a case of rape in the popular definition of the term, but under the circumstances that are defined in the law as rape. Under these circumstances, it was stated to us, the deeds need to be looked at as less than other rapes and the sentencing needs to be decided upon appropriately.

We think that it in not up to the court to place itself into the gradients of evil and to try and distinguish between degrees of depravity. It is not accidental that the law-maker defined various actions that involve penetration of the genitals as rape, and decided upon punishment that is appropriate for such actions. It is the direction of the law—which leads us as we come to give judgment—that we do not engage with the way and amount of penetration into the body. The punishment decided upon in the law it due to the depth of harm to the soul. And in that case, as is seen in the evidence before us, the severity of the defendant's actions is the maximal known to the law, and that we, too, who judge in similar cases, know.

The law-maker determined that long prison times be given for felonies that like the ones the defendant was convicted of. The ceiling of punishment for such felonies need to be our starting point, which we need to keep in front of us when we come to place our judgment. The law-maker determined a deterrent punishment so that criminals—either actual or potential—would see and beware. When we come to place our judgment we need to bring into manifestation the meaning of the law and it's goal in a way that the law will not be an empty slogan. This is especially true when we have in front of us a defendant that made serial offenses and who can never make up the accumulated punishment for all his actions, even if he was born today. What we are talking about it an accumulated jail time that exceeds the life expectancy of a man. Under these circumstances, and in order to clarify society's repulse of his actions, and to deter, it is the court's duty to judge in the severity determined by law. See:

(a reference to precedent case)

Beyond that, it is the duty of this court to protect the victims of the felony. Just as the defendant has the right that his rehabilitation and the needs of his family be taken into account as part of the reasons for the sentencing, so do the victims—those actually harmed by the defendant's actions—have the right for the court's protection. The more severe the actions of a defendant, the greater the need to put the emphasis on protecting the victims. See:

(a reference to precedent case), page 8-9, where the following was said, and that guides us when we come to place the judgment:

"When it comes to the public's interest, it is not enough to impress into the law standards of behaviors. The public needs to see them manifested at all times and to see them as an inseparable part of accepted social standards that protect the body, property, and dignity of each one in it. A forgiving punishment in cases of severe criminal behavior might result in a collapse of moral defenses and might be interpreted as compromising values and norms. It can damage the trust in the reality of the threat of punishment being manifested, and give a negative message to potential criminals predisposed to do similar felonies. In the same way that giving a real punishment is a sharp social manifestation of the condemnation that severe actions deserve, adopting a forgiving strategy would weaken the acknowledgment of the wrongness of the behavior."

But punishment is not only a matter of arithmetic. We are not dealing with the multiplication of evil, as it was detailed in the segments of the accusation, in years in prison mandated by the law, and then getting at a mathematical sum. We have to examine the punishment with its relative weight while also paying attention to the circumstances in each case and with each defendant.

In order employ the direction of the punishment law to the matter of the appropriate punishment, one needs to examine it in light of the legal directions of a constitutional law: man's dignity and freedom. The constitutional law declares guidelines that lead us in the process of manifesting the directions of the punishment law and determining the appropriate amount of punishment. The relevant directions for our matter are in the following segments:

(4) Protection of life, body, and dignity—Every person is entitled for protection of his life, his body, and his dignity.

(5) Personal freedom—One does not take away or limit the freedom of a person through imprisonment, lock-up, extraditing, or any other way.

(8) Damaging rights—One does not harm the basic rights in the constitutional law unless with a law that is appropriate to the values of the state of Israel, and that is meant for a good cause and in an extent that does not exceed what is needed or is according to the law and the power clearly invested in that law.

The constitutional law declares that the yardstick for punishment must balance the two that sometimes clash. On the one side, the duty in segment 4 is to protect society from the criminal. On the other hand, there is a rule about not limiting a person's freedom. It is understood that punishments, and especially punishments that include prison time, damages the basic right in segment 5. Therefore, the law-maker ordered that taking away the right for freedom—which is the criminal's right as well—will be done to manifest the legal duty in segment 4 of the constitutional law, to protect victims from the bad harm of the criminal. And would be done with attention to the direction in segment 8. That is, "to an extent that does not exceed what is needed."

Employing the fundamentals of the constitutional law onto the judgment calls for attention in sentencing, among other things, to the personal danger of each criminal. The amount of punishments needs to guarantee that the criminal will not harm others and will not offend again. When we come to judging the sentencing, we are not acting as the victims' messengers of revenge at the defendant. We judge the sentencing in a way that will guarantee, as much as it is possible—that the defendant will not be able to harm again. There are times when the personal details of a defendant will call for less punishment to reach that goal, and there are times when the personal details of a defendant make it necessary to sentence a longer imprisonment period.

This is especially true for sexual offenses. It these offenses the matter of age is a significant detail when we come to determine how dangerous the defendant is and how much to keep him away from society. Accordingly, we will not avoid making a difference between punishing a young man, who might repeat his offenses, and punishing an elderly man, whose chances of continuing his criminal deeds after completing the allotted jail time, are slight.

We reason that the duty of the law calls for a deterring punishment that sends an equivocal message: Whoever murders the souls of his children and/or grandchildren and does sexual offenses in them, be his social status as high as it might, one will be their judgment—be taken away from society and lengthy prison time. But the duration of the jail time will be derived also from the life expectancy of each defendant, and even more so, from their dangerousness expectancy.

Accordingly, and if a young criminal will come in front of us, we reason that under the right circumstances, and especially in cases like the one before us now, one should not keep from giving a long jail time, even longer than what is given to those with life-sentences. (See a reference to a file from 11/26/01). However, when in front of us is an elderly man of about 70 years, we surmise that we can accomplish the goal of law and the purpose of the punishment also by sentencing for jail time that is mathematically milder, but that for this defendant means, actually, a life sentence.

In summary, and when we come to sentence this defendant, we believe that he should be given a long prison time. This sentence will clarify that the policy for punishment is clear and consistent—removing rapists, especially those who hurt their children and grandchildren, from society. At the same time, the amount of the sentencing, and for this matter, the length of jail time, will be examined carefully so that it does not exceed what is needed. When the defendant is elderly, this amount is less than what he would be sentenced for had he been younger, since we reason that by the time he completes his jail time this defendant will not be able to repeat his actions.

Additionally, and against the severity of his actions, we suppose that two important factors need to be brought into the equation in regards to lightening the defendant's sentence. The first factor is his immediate admittance of the felonies applied to him, which beyond the legal meaning of saving a lengthy process was deeply significant for his granddaughter, the complainant. The other factor is the fact that the events that are the subject of this law suit happened over ten years ago. In the time since then, the defendant voluntarily went to psychological treatment and this after he realized that his deviation calls for appropriate treatment. Granted, this does not reduce the severity of the things he did, but we believe that a sex offender who acknowledges his deviation and seeks appropriate treatment, without any connection to a criminal process and when he has no threat of investigation or trial, needs to be given credit for.

We cannot ignore the request of the defendant and his wife, and to bring into our considerations the defendant's small children. Our heart goes out to his young daughter, who is yearning for his coming home, and to his son, who asked that his dad come to his preschool for his birthday, which falls soon. We are aware of the disaster that came onto these children, whose father was arrested and kept away from the family unit, without any warning. Truly, reality had made these children, too, victims of their father's criminal behavior, because of the things he did in his granddaughter from his first marriage and before these children even came to the world. We know that in this serious case we cannot sentence the defendant to a punishment that will reduce their pain even in a little bit. Our hope is that when it is time they will understand (even if not agree) that against us stood the duty to protect the dignity, freedom, and safety of every child and grandchild against harm and torment by a parent or grandparent or stranger.


5. Compensating the complainant.

The prosecution asks to require the defendant to compensate the complainant. The defense claims that the defendant himself did not negate the idea but claimed that the defendant gave all his assets to his daughters from his first wife and is today without any property. And that he especially would not be able to compensate the complainant if he is given a long jail sentence.

We are aware of the practical hardship of a prisoner to compensate the victims of his crime. However, the policy of appropriate punishment must establish yardsticks that would deter any criminal. One of which is the knowledge that the person who harms will have to compensate the victim for the damage he did.

In the case in front of us, no monetary compensation will even compensate for the damages incurred. At the same time, we believe that it is appropriate to judge in this procedure monetary compensation to the complainant that will take into account requiring the defendant to participate in the immediate costs of repairing the damage done. The complainant had needed years of psychological treatments and will need them in the future. It would be only right if from already at this phase we require the defendant to participate in these costs.

In is clear that in ruling for penalty we are not presuming to rule a compensation that reflects the magnitude of the damages. The complainant holds the right to pursue this matter in a civil suit in the appropriate court.

6. Summary of sentencing-

In summary, and after we weighed the multitude of factors above, we decided to sentence the defendant in the following way:

We sentence the defendant to 19 years imprisonment, our of which 16 are for active jail time, and the rest, 3 years probation. The probation being that the defendant will not commit any sexual offense within three years of his release from jail, including during vacations, if he gets one.

The counting of jail time is from 3/14/01, the date when the defendant was arrested.

The secretary will prepare a prison order accordingly.

We have to point out that if it wasn't for the defendant's old age and his guilty plea; and the fact that at least as this stage he decided to make things easier for his granddaughter and not put her on the stand, and not cause her further suffering—we wouldn't have hesitated from giving him a more severe sentence. And even then we wouldn't have assumed that it would express even a little of the suffering he caused her.

Additionally, we require the defendant to pay the complainant a compensation that will be a symbolic compensation only, in the sum of 50,000 shekels. This sum will carry interest and inflation rates according to the law from today and until the time it is actually paid.

Due to the nature of this procedure, the discussion in this case was done behind closed doors. However, now that the judgment was made, we believe that indeed the goal of this sentencing is to deter others so that they see and beware. Accordingly, we allow publication of this judgment.

If it were possible, we would have allowed the publication of the defendant's name and this is so that beyond the jail time we sentenced him for, his deeds would be public knowledge so that the sigh of Cain would be branded on his forehead. However, exposing his name would necessarily mean that the identity of his granddaughter, and would add onto the already great harm for his young children. Therefore, and to protect the complainant and the rest of his family, it is forbidden to publish any identifying details of the defendant and the family members.

At the end of this painful procedure, we want to address the complainant, the defendant's granddaughter. We do not presume with this punishment or any other punishment to heal the wound that the defendant did to your soul. It is not always possible to mend a wrong that was done by one man by the deeds of another man. Our hope is that the courage you had to bring this affair in front of the court and the deterring punishment, would save a similar fate, and even if for one girl or boy, and that this would be your comfort.

It was explained to the defendant that he has the right to appeal to the supreme court within 45 days from today.

It was given today, the twenty-first of Kislev, December 6th 2001, in the presence of the defendant, the defense attorney, and the representative of the prosecution.

Authorized for public from 12/6/01.

____________________________________________________________________________________

FAIR USE NOTICE
Some of the information on The Awareness Center's web pages may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.

We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml . If you wish to use copyrighted material from this update for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Basic Principles of Assertive Philosophy

Basic Principles of Assertive Philosophy

1. By standing up for my rights I show I respect myself and achieve respect from other people.
2. By covering up my feelings so as to never hurt anyone, I end up hurting myself and other people.
3. Sacrificing my rights usually results in destroying relationships or preventing new ones from forming.
4. Not letting others know how I feel and what I think is a form of selfishness.
5. Sacrificing my rights usually results in training other people to mistreat me.
6. If I don't tell other people now, that their behavior has a negative effect on me, we are denying them an opportunity to change their behavior.
7. I can decide what's important for me, I do not have to suffer from the tyranny of the should and should not.
8. When I do what I think is right for me, I feel better about myself and have more authentic and satisfying relationships with others.
9. I have a natural right to courtesy and respect.
10. I have a right to express myself as long as I don't violate the rights of others.
11. There is more to be gained from life by being free and able to stand up for myself and from honoring the same rights of other people.
12. When I am assertive everyone involved will usually benefit.

Guidelines and Rules to Protect Children from sexual predators - Ad Hoc Bais Din of Chicago

The following statement was made public as a result of the Ad Hoc Bais Din of Chicago deliberated on what to do with the allegations of a rabbi/teacher sexual abused children at Jewish Day School in the Chicago area.  Unfortunately, Chicago is like every other orthodox community. They attempt to do their own investigations when there are suspecions of abuse or neglect, instead of making hotline or police reports.

Please note in the following article the name of the alleged offender,  Rabbi Tzvi Wainhaus's  was never mentioned.

___________________________________________________________

 

Guidelines and Rules Aimed at Protecting Our Children
Jewish Image Magazine (Page 46)
Fall 2000, Tishrei 5761

Rabbi Tzvi Wainhaus

Under NO Circumstances whatsoever may the perpetrator teach in any classroom situation or any private or tutorial situation with any students, nor may he enter any school building at any time under any circumstances. Included in school buildings are any kollel buildings (adult learning center) that are open during non-school hours, such as during the summer, all school holidays,as well as Sundays and after school hours. He may not go to any mikvah (ritual bath) anywhere in the world at any time, including erev Shabbos, Erev Yom Tov, erev Rosh Hashanah and erev Yom
HaKipurim.
 

He may not go to any J.C.C. (Jewish Community Center) or any swimming
facility anywhere at any time. He many not sue the restroom in any synagogue, yeshiva, kollel, or any other Jewish facility at any time, even if this will force him to miss davening (praying) or krias HaTorah or learning. The only exception is during the times that it is permissible to be in a kollel as enumerated above. During those times, and those times only, it is permissible for him to use the restroom.  No children, even his own, are allowed in his house at any time while he is
present until the ad hoc bais din is advised to the contrary by his therapist.

He may not attend any simchas (celebrations), including weddings, bar mitzvahs, bas mitzvahs, kiddushim, brissim, vorts (lectures), banquets, or any other simcha anywhere or any time until the ad hoc bais din is advised to the contrary by his therapist.  He must be engaged in regularly scheduled uninterrupted intensive therapy with a therapist with whom the bais din is advised to the contrary by his therapist.
 

The Bais Din (Jewish Court), after much deliberation, and taking into consideration his health problems, will allow him to daven in different area shuls on Shabbos, even though there are children present, with the understanding that every Rav (Rabbi) will be made aware of his name, and to
make sure that there is surveillance whenever he leaves the sanctuary to use the restrooms or any other area of the building. Any Rabbi not wishing to take on this responsibility has the right to prohibit him from davening (praying) in their shul.

Rabbi Gedaliah Dov Schwartz
Rabbi Avraham Chaim Levin
Rabbi Shmuel Furest
Rabbi Zev Cohen

Medics probe boundaries of doctor-patient relationship

Wouldn't a rabbi having sex with congregants fall under the same category as a doctor having sex with a patient?

________________________________________________________________

Medics probe boundaries of doctor-patient relationship
By Leslie Katz
Jewish Weekly Bulletin of San Francisco - October 8, 2002

It doesn't take a medical ethics board to conclude that a doctor having sex with a patient violates the trusted physician-patient relationship.

But what about other, less extreme behavior? Does seductive language constitute an ethical infraction? Can a physician treat the accountant who prepares his taxes? Can a doctor hug a patient at the end of a visit? Harvard psychiatrist Dr. Carol Nadelson explored boundaries in the doctor-patient relationship, and who might be most likely to cross them, at a session of the 10th annual International Conference on Jewish Medical Ethics last weekend. More than 400 attended the four-day conference, co-sponsored by the San Francisco Hebrew Academy.

Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb

Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, a congregational rabbi and psychotherapist in Baltimore, added a Jewish ethical perspective to the discussion at the Park Plaza Hotel in Burlingame.

The question "Who am I?" is paramount, the rabbi said. "Often the answer determines what is right. Out of the answer should come ethical guidelines."

He asked those attending the conference session to answer the question "Who am I?" 10 times in writing. People jotted down answers ranging from personality traits to nouns such as "father" and "daughter." "If one of the answers was `physician,' that means you have a higher standard, a different standard than other people," Weinreb said. "I stand in a tradition of physicians going back to Hippocrates, to Maimonides." Nadelson's overview made it clear that a discussion of doctor-patient boundaries comprises a broad rubric. "We have a spectrum that requires judgment and careful thinking," she said.

"An essential component of professional conduct is respect for the patient's dignity," she added. "This includes the physician's language."

Violations can be major or minor, she pointed out, ranging from the most extreme cases of sexual assault to the giving or accepting of certain kinds of gifts.

Even "calling a patient by their first name without asking for permission can be a problem."

In cases involving sexual contact, doctors are often clinically depressed or addicted to alcohol or drugs, said Nadelson, a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Less often, they suffer from character pathologies, such as narcissism or paranoia.

As for the patients involved, "there is no one profile," she said.  "Regardless of any patient provocation, it's always the doctor's responsibility." However, patients are likely to share common aftershocks: a sense of betrayal, abandonment, shame and guilt.

In assessing possible boundary violations, Nadelson stressed the importance of context. While taking a routine medical history, a doctor may ask a question perceived by a patient as offensive or irrelevant.  For that reason, she said, "it's terribly important" that physicians explain why they're asking a given question. Similarly, a friendly or comforting hug may be uncomfortable for certain
patients. "Those with histories of sexual abuse may experience a hug or a kiss as an assault, a repeat of early boundary violations," she said. Like Nadelson, Weinreb considered the question of boundary violations in a broad context.

"I have seen sexual transgressions, but there are others for sure," he said. Among them is the failure to respect cultural diversity.

For example, Weinreb has been asked to serve as an expert witness in a case against a prominent psychotherapist in his area. Several patients were outraged when, speaking of spiritual aridity in their lives, the doctor suggested spiritual paths, including Jews for Jesus.

Surprisingly, however, Weinreb pegged arrogance as "the worst boundary violation of all.

"A passage in the Talmud says, `I can't live in the same world as an arrogant person,'" he said. "A humble person knows full well who he is. On the heels of humility comes true piety, true devotion."

______________________________

Note from The Awareness

Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, the the former Executive Vice President of the Orthodox Union and  formally was  the rabbi of Congregation Shomrei Emunah in Baltimore. 

 

Rabbi Weinreb, who earned a Ph.D. in Psychology from the University of Maryland, was a member of the Executive Committee of the Rabbinical Council of America and Vice President of the Rabbinical Council of Greater Baltimore. In addition, he is a member of the Ethics Committee of the Veterans Administration Hospital. A licensed psychotherapist, Rabbi Weinreb is also Rabbinic Liaison for NEFESH: North American Network of Orthodox Mental Health Professionals. Rabbi Weinreb is married to the former Chavi Taub. They have three children and nine grandchildren.

Confidentiality of Statements Made to Rape Crisis Personnel

Ill. Rev. Stat. Ch. 110, sec. 8-802.1; 735 ILCS 5/8-802.1

For more information contact:  

Illinois Coalition Against Sexual Assault,

123 S. 7th St., Ste. 500, Springfield, IL 62701-1302

(217) 753-4117

(a) Purpose. This Section is intended to protect victims of rape from public disclosure of statements they make in confidence to counselors of organizations established to help them. On or after July 1, 1984, "rape" means an act of forced sexual penetration or sexual conduct, as defined in Section 12-12 of the Criminal Code of 1961, as amended, including acts prohibited under Sections 12-13 through 12-16 of the Criminal Code of 1961, as amended. Because of the fear and stigma that often results from those crimes, many victims hesitate to seek help even where it is available at no cost to them. As a result they not only fail to receive needed medical care and emergency counseling, but may lack the psychological support necessary to report the crime and aid police in preventing future crimes.

(b) Definitions. As used in this Act:

1. "Rape crisis Organization" means any organization or association the major purpose of which is providing information, counseling, and psychological support to victims of any or al of the crimes of aggravated criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, sexual relations between siblings, criminal sexual abuse and aggravated criminal sexual abuse.

   
   



2. "Rape crisis counselor" means a person who is a psychologist, social worker, employee, or volunteer in any organization or association defined as a rape crisis organization under this Section, who has undergone 40 hours of training and is under the control of a direct services supervisor of a rape crisis organization.

   
   



3. "Victim" means a person who is the subject of, or who seeks information, counseling, or advocacy services as a result of an aggravated criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, sexual relations within families, criminal sexual abuse, aggravated criminal sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of a child, indecent solicitation of a child, public indecency, exploitation of a child, or an attempt to commit any of these offenses.

   
   



4. "Confidential communication" means any communication between a victim and a rape crisis counseling in the course of providing information, counseling, and advocacy. The term includes all records kept by the counselor or by the organization in the course of providing services to an alleged victim concerning the alleged victim and the services provided.

(c) Waiver of privilege:

1. The confidential nature of the communication is not waived by the presence of a third person who further expresses the interests of the victim at the time of the communication; group counseling; or disclosure to a third person with the consent of the victim when reasonably necessary to accomplish the purpose for which the counselor is consulted.

   
   



2. The confidential nature of counseling records is not waived when: the victims inspects the records, or in the case of a minor child less than 12 years of age, a parent or guardian' whose interest are not adverse to the minor inspects the records; or in the case of a minor victim 12 years or older, a parent or guardian whose interests are not adverse to the minor inspects the records with the victim's consent.

   
   



3. When a victim is deceased or has been adjudged incompetent by a court of competent jurisdiction, the victim's guardian or the executor or administrator of the victim's estate may waive the privilege established by this Section, unless the guardian, executor, or administrator has an interest adverse to the victim.

(d) Confidentiality. Except as provided in this Act, no rape crisis counselor shall disclose any confidential communication or be examined as a witness in any civil or criminal proceeding as to any confidential communication without the written consent of the victim or a representative of the victim as provided in subparagraph (e).

(e) A rape crisis counselor may disclose a confidential communication without the consent of the victim if failure to disclose is likely to result in a clear, imminent risk of serious physical injury or death of the victim or another person. Any rape crisis counselor or rape crisis organization participating in good faith in the disclosing of records and communications under the Act shall have immunity from any liability, civil, criminal or otherwise that might result from the action, In any proceeding, civil or criminal, arising out of a disclosure under the Section, the good faith of any rape crisis counselor or rape crisis organization who disclosed the confidential communication shall be presumed.

(f) Any rape crisis counselor who knowingly discloses any confidential communication in violation of the Act

Commits a Class C misdemeanor.

NCSY Conduct Policy and Behavioral Standards

NCSY Conduct Policy and Behavioral Standards

Table of Contents: 

1. REPORTING ABUSE TO THE GOVERNMENT
2. HALAKHA
3. UNACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR
4. ABUSE OR HARASSMENT
5. SEXUAL ABUSE
6. HARASSMENT
7. WELCOMENESS
8. SEVERITY, PERSISTENCE and PERVASIVENESS
9. GENDER BASED HARASSMENT
10. INDIRECT HARASSMENT
11. POWER-IMBALANCED ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS
12. DATING
13. PERMITTED PHYSICAL CONTACT
14. DISCIPLINE
15. PHYSICAL FORCE
16. MANIPULATION AND CONTROL
17. NCSY PARTICIPANT BEHAVIORAL STANDARDS
18. UNACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR
19. Procedures of the office of Ombudsman

____________________________________________________________________________________

NCSY Conduct Policy and Behavioral Standards
Orthodox Union.org - October 6, 2002
http://www.ou.org/oupr/2000/comm/conduct.htm


NCSY is committed to providing a safe and appropriate environment for all participants and employees. All NCSY Staff members are expected to positively contribute to this environment.

As part of NCSY's goal of deepening Jewish identity and encouraging greater Torah commitment, all NCSY Staff shall encourage participants' self-confidence, rooted in self-competence. NCSY should endeavor to help the adolescents in their charge grow and become who they can be within their familial context.

NCSY Staff must work to maintain and ultimately enhance participants' relationships with and respect for their parents, and work to help children learn how to develop a wide range of good relationships with peers, school personnel, and members of their community. When a conflict arises between NCSY and parents a mediating authority agreeable to both should be consulted. NCSY Staff should encourage respect for diversity and multiple sources of guidance in those NCSYers for whom they serve as mentor.

To achieve these goals, all NCSY Staff and NCSYers are expected to adhere to the Conduct Policy and Behavioral Standards in this document. This policy applies to all NCSY operations and programs, as well as to contacts between Staff, or between Staff and members, that take place outside the context of NCSY.

NCSY will send a copy of this Conduct Policy and Behavioral Standards to all Synagogue Rabbis, Presidents, and Youth Chairpersons of synagogues sponsoring Chapters. It is essential that all affected persons understand the policy and how to respond if they feel they are being harassed or abused.

NCSY as an organization, and all NCSY Staff as individuals, are committed to the NCSYers' physical safety, and to respecting modesty and dignity regarding all personal and sexual matters in both deed and word. NCSY Staff must refrain from any deed or word that is injurious or demeaning in these matters.

Any allegations of abuse or harassment should be reported promptly to the NCSY National Ombudsman at 212-613-8361, or if the complainant is more comfortable they can contact their Regional Director or the National Director according to the procedure at the end of this document.

None of the above-mentioned reporting normally constitutes impermissible Lashon HaRa or any violation of any other Jewish Laws of Proper Speech. NCSY will not retaliate in any way against any Staff member, NCSYer or parent who reports a violation, or who assists in the investigation of a complaint.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Reporting Abuse To The Government

Each Government and State has its own laws regarding the responsibility of reporting suspected abuse. Regional and Program Directors are expected to be aware of the law and are expected to follow it. The US Department of Health and Human Services offers the following web site and hotline for information on laws in each state http://www.calib.com/nccanch/index.cfm or 1-800-4-A-CHILD (1-800-422-4453). This hotline is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The Hotline can tell you where to file a report and can help make the report. Health Canada has a similar web site at http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hppb/familyviolence/child.htm

____________________________________________________________________________________

Halakha

Halakha (Jewish Law) must be observed by all participants at all NCSY events. Shabbat must be observed at all times during a Shabbaton, whether during group programs or free time.

All halakhot of physical contact ("Negiah") must be observed at all times. Physical contact between members of the opposite gender is prohibited except to protect or safeguard someone in immediate physical danger, or to protect or safeguard synagogue or private property from immediate danger.

All halakhot of Yichud must be followed at all times. NCSY discourages activities and situations that leave two individuals alone, even when the technical violation of Hilkhot Yichud is not involved.

While respect can be communicated by gesture and tone of voice, language is the most powerful tool for conveying it. "Nekiyut HaLashon", cleanliness of language, serves as the standard that should guide everyone. Words should be chosen with regard to their impact upon the listener, and should confirm his or her sense of self-worth.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Unacceptable Behavior

While the overwhelming majority of interactions between NCSY Staff and NCSYers fall well within the range of normal healthy relationships, certain behavior should be regarded as incompatible with NCSY's goals and standards and therefore always prohibited.

The following behavior is incompatible with NCSY's goals and is therefore unacceptable:

mocking, ridiculing, berating, or any other speech that deliberately hurts the feelings of an NCSYer,
unwanted sexual attention in the form of remarks, jokes or innuendo about a person's body or clothing, or sexual activity,

denigration, public or private, of parents or their central role in the lives of their children,
denigration, public or private, of religious institutions or their leaders, including local synagogues and their Rabbis, as well as yeshivot and their administration and faculty, psychological manipulation or control of NCSYers by staff. Among the identifying hallmarks of this are attempts to restrict, rather than to widen, the range of resource persons with whom NCSYers develop relationships, and attempts to eliminate parents as critical influences in an NCSYer's life. The psychological health of each NCSYer must be protected just as their physical safety is protected.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Abuse or HarassmentChild abuse, Abandonment, Cruelty and Neglect, includes, but is not limited to, unwelcome physical and emotional harassment, and physical injury.

The United States Office of Civil Rights, under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, defines sexual harassment as unwelcome activity in two categories, which are described further below: "Quid Pro Quo Harassment" and "Hostile Environment Harassment."

• any demeaning or exploitative behavior of a sexual nature, including threats of such behavior,
• displaying demeaning, suggestive, or pornographic material,
• unwelcome physical contact, such as inappropriate touching, patting, pinching, punching, and physical assault,
• indirect or explicit invitations to engage in unwelcome sexual activities which may or may not include a promise of reward for complying or a threat of reprisal for not complying.

Sexual abuse or harassment shows no preference for age, race, appearance, or occupation. It usually happens to females, but males may be victims, too. The abuser/harasser and victim may be of opposite sex or the same sex. It may involve the abuse of:

• an NCSYer by a paid or volunteer staff member,
• an advisor by a regional or national staff member or another advisor,
• a staff member by another staff member,
• an advisor or staff member by an NCSYer,
• an NCSYer by another NCSYer.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Harassment is defined as unwelcome physical, verbal, visual, or behavioral mannerisms or conduct that denigrates, shows hostility or aversion towards an individual because of his or her sex or other legally protected characteristics, where

submission to or rejection of such conduct is made (explicitly or implied) a term or condition of employment, maintaining their volunteer position (chapter board, regional board, etc.), participation in NCSY activities or the granting of preferential treatment (awards, recommendations, scholarships, etc.) This is known as "Quid Pro Quo Harassment";

submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as a basis for evaluation in making personnel or leadership decisions affecting an individual. This is also known as "Quid Pro Quo Harassment";

such verbal or physical conduct has the effect of interfering with an individual's work, participation in NCSY activities, or living conditions, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment. This is commonly known as "Hostile Environment Harassment".

____________________________________________________________________________________

Welcomeness
Conduct is unwelcome if the recipient did not request or invite it and regarded the conduct as undesirable or offensive. Acquiescence in the conduct or the failure to complain does not always mean that the conduct was welcome.

If younger children are involved, it may be necessary to determine the degree to which they are able to recognize that certain sexual conduct is conduct to which they may or should reasonably object and the degree to which they can articulate an objection.

NCSY is particularly concerned about harassment by a person in a position of authority, since in these cases victims often feel less able to express that the conduct is unwelcome.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Severity, Persistence and Pervasiveness
Hostile environment sexual harassment is created if conduct of a sexual nature is sufficiently severe, persistent, or pervasive to limit the victim's ability to participate in or benefit from the educational program or to create a hostile or abusive educational environment.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Gender Based Harassment
Sexual harassment may occur between members of the same or opposite sex. Further, harassment based on a person's sex is not limited to instances involving sexual behavior. That is, harassment on the basis of sex may occur without sexual advances or sexual overtones when conduct is directed at individuals or groups because of their sex. This is often referred to as sex or gender harassment and violates this policy.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Indirect Harassment
A person does not have to be the direct and immediate target of sexual harassment to complain about it. Harassing behavior toward others may be so offensive, demeaning or disruptive as to constitute a hostile environment, though not specifically directed at the observer or individual lodging the complaint.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Power-Imbalanced Romantic Relationships
The difference in power and the respect and trust that is often present between an advisor and NCSYer, supervisor and subordinate, or senior and junior colleague in the same department or unit makes these sexual relationships especially vulnerable to exploitation. Those who abuse their power in such circumstances by, for example, granting preferential treatment to a member who has submitted to sexual favors may be found to have violated this policy. "Voluntary" participation in a romantic relationship does not alone demonstrate that a romantic partner's conduct was welcome.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Dating
Attempts by NCSY Staff to establish a dating relationship with an NCSYer are strictly prohibited, with no exceptions, as they are contrary to a healthy mentor-NCSYer or supervisory relationship. A dating relationship is not only incompatible with mentoring and supervising, but can also give the impression of coercion, and can lead to at least the appearance of playing favorites. In addition, a dating relationship between an NCSY Staff person and an NCSYer may fall into the category of a "power-imbalanced romantic" relationship.

Therefore, violations of this prohibition are grounds for immediate dismissal.

It is understood that dating between Staff members might also potentially fall under the category of "power-imbalanced" relationships. However, understanding the importance of such interactions, rather than prohibiting outright all such relationships, it is the responsibility of the Regional Director to the best of his or her ability to monitor all such relationships to assure that they not fail this critical test.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Permitted Physical Contact
NCSY Staff and an NCSYer of the same gender, or two NCSYers of the same gender, are welcome to engage in normal physical contact such as hugging or touching as an act of encouragement or consolation. This is permitted as long as the contact is both welcome and appropriate and not of a sexual nature.

Similarly, normal aggressive contact, such as that which would take place in a basketball or football game, or arm-wrestling is permitted as long as the activity is appropriate, welcome, and is not of a sexual nature.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Discipline
All NCSY Staff present at an event are expected to help the program organizers run their programs. All NCSY Staff members are expected to keep order and usher NCSYers in a respectful but firm manner. Should an NCSYer remain uncooperative, the Staff member involved should inform the Regional Director or person running the event for disciplinary procedures.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Physical Force
Physical force may never be used other than to safeguard against immediate physical danger to another person, to a sacred religious object, or to property if the results of damaging the property would cause physical danger to an individual. It certainly may never be used as a means to discipline a recalcitrant NCSYer.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Manipulation and Control
NCSY is committed to fostering healthy teen development, development of Torah middot, respect for all parents, respect for Torah institutions, and respect for all people. While teenagers often begin to rely more on peers as they attempt to establish their independence, NCSY should encourage the long-term primary role of family in the NCSYer's life.

NCSY regards the following as important to healthy adolescent development:

Recognizing that the chief goal in parent-child relations is the transformation of the relationship from one in which parents decide for children to one in which children learn to make sound and informed decisions with their parents as their most valued advisors,
Helping the NCSYer to develop self-confidence rooted in self-competence as he or she expands the range of skills that he or she can successfully employ, and the range of people and resources upon which he or she can draw.

In keeping with these goals, all NCSY Staff should always speak respectfully when addressing or speaking about NCSYers, their parents, their schools, Rabbis, shuls, etc. In addition, they should be sensitive to issues that may arise and foster respect for a persons right to a varying point of view. NCSY staff should listen and help NCSYers clarify their thoughts, concerns and feelings and attempt to inspire greater Torah observance. However, they should avoid coercing NCSYers by:

Applying negative pressure and fear to achieve a desired result. For example making an NCSYer feel that he or she will not be accepted if an undesired conclusion is reached.

Exerting emotional encouragement so strongly that the individual perceives emotional pressure.
Making the NCSYer to staff relationship conditional upon their decision.

Adolescent life is often a time of turmoil, distress and conflict. Extreme reactions to people, places and things are quite common during this stage of development. NCSY Staff must be especially careful not to allow an adolescent's normal occasional tendency toward "hero worship" to be transformed into an unhealthy relationship with a member of NCSY Staff. NCSY Staff shall be sensitive to such situations as they develop, and will endeavor to see that NCSYers are referred to the appropriate resources for assistance in dealing with them.

If it is brought to the attention of an advisor that his/her attempt to recommend a particular school or program is causing conflict with the parents of the NCSYer then the advisor should inform the Regional Director who should then consult with the NCSYer's parents.

____________________________________________________________________________________

NCSY Participant Behavioral Standards
In addition to adherence to the above policies and standards, NCSYers also have a responsibility to conduct themselves properly at all NCSY events and in all NCSY interactions.

The most important elements in proper NCSYer behavior are to treat both NCSY Staff and each other with the personal respect that lies at the heart of healthy personal relationships, and to follow Staff directions and instructions.

Events, that involve both trips and multiple chapters present require tight organization and diligent compliance. Clear organization and complying promptly with directions and instructions are vital to both the success of the particular event and the safety of the participants.

If an NCSYer violates the rules, or in any emergency situation which occurs at such an event, the Regional Administrator in charge of the event shall take whatever action he or she deems necessary within the parameters of this policy, and as soon as possible afterwards shall report the entire matter to the Regional Director, who shall promptly report it to the local Adult communal leader of the NCSYer's Chapter, and if necessary, to the NCSYer's parents.

Adult communal leaders should take lead responsibility, in consultation with NCSY, to inform parents of serious NCSYer misconduct, especially any misconduct that may lead to an NCSYer's suspension or expulsion, even though the misconduct itself is not illegal. The Adult communal leaders may seek assistance, where necessary, from outside consultants and mental health professionals, as well as from NCSY Staff where appropriate.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Unacceptable Behavior
Beyond making mutual respect the cornerstone of personal relationships, and beyond following directions and instructions, there are specific behavioral standards that apply to NCSYers.

• NCSYer abuse of staff will not be tolerated.
• Any behavior that threatens the safety of program participants will not be tolerated.
• Violence, depending on the seriousness of the act, may also result in referral to law enforcement authorities.
• Foul, obscene or profane language of any sort (verbal, written or electronic) is unacceptable.
• Smoking at an NCSY event may be grounds for immediate dismissal from the event at the earliest practical time
• Drinking of alcoholic beverages at an NCSY event may be grounds for immediate dismissal from the event at the earliest practical time.
• Use of illegal drugs and controlled substances at an NCSY event is grounds for immediate dismissal from the event at the earliest practical time, and may be subject to further disciplinary action.
• Bringing illegal weapons (such as guns, switchblades, sharpened box cutters, and sharpened screwdrivers) to an event will result in confiscation of the weapons, expulsion from the event at the earliest practical time, and may also be referred to the appropriate law enforcement authorities. Other items that are intrinsically dangerous will be confiscated for the event, and those who brought them may be subject to further disciplinary action. (Swiss Army knives, or small pocket knives, which are as much tools as knives, are generally permitted. In specific situations, however, the Regional Administrator in charge of the event may confiscate them at his or her discretion for the period of the event.)

NCSY Staff shall be sensitive as to which breaches of standards indicate the need to refer the problem to professional outside resources for further resolution.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Procedures of the office of Ombudsman

I. Reporting Procedures
The Orthodox Union Board of Trustees through its subcommittee National Youth Commission created the Office of the Ombudsman ("Ombudsman") to receive reports or complaints of harassment or abuse or any violation of the standards herein from any individual or victim of harassment. If the complaint involves the Ombudsman, it should be filed directly with the Chairperson of the Board of Trustees.

Any NCSY student or staff member, who believes she or he has been the victim of harassment or any third person (including but not limited to a parent or guardian of a minor) with knowledge or belief of conduct that may constitute harassment should report the alleged acts immediately (or at any later date that he or she feels comfortable) to the NCSY Ombudsman as designated by this policy. Anyone with a complaint may also contact the Regional or National Director if that is more comfortable. NCSY encourages the reporting party or complainant to use the report forms available from any NCSY Regional Office; however, use of the formal reporting form is not mandatory.

Any NCSY staff member who has or receives notice that a student member has been the victim of harassment is required to immediately report the alleged acts to the NCSY Ombudsman as designated by this policy

NCSY will respect the confidentiality of the complainant and the individual(s) against whom the complaint is filed as much as possible, consistent with NCSY's legal obligations and the necessity to investigate allegations of harassment and take disciplinary and other appropriate action, as necessary. No person named in a complaint will have any part of the review of that complaint. Submission of a complaint or report of harassment will not affect the future membership or status of any individual with NCSY.

Complainants should report any alleged acts of harassment directly to the Ombudsman. However, if the Regional Director receives a report, the Regional Director must notify the Ombudsman within 24 hours without screening or investigating the report. The Regional Director may request but may not insist upon a written complaint. As soon as practical, the Regional Director will forward a written statement of the facts alleged to the Ombudsman. If the report was given verbally, the Regional Director shall personally reduce it to written form within 72 hours and forward it to the Ombudsman. Failure of the Regional Director or any NCSY staff member to forward any harassment report or complaint as provided herein, will be considered a breach of responsibility.

II. Investigation and Recommendation (back)
The Ombudsman, upon receipt of a report or complaint alleging harassment shall immediately conduct an investigation. Due to geographic constraints the ombudsman will arrange to have a group of three professionals recommended by the youth commission of each region outside the New York metropolitan area and approved by the Ombudsman, consisting of a rabbi, attorney and a mental health professional available to assist if necessary in the investigation supervised by the Ombudsman. Regions in the New York metropolitan area will utilize those professionals from among members of the National Youth Commission. The Ombudsman shall promptly notify the NCSY National Director and the relevant Regional Director once a complaint has been made and shall provide a written report of the status of the investigation to the NCSY National Director within 10 working days. If the report or complaint involves the National Director or the Regional Director, the Ombudsman shall notify the Chairperson of the Board of Trustees or its subcommittee National Youth Commission and provide the written status report to the Chairperson. The right to confidentiality of both the complainant and the accused will be respected consistent with NCSY's legal obligations and the necessity to investigate allegations and punish substantiated misconduct.

In determining whether alleged conduct constitutes harassment, the surrounding circumstances, the nature of advances, relationships between the parties involved and the context in which the alleged incidents occurred should be considered. Whether a particular action or incident constitutes harassment requires a determination based on all the facts and surrounding circumstances.

The investigation may consist of personal interviews with the complainant, the individual(s) against whom the complaint is filed, and others who may have the knowledge of the alleged incident(s) or circumstances giving rise to the complaint. The investigation may also consist of any other methods and review of documents deemed pertinent by the Ombudsman.

NCSY may take immediate steps, at its discretion, to protect the complainant, as well as other NCSY members, pending completion of an investigation of alleged harassment.

The Ombudsman shall make a report to the NCSY National Director and the Board of Trustees or its subcommittee National Youth Commission upon completion of the investigation. A verbal report shall also be given to the accused and the complainant and/or his or her parents. The ombudsman shall use discretion and seek legal advice to determine if the report will be presented in writing.


III. NCSY Action
Upon receipt of a recommendation that a report or complaint of harassment is substantiated, the Board of Trustees or its subcommittee National Youth Commission will take such disciplinary action as it deems necessary and appropriate, including issuance of a warning, a suspension or immediate discharge to end the harassment and prevent its recurrence.

NCSY will verbally report the result of the investigation and any disciplinary action taken as a result of the complaint to the accused and the complainant and/or his or her parents. The ombudsman shall use discretion and seek legal advice to determine if the report will be presented in writing.

NCSY would like to thank and give credit to all the many people who contributed to this document.

____________________________________________________________________________________

FAIR USE NOTICE
Some of the information on The Awareness Center's web pages may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.

We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/17/107.shtml . If you wish to use copyrighted material from this update for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

____________________________________________________________________________________