 |
| Image from JTA for illustrative purposes only |
(I)ndividuals who have left the Orthodox community are more than four times as likely to have been molested as children than the general population.
Lest anyone think there was some sort of anti Orthodox bias in this study, it should be noted that Psychologist Dr. David Pelcovitz, one of the most respected Orthodox mental health professionals and considered an expert in sexual abuse was part of the professional group that conducted this study.
It appears that the more insular; the more extreme the religiosity of a community, the greater the chance that it will happen. And likelihood of going OTD seems to be almost guaranteed.
Is there a causal relationship? From JTA:
While Rosmarin said he hasn’t fully fleshed out the causal relationship between abuse and the abandonment of religion, he believes the study “was pretty conclusive” that there is one.
It seems as though there is. Why that is is something we can only speculate about. By using anecdotal evidence and some common sense. Here are my thoughts.
Experts tell us that the majority of sexual abuse is done by people known to the victim. People that have easy access to them. Like a beloved relative or a charismatic teacher. Being molested by someone like that who in many cases is seen an exemplar of Torah can be pretty shocking to the victim. It goes against everything they have been taught about modesty in Jewish law.
When they report it to authority figures they are often disbelieved, ignored, or told to just get over it. Sometimes even parents will advise that – believe the stigma of being a survivor of abuse will only make things worse.
And stigma there is. In spades. Not just for the survivor, but for the rest of the family. Shidduch chances become exponentially more difficult even for siblings that did not experience any abuse. Why would anyone want to get involved with a family that has been traumatized like that? Better to avoid dating anyone from that family. This is not an unusual thought process for parents and young people ‘in Shidduchim’.
There is also a sense by the survivor of great disappointment. To be sexually abused is clearly the opposite of what Orthodoxy teaches about modesty. Which may be the most focused upon Mitzvah in the more extreme version of it. After being harangued about it by their religious teachers and leaders (practically from birth) about modesty - and then seeing how those very same people react when sexual abuse happens to you is a prescription for leaving observance. There is no greater hypocrisy than that.
This attiude also results in abusers continuing to abuse new vitims freely reely since no one is going to do anything to them. In fact the more insular Chasidic communities have in the past actually forbidden reporting abuse to the authorities – conserving it Mesira - the grave sin of informing on a fellow Jew.
That most of Orthodoxy does not see Mesira that way doesn’t concern them. If abusers are allowed to roam free what can we expect?
Additional motives for these cover-ups (and that’s what they are) is the desire to not make the community look bad. They believe it is far worse to put a community in a bad light then it is for a survivor to get justice and to rid the community of abusers.
These are just some of the thoughts about why sexual abuse might be more prevalent in the more extreme and insular Orthodox communities.
I should note however that there has been some criticism of this study from unexpected sources. From JTA:
Some have expressed skepticism regarding the research by Rosmarin and Pelcovitz. While declining to comment on the study directly, Lani Santo, executive director of Footsteps, an organization that helps former haredim integrate into mainstream American life, said that while “we certainly see high rates of abuse reported by people” who have left the community, the decision to leave Orthodoxy was not necessarily due to the abuse itself…
Queens College sociologist Samuel Heilman, an expert on American haredi Orthodoxy, questioned the study’s methodology, telling JTA that he believed that the study undercounted haredim from the more insular Hasidic movements, especially as much of the questioning was done online.
The connection between abuse and the abandonment of religion was also not particularly simple, Heilman said, calling it a chicken and egg scenario.
Those who are already “on the borderline of ‘deviance’ are much more liable to be the subject of abuse because the abusers figure these people are already borderline and are less likely to be believed if they say something,” he said.
Heilman used “deviance” in the sense of individuals who deviate from the religious norms of their religious communities, which often include shunning secular education, limiting social contact with non-haredim and dressing according to distinct rules of modesty.
I hear that. But I also hear my initial thoughts on the subject. What is or isn’t true here is still to be determined. But I tend to side with Dr. Rosmarin who said that the evidence is pretty conclusive.
Food for thought, anyway.