The Worst Day of Our Lives

 

On August 9th, 2023 at 2 AM I got a phone call from our child Grayson.  I was sleeping soundly and Nicole was sleeping in the living room because my CPAP was less than optimal.  My first thought was: well fuck they snuck out and can't get back in or the piece of shit car won't start or something.  

The next  words I heard changed our entire lives.  "Dad, I think I need to  go to the hospital, I took a bunch of pills and I'm really sick."  I got to their room and assessed them (first aid 101).  They had vomited quite a bit but we weren't sure what would happen next.  I got dressed, loaded them in the car and headed for Unity  Pointe ER in Rock Island.  I woke Nicole before I left and told her to meet us there. 

At the ER, Grayson was assessed and put on a hold for psych and a Pediatric ICU bed in Peoria because there are no PICUs in the Quad Cities anymore.  The drugs she took were her mental health meds and allergy pills and the  doctors were concerned about the mental health meds. 

Once we got the approval for Peoria, they were transported there by ground ambulance, Nicole and I took one car home, packed a bag and drove to OSF Peoria as fast as safely possible.  OSF was actually wonderful for them and we were hoping for a Psych bed across the street at Carle Methodist which had adolescent in-patient. 

Getting them evaluated for a bed was a challenge. The wait continued for days,  This started on a Wednesday, and they were finally seen late Friday evening and determined that they needed in-patient care.  Unfortunately Carle had no beds.  Finally we got a call at the hotel at 730 AM on Sunday that Heart Grove in the Chicago burbs had a bed, so we agreed.  The worst mistake we made in the whole ordeal. 

They were transported to Heart Grove and we drove home.  They put them in a bed that was on the children's unit, not the Adolescent Unit.  They took the underwear and socks we sent brand new in the package and didn't give them to them for several days. 

By Monday night when Grayson got their call home, she was sobbing, she'd seen a doctor, and a counselor but the promised group hadn't started.  They weren't doing anything school related and couldn't even log on to their Chromebook to check school work at Rocky.  

By Tuesday night things had gone down hill, they still hadn't been allowed them a shower, clean clothes or underwear.  Mind you this is a 16 year old child who was assigned female at birth.  They desperately begged us to come get them.  

Wednesday was family visit day and Nicole and I made the determination that Grayson was coming home come hell or high water.  When we arrived we demanded that they be released.  We showed documentation that we had locked all our meds,  made an appointment with their therapist and scheduled an appointment with a Psychiatric APRN to  get the meds right.  The doctor refused to release them.

We begged them to  let us take her AMA.  We were threatened with DCFS.  I responded to the threat with "I  work for them, it's not Medical Neglect if it revolves around mental health and they are not  actively suicidal"  This was met with crickets.

In the end, we relented.  By the time we had the family visit at 7 PM, Grayson's clothes and underwear had been miraculously been found and they agreed they could make it to the following Monday because it was a 5 day stay and weekends didn't count. 

I picked them up Monday and we came home. Thankfully for us this ended the bad part and we started rebuilding.  

Lessons Learned

The first lesson learned is you really never know when something like this might happen.  Grayson had a diagnosis but was on meds.  The night of the 8th  they regaled us with school stories and we watched the Cubs.  Everyone went to bed happy.  They were doing great and had weather many storms Sophomore year and made it through

The trigger was a falling out with an on line friend that we had no clue about.  It  sent them downhill in a hurry and they wrote in their note (we found the note cleaning out their room-Gut fucking punch), that they wanted to go to sleep and not wake up. 

Fortunately for us the allergy meds counteracted with the mental health meds and made them puke. 

The second lesson is make sure if your kid is on meds and in therapy make sure they keep their appointments.  We admittedly got lazy and if they wanted to skip those we let them.

The final lesson we learned was that the mental health hospital system in this country is terrible.  We are middle class professionals with good jobs and insurance and skills navigating health care and social work.  We can't imagine how poor people could deal with this. 

The Good News

After our scare last year.  A lot of changes were  made.  Meds locked up, more scrutiny of friends, more engagement.  Grayson, has decided to be a teacher.  They are graduating High School early in December with a 3.97 GPA.  They are already accepted and going to Northern Illinois.  They worked the summer at a day camp with elementary kids.  They are hopefully going to tutor  in an after school program at the Martin Luther King Community Center.  

They are happy, healthy, engaged and thriving.  Last Saturday we spent time at a hotel for our anniversary leaving Grayson by themselves overnight for the first time.  Grayson made chocolate chip cookies for her friends to  celebrate tomorrow.  

Grayson gave me permission to write this and I needed to write this.   

Fortunately life goes on. 

Teaching Kids That LGBTQI+ People Exist Isn't 'Grooming'.

It's been a minute since I wrote about anything.  It feels like I've forgotten how.  Sometimes issues come up that need my professional and personal perspective.  This is one of those times.  

In response to companies like Disney and Apple protesting the Florida 'Don't Say Gay" law,  many on the right including most of FOX News, have taken to calling Corporations and people who oppose the law, 'Groomers'.  The use of this term is intentionally inflammatory and used by the right to equate Gay people with child molesters.

I've been investigating child abuse in Western Illinois for DCFS for 28 years.  I'm a certified Forensic Interviewer.  Forensic Interviews are a specific type of interview to use with victims of sexual abuse.  So I can say without hesitation that teaching children that gay people exist is NOT grooming.

It should be noted that Florida already doesn't let sexual education classes start before 6th grade.  The idea that teachers are actively teaching kids in K-3rd grade about gay sex is ridiculous. Teaching kids that there are people who love each other and get married or stay in relationships with people of the same sex is not child abuse.  

What is child abuse are laws being put in place to deny rights to gay people.  Imagine being a parent of a trans child.  You encourage them or at minimum accept their being who they are.  You support them getting hormone therapy when they are 15 or 16.  In Texas this could get your child taken away and you pit in jail. 

My youngest child, Greyson (formerly Rowan) is non-binary.  They don't identify with either binary gender. We didn't groom them to be NB, they just are.  I guarantee you that I will support their life and their ability to exist and thrive.  

The GOP and FOX have recently started accusing Disney of 'grooming' children to be LGBTQI+.  Disney has made statements that they support peoples lifestyles.  The term grooming in this context is very dangerous and homophobic.  In the the 60's, 70s., and 80s,  people genuinely believed that gay "rubbed off" on people.  In reality you can't "catch gay".  You either are or you're not. 

Grooming is a specific term in my business used to describe getting a child comfortable with sexual abuse.  Grooming can be done within a family or without.  

The traffickers that Q Anon and the GOP is so concerned with, groom teens with money and drugs. It should be noted that traffickers don't have a political affiliation, despite what the GOP may think. They traffic kids to adults and the don't care who the adult voted for. 

Grooming also happens in families.  Parents who abuse their children groom them too.  It's subtle, and it takes time, but very few parents immediately start actively abusing their children.  The best analogy I can think of is foreplay between adults, only over a longer period of time. 

Equating grooming, with companies like Disney speaking out about discriminatory laws is a new low.  Laws like those in Florida and Texas pretend to protect children from "abuse".  A child who is LGBTQI+ isn't abused by living their truth.  What is child abuse is forcing a non gender conforming kid to conform to these arbitrary laws.  

 Depression In Teens

By Rowan Perion

Depression in teens is more common than some people may think. Some parents may not notice their teenager going through a depressive stage, or they may just think their teen is just being “moody” or it’s “just hormones”. In reality it is so much more than that. About 1 in 5 teenagers suffer from clinical depression. 

How Parents Can Affect Their Child’s Depression and How They Can Help.

Many parents do not believe their children when they’re depressed, they usually say something along the lines of “Oh it’s fine, it’s just normal teenager things,” or “You’re fine, kids your age don’t get depressed.” Words like those can cause your teen to go into even more of a depressive state. As stated in the article How Parents Affect Their Child’s Mental Health, “Meanwhile, parenting with a critical, dismissive tone can dampen children’s self-esteem and lead to anxiety or depression.” Telling your child what they’re feeling is invalid is very harmful and can lead to more hurt and anxiousness.

As a teen with depression I know how hard it is to speak up. I know how it feels to be scared to tell someone, especially a parent, how you’re feeling. If your teen works up the confidence to come and tell you how they feel then you should listen to them. Listening to them can help so much. Also let your child know that it’s okay, provide some hope in the situation. “Let your teenager know that depression is a treatable illness. It is an illness like diabetes. They shouldn’t feel ashamed, and they shouldn’t be afraid to ask for help. There is help,” Joanna Bridger says in the article Why it’s Important to Pay Attention to Teen Depression. If you express to your teen that you understand and it will be okay, then you just gave them some of the best help they’ve received. 

Why Are Teens Depressed So Often?

Teens go through a lot throughout their daily lives. Believe it or not they have many reasons to be depressed. I promise you, your child isn't exaggerating when they’re talking about how they feel. “There are multiple reasons why a teenager might become depressed. For example, teens can develop feelings of worthlessness and inadequacy over their grades. School performance, social status with peers, sexual orientation, or family life can each have a major effect on how a teen feels. Sometimes, teen depression may result from environmental stress,” Debra Fulgum Bruce states in the article Teen Depression.

Some teenagers may experience bullying for things like looks, sexual orientation, etc, which can contribute to depression quite a bit. I know when some things about the way I looked were brought up to me I felt hurt. I started to see myself differently, not in a good way. Many teens also struggle with school work. Sometimes it’s hard for them to get their work in on time and with all those assignments and different due dates stacking up they can get stressed. “Teens think they are invincible, so when they feel psychological pain, they are more apt to feel overwhelmed by hopelessness and the belief that they have no control over their lives,” Tony Jurich said to the Portland Press Herald. Having so many things to keep up with and worry about is difficult. I myself get overwhelmed with the amount of work and other tasks I have throughout the day. 

Warning Signs of Depression and What Can be Done to Help Treat it. 

Yes, being able to tell if your teen is depressed or may have depression is hard, but there are signs that can be seen. In an article for World of Psychology, Borchard lists these common indicators of depression among teens:

• Sadness or hopelessness

• Low self-esteem

• Sluggishness (less active)

• Substance abuse

• Spending more time alone (this includes time alone from you as parents and time away from their regular friends)

• Decrease in desire to do things they used to like to do (sports, activities, hobbies)

• Physical ailments (headaches, appetite problems, sleeping problems)

• Problems in school (falling grades, getting into trouble, not paying attention in class)

• Talking about death or suicide (never to be taken lightly)

• Not caring about appearance

• Running away from home

Don’t worry, there are ways to help your child get better. Start by seeing a doctor. Depression symptoms likely won’t get better on their own. If you’re worried about your child you can go to a doctor to see what they might have in mind that can help. Debra Bradlet Ruder states in Why It’s Important to Pay Attention to Teen Depression, “A handful of antidepressants, which act on brain chemicals, are approved for teens, and their use should be closely monitored.

Various types of psychotherapy (talk therapy) exist, and it’s important to find a good match, as therapy is a relationship that requires trust and connection. Formal treatment aside, physical activities such as dance, yoga, or team sports can also make a significant difference.” I was put on an antidepressant and within 2-3 months I became less depressed, more social, more motivated, etc. I also went to a therapist and talking to her was one of the best things I had experienced through my depressive states. She helped a lot and cared about how I felt. 

All in all teen depression is serious and shouldn’t be taken lightly. If you see your teen may be depressed, try to help. Help will never hurt and it’s always good to try. 

 

Sources:

https://integrisok.com/resources/on-your-health/2021/may/how-parents-affect-their-child-mental-health  

https://www.webmd.com/depression/guide/teen-depression  

https://www.teenlife.com/blog/paying-attention-teen-depression/ 

https://discoverymood.com/blog/todays-teens-depressed-ever/  

https://www.mhanational.org/depression-teens-0 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/teen-depression/symptoms-causes/syc-20350985#:~:text=Teen%20depression%20is%20a%20serious,emotional%2C%20functional%20and%20physical%20problems.  

Social Media and Social Movements

 Guest post from my kid, Rowan:

Social media has a significant impact on social movements. Nowadays social media is a main source of information on things that are happening around the world everyday. Everyone spreads their opinions on social movements by using social media as their main outlet. Since there is a large amount of people on social media, many people can use social media to positively and negatively influence social movements.

Due to the amount of people who can voice their opinions and spread awareness on social issues, social media can lead to a positive impact on social movements. For instance, “iPhones and the internet offer new ways to spotlight injustice. With nearly everyone having their own publishing platforms in the palms of their hands, no longer are major news outlets the main filter of public dialogue. Social media provides a voice for anyone with an internet connection.” (Ruf 1). This shows that social media, an online platform, gives people a place to voice their opinions and connect to other people with the same issues all around the world.  Furthermore, “Part of what social media does is allow us to see a reality that has been entirely visible to some people and invisible to others. As those injustices become visible, meaningful change follows.” (Ovide 1). This proves that as social media becomes more popular everyone  is able to see the true problems in the world. Social media shows many people what is really happening and makes people want to help make a change. In the same light,  “Using social media to rapidly and efficiently spread information has been instrumental in organizing large-scale protests.” (Azar 1). Azar explains how with social media at everyone’s fingertips, protests can be spread and created easily without too much hassle. The information on protests and how to help can be spread so rapidly that it doesn’t even take long to get social movements to progress.  Again, social media is giving people a way to reach out and share their opinions and information on social movements. 

With social media giving an outlet for people to participate in social movements, it allows them to become lazy with their participation and spread negative opinions. Initially, “Roughly three-quarters of U.S. adults (77%) say the statement “social media distract people from issues that are truly important” describes these platforms well, with 35% saying it describes them very well. And 71% believe that social media make people think they are making a difference when they really aren’t, with 28% saying this describes social media very well.” (Anderson et al 5). This shows that social media is seen and used negatively when it comes to social movements. Social media allows people to believe they are helping when in reality they are doing the bare minimum and not doing much to help the movement at all. In the same way, “The core group are the users on the street, actively protesting and spreading their message, and the periphery are low-commitment participants, echoing and sharing that message through various social media.” (Granillo 2). While social media can spread awareness quickly, it also leads to people choosing to be lazy in their participation in social movements. Even when people are seeing that others are actually going out to protests, there are still many who just sit there and think posting and sharing is going to be the biggest help in a movement. On top of that,  “Wasow, a professor at Princeton University and co-founder of the pioneering social network BlackPlanet.com, said social media was helping publicize police brutality and galvanizing public support for protesters’ goals — a role that his research found conventional media played a half century ago. And he said he believed that the internet was making it easier to organize social movements today, for good and for ill.” (Ovide 1). This proves that social media does have an impact on social movements, but impact does not only mean positive impact. Social media gives an outlet for people to spread their negative opinions on social issues, leading people to only believe the negative side therefore hurting the movement. In summary, social media allows people to put in the smallest amount of work into a movement as well as allowing users to share their negative opinions on the social movements.

Social media does give a huge outlet for people to express their opinions about social movements, whether they are negative or positive. Social media can be a place for people to spread positive information on social movements. People can also voice themselves and share their experiences on social media. While social media can be good for social movements it can cause a negative impact on them as well. The amount of people who have different opinions on these social movements is large, therefore there are people who will use social media negatively as well as just using social media as a quick, less active way to participate in social movements. Social media should be used in social movements, but it is good to be careful on what to believe and share. Social media also should not be used as an easy way to participate in social movements, yes it is helpful but there are other things to do than just post and share. Going out and protesting actively can be much better than only using social media, so just limit the amount of social media being used and put effort into these movements.

Joe Biden is the Grandpa Who Raised You in Foster Care.

Long time, no blog.  We're just past Super Tuesday and Joe Biden and his team pulled off a dramatic upset.  Drawing on support from the Black Community,  Baby Boomers and pretty good chunk of Gen X, he won 9 states outright, and split the vote with Bernie Sanders in 4 others to win at least some delegates.

Nobody saw this coming last week,  even after South Carolina, most pundits, polls and voters had Bernie ahead in almost all the Super Tuesday states.  I have a theory about what happened. It's a little nuanced but it's based on my experiences working with victims of abuse, and it sort of makes sense.

When we deal with victims of child abuse, we do everything we can to keep the family together, and keep kid safe.  That's the mission, that's the job.  Every so often, (about 3% of all cases) the abuse is so bad, or it's been repeated so many times, we have to take the child into protective custody and place in foster care.

America and the Democratic party are the abuse victim, that need foster care for safety and healing. Now you're thinking What the hell is this guy talking about?  Bear with me.  My assertion is that Donald Trump and the GOP have abused the country so badly in the last four years, that we as a country and a party need to be protected, and given a safe space to heal.

Now when we take children into foster care,  we have several choices to make about placement.  Non relative licensed foster care is certainly an option.  Safe people who would take a kid in and protect them and provide structure.  In this analogy Warren, Harris, Castro, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, and Booker are the licensed non-relatives.  Good people who would take good care of us.

I've worked with foster parents who have traits similar to each of these candidates.  Foster parents like Elizabeth Warren, who keep a kid safe and have a plan for that kid daily, but also a kind heart.  Fosters like Kamala Harris who will take that angry ornery kid, give them some real truth and at the same time buy a plane ticket and an extra Disney pass, so the kid can go with the family even if the kid just got there.

Foster dads like Julián Castro, Pete Buttigieg, and Cory Booker, who inspire the kids they take in and make sure they do their homework and play their sports or go to their plays.  Foster moms like Amy Klobuchar and Kristen Gillibrand who do the same thing and also make sure the kids learn about body safety and consent.

All of the traits of all of these candidates are things I see in Foster Parents.  What they don't have in this analogy is they are not family.  Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders to a lesser extent are family for whole swaths of Democrats.

Let me explain.  When we take children into care, we do have choices of many qualified loving foster parents, but to try to make the kids feel as safe as possible, we first seek out relative foster parents who are members of the kids family.  People the kid knows.  This makes the kid feel safer.  As good as Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris might be as foster moms, they are strangers to a lot of people.

Joe and Bernie are family.  People know them.  I think the reason Joe is doing better is because he's like my grandpa Tom who was solid as a rock, somewhat progressive, but safe and comfortable.  Bernie is more like my Great Uncle Nat who was an inventor and somewhat eccentric.  Nat was a good guy and I think Bernie is a good guy, but Nat had ideas that people thought were too far out there and I think that's why mainstream Dems are hesitant to get behind him.

Joe is the guy who snuck you candy even when you didn't finish your broccoli.  Joe is also the guy who is tough enough to come running downstairs in his boxers and boots with a 12 gauge when somebody was trying to enter your house (true story about my grandpa).  Joe may be staid, and corny and boring, but the country wants from a little boring in my opinion.

I have long thoughts about the misogyny that tanked the female candidates and I wish they all could have stayed in because they all would be good Presidents, but because of the way things have gone, they won't be.  That sucks.  I hope Joe and if he makes a late charge, Bernie chooses a woman for Vice President, so that to people in this country in a few years, she will feel like family.

In my work kids have better outcomes when they're with family.  Taking a kid away from their parents because they are abused is very  traumatic.  This country and has been abused for the last four years.  The country and the Democrats in particular need to be given space to heal and feel safe.  Could any of the Democratic nominees do this?  Of course, but like an abused kid we crave the safety of family.

Bret Stephens is Wrong

On February 9th,  Bret Stephens penned an Op-Ed for The New York Times entitled " The Smearing of Woody Allen".  In the piece he argues that Woody Allen is getting unfairly treated because his adopted daughter Dylan said he sexually abused her when she was 7.  Bret Stephens is wrong.

I've been investigating child sexual abuse for over 2 decades.  I've previously written about my belief in Dylan Farrow's assertions.  In my opinion she's telling the truth. She's always been telling the truth. In order to understand why, you need to walk with me for a minute about how children disclose and and how the initial investigation of Dylan's allegations were botched. 

In reviewing the way Dylan was interviewed and examined, there were so many mistakes made, it's little wonder that as Stephens writes " An in-depth, contemporaneous and independent investigation into the allegations, conducted over several months by the Yale-New Haven Hospital in 1992 and 1993, noted that there were “important inconsistencies in Dylan’s statements,” and that “her descriptions of the details surrounding the alleged events were unusual and were inconsistent.” It concluded categorically: “It is our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused by Mr. Allen.”

The fact is, if Dylan had been interviewed using modern forensic techniques, the outcome of the investigation may have been very different. Today, forensic interviewers interview child victims one time. Children are not questioned by teams of doctors and social workers and police and attorneys.

Dylan's statements being inconsistent can be attributed to a very common mistake made in talking to children. Children generally want to be right when giving an answer to a direct question. So the fact that she said different versions to different questioners was the fault of the questioner, not the child. She was trying to give the best answer she could to appease the questioner.

Stephens asserts that 'if Allen is in fact a pedophile he appears to have acted out his sick fantasies on exactly one victim".  

First of all a child sexual abuser isn't always a pedophile. A pedophile is only aroused by pubescent or pre pubescent children per the DSM 5. A child sex abuser abuses children of any age. Secondly, does one have to abuse multiple children to be a monster? I mean most people think that fondling one child is bad enough. 

It's easy to doubt all of this. It's easy to say Dylan has a false memory. What's hard is believing her. What's hard is understanding that your Hollywood icon is a monster. 

Child abuse isn't something anyone wants to see or believe or accept.  I've seen enough to know that it's real, it happens and no matter how famous and powerful the perpetrator is, the 7 year old was telling the truth. 

RIP Chez Pazienza

Yesterday one of my personal writing heroes passed away suddenly at the age of 47.  Chez Pazienza was a writer, a TV producer and podcaster who I considered a friend. Details of his passing have not been released as of this writing, but it doesn't really matter. We lost a singular voice who could speak passionately about politics, music, movies, beer, food, you name it.

I don't remember how I came across Chez to begin with. I think that it was at his blog Deus Ex Malcontent or maybe Twitter. This was probably 2010 or 11. Chez's writing style grabbed me and I immediately purchased his autobiography Dead Star Twilight. Still to this day one of my favorite books.

The man had demons. He fought those. He was so brutally honest about his mistakes whether it be failed relationships, drug addiction, screwing up career opportunities, he never flinched from his truth or his reflection. 

When he started podcasting with his friend Bob Cesca, (also someone I deeply admire), I was hooked. Those guys were me. They cursed, they talked in depth about politics, movies, music and life. I was happy to support them.

When Chez, Bob and Ben Cohen started the Daily Banter, I was immediately on board as a reader.  I was also fortunate enough to be accepted as a guest writer by Ben, Bob and Chez. This brings me to one of my favorite personal memories of Chez.

Chez and I had a difference of opinion on a teen aged boy who had a threesome with two adult female teachers. Both of our opinions were published at the Banter.  We had an email and text exchange and finally a brief phone call. He could not have been kinder. I will always be thankful for his advice and encouragement.

The last few years, Chez seemed to find happiness with his fiancee, Taryn. He positively glowed when he wrote or talked about her.

The only people he loved more than Taryn were his daughters Inara and Madison. He wrote voluminously about Inara. Another thing we had in common, we have daughters almost exactly the same ages.

I'm going to miss Chez's passion, his acerbic wit, his insight. He truly spoke to me like few others have.

My sincerest condolences to Taryn, Chez's daughters Maddie and Inara, his parents and all those who knew and loved him.

RIP my friend, I hope in the end you found peace.

Joe Paterno Chose Evil

In the wake of the testimony in the Jerry Sandusky child rape trial, being unsealed there is new shock and outrage directed at Penn State and Joe Paterno and rightly so. Paterno facilitated what may well have been a criminal child sex trafficking operation by turning a blind eye to reports of Sandusky's depravity as far back as 40 years ago. 

As a reminder the first contact about Sandusky with police was in 1998. He wasn't arrested until 2011.  The nation in general and sports fans in particular were dumbfounded. People were shocked when reports surfaced that Paterno was made aware in 2001 and informed higher ups at Penn State who did nothing. 

Now we know that 22 years of additional victims exist. From a numbers perspective we are talking about thousands if not tens of thousands of individual acts of sexual assault and child rape perpetrated by Sandusky. Hundreds of more victims. 

It's important to understand that when a perpetrator like Sandusky has access to a victim, he doesn't just assault the victim once.  Generally speaking, there's grooming behavior, then inappropriate touching, then acts like oral sex and anal penetration.  In 22 years of conducting forensic interviews of children, maybe a dozen have told me it happened only one time.  

An overwhelming majority of sexual abuse and child rape victims suffer the abuse over and over and over. Due to confidentiality, I can't be specific but I had a case with a perpetrator who was abusing a child 7-10 times a day. This is the rule not the exception. 

The sad thing about all of this is the response by the Paterno family and Penn State officials. Anthony Lubrano, a Penn State trustee and a staunch supporter of Paterno was interviewed by Dan Bernstein and Barry Rozner on WSCR 670 The Score in Chicago today.  He's still making the case that Sandusky didn't commit any crimes.

I read much of the testimony of the victims in the trial, as well as the statements made in the original indictment.  The details provided by the victims are the key to their credibility. It's what we look for when interviewing victims, the more detail, the more corroboration.  Sorry, Mr. Lubrano, but the allegations aren't uncorroborated. 

It's important to remember that as many as 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 boys are sexually abused. The percentage of false reports is infinitesimal. Very few people make up sex abuse allegations, that's not to say there aren't false reports, but we members of the child protection community can weed those out pretty quickly.  

Today's revelations underscore one of the things we tell people.  If you see or suspect child abuse call the authorities. The worst thing that will happen is that professionals will meet with a child and determine they are safe, and not being abused.  

All of the coaches named today bear some responsibility for the evil they let go unchecked, but Paterno was the man in charge. A man charged with molding young men into productive adults, didn't have time for a 14 year old telling him he was abused. He told the young man John Doe 150, "I don’t want to hear about any of that kind of stuff, I have a football season to worry about"

Joe Paterno was fond of talking about the Grand Experiment, coaching football and educating young men at the same time.  Paterno read the classics and often quoted Plato. Plato once wrote "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the law". Make no mistake, Joe Paterno was not good people.

Joe Paterno Facilitated Child Rape.

On the same day that an appeals court judged granted Jerry Sandusky a hearing on a possible appeal, a second story about the Penn State child rape scandal broke.  Penn Live is reporting that as far back as 1976 Joe Paterno was made aware of  Sandusky's  abuse.  That's a full 35 years before he was told about the abuse witnessed by a grad assistant in 2001 .

Per Charles Thompson of Penn Live: "A new bombshell dropped in the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal Thursday.

It came in the form of a single line in a court order on a related insurance coverage case involving Penn State, and its full ramifications can't immediately be gauged.

But that line was eye-popping in itself.

The line in question states that one of Penn State's insurers has claimed "in 1976, a child allegedly reported to PSU's Head CoachJoseph Paterno that he (the child) was sexually molested by Sandusky." "

To say this is shocking is an understatement. Paterno's excuse for not reporting in 2001 was that he was old and didn't fully understand what was being reported. In 1976 he was neither old nor confused. He was a  powerful football coach at a power school.

In 1976 there was no social media so it's entirely possible he could have at minimum dismissed Sandusky and at maximum had him investigated. There would have been no blight on the program nor on Paterno. There would not have been more than a national eye brow raising and a tut tut over Sandusky's crime.

Instead of doing right by children, Paterno chose to do right by himself.  He clearly thought his program would suffer.  Perhaps people would doubt his status, his genius. Maybe people would question if Sandusky was the only coach preying on young boys.

What happened since 1976 has been well documented.  Sandusky raped at least 10 boys and was convicted for it.  He used his position of authority at his charity First Mile and his stature as a coach to groom them. He gave them gifts of team merchandise and trips to bowl games to buy their silence.

The fact that Paterno was aware of Sandusky's crimes in 1976 and still let him bring minor boys to bowl games could very well be considered trafficking.  Penn State Football essentially was a front for a child sexual abuser.  If Paterno was alive he could be facing Federal charges for criminal conspiracy

The tragedy in all of this is not that Paterno didn't get the perp walk he so richly deserved. The tragedy is that an uncounted number of boys were abused by Sandusky over a 35 year period and it could have been stopped. I'm spitballing here but I'd guess a minimum of 100 victims in those 35 years.

Joe Paterno facilitated child sexual abuse.  He knew about it. He ignored it. We once thought that he was covering up for his program for 10 or 11 years. Now we know that he was covering for 35 years. I'm not sure there's a level of hell deep enough for him.

Dennis Hastert, Child Molesters, Homophobia and Transphobia

Child sexual abuse is a scourge that this country tries to overlook, it's an epidemic that no one likes to talk about. Child sexual abuse became a central topic in the media and social media over the last two weeks. The nation reacted in shock when it was revealed that Dennis Hastert was a serial child molester. 

Recently former Speaker of the House was sentenced to 15 months in prison for a number of bribery charges stemming from his sexual abuse of teens when he was a wrestling coach 40 years ago.  In the aftermath of his sentencing there were a number of misconceptions about sexual abusers in general and him in particular.

A number of people, mostly on social media started referring to Hastert as a closeted gay child molester because he molested boys.  Aside from perpetuating a bigoted myth, this is wrong for a couple of reasons.  Closeted gay men and women may have illicit affairs in secret.  They may visit bath houses or adult book stores. They may carry on relationships with someone of the same sex for years.  They don't abuse children unless they are child sexual abusers.

Child sexual abusers can identify as gay, straight, bi, queer, trans or any combination in between. Sexual abuse of children, like rape is about power and control.  It's about sexual gratification but it is NOT about orientation. Child sexual abusers often abuse children of both biologic genders. In 22 years in hundreds and hundreds of cases, the split between people abusing one gender or both is about a 50/50 split.

The most important aspect of child sexual abusers is opportunity.  They most often groom and abuse children they know.  Statistics show that about three quarters of children who are sexually abused are abused by someone they know.  There are a few child sexual abusers who do abuse strangers but this is extremely rare. The few cases I've done with abusers assaulting kids they don't know have happened in situations like sleep overs.

This brings me to the topic of the hysteria by right wing demogogues about Trans people using the bathroom they identify with.  This is just unadulterated bigotry and hatred. It is patently false that men dress up as women to abuse girls or adult women in bathrooms. As I illustrated above, child sexual abusers don't need ruses and costumes.

Claiming that bathroom laws protect women and girls totally discounts the fact that sexual abusers can be women abusing girls or men abusing boys.  Making sure men don't dress as women to abuse 'little girls' is just code for bigotry.

Dennis Hastert's crime brought the issue of child sexual abuse back to the public eye.  It's a horrific crime that leaves the victim scarred for a lifetime. It's crime that people don't like to talk about and when they do it's important that they use facts, not myth.

Gay men and Trans people are not child sexual abusers because they are gay or trans. That myth is bigotry, not fact. Child sexual abusers are child sexual abusers. Period.

R Kelly: Fame, Talent and Child Sexual Assault

Awards show season is upon us and Sunday night brought the Soul Train Awards to BET.  Generally speaking every awards show has some controversy, but last night's Soul Train Awards was closed out by R. Kelly, creating a firestorm across social media.

R Kelly was tried and found not guilty on child pornography charges in 2008.  He was first charged in 2001 after a homemade pornographic tape surfaced showing Mr. Kelly engaged in various sex acts with an (alleged) minor.  His defense team successfully argued that the age of the of the girl in the video could not be ascertained conclusively. 

Those are the recorded facts of the case.  For many people, who were quite vocal on social media last night, those facts are all that matter.  For many other people, a acquittal in criminal court does not equal innocence, and they argue that no amount of musical talent, celebrity, or money cleanses Mr. Kelly of the fact that he routinely sexually assaulted minor girls.

I have written extensively before about Woody Allen, Jerry Sandusky, Josh Duggar and numerous other predators.  As a 21 year veteran child abuse investigator I've investigated teachers, priests, lawyers, doctors and police all who were serial predators.  They all have a lot in common with R Kelly.  

Serial predators like those I mention have some amount of wealth or influence or both. Their wealth gets them the best attorneys, hush money and most importantly gifts to help along in the grooming.  R Kelly clearly had an excellent legal team as evidenced by his acquittal.  He had wealth and fame to impress the impressionable children and to pay off their families if necessary. 

Chicago authors and activists Mikki Kendall and Jamie Nesbitt have written and tweeted extensively about R Kelly's predilections.  Not only was Kelly's limo seen around neighborhood schools, but his crew would routinely approach young black girls with invites to see Kelly.  These predatory behaviors didn't start in 2001. They go as far back as at least 1993. Nor did they stop in 2008 as several people can attest to. 

This brings up another point, in the case of R Kelly as is all to often the case elsewhere, the victims are girls and boys who are targeted for a very specific reason.  In the case of Kelly, those girls were young and black.  Black girls are sexually victimized as minors at a far higher rate than white girls and in general a higher rate than other girls of color. 

There are many theories as to why this is, but in the main it's because black girls are sexualized at a much younger age.  Again, I'd refer you to Mikki Kendall on Twitter and the hashtag #FastTailedGirls. Viewing black girls as sexual objects at a young age is disgusting, but unfortunately true. It's because young black victims are less likely to be believed.

These views of black girls are also why they're trafficked at much higher rates and at much younger ages, but that's a column for another time. 

In cases like Sandusky, the predator specifically went after boys who were in his youth program. Boys who were troubled, whom he bought off with gifts and trips.  Boys who he thought no one would believe.  

Woody Allen allegedly sexually abused his young daughter.  Josh Duggar abused his sisters while they were sleeping.  Again, preying on people whom they could portray as confused or mistaken. Children who most likely would not be believed. 

One other point to make in the Kelly case.  Many people have made mention of consent. For those who saw the sex tape, many thought that the young girl 'knew what she was doing' and therefore consented.  This is not unlike the Rob Lowe sex tape with the minor girl in 1988. 

People assume that girls in their teens are in control and want to be involved with these adult men. What they don't understand is that their 'consent' is purchased with gifts, celebrity and threats.  It may appear that they were willing participants but their will is compromised by the wealth, power and fame of the abuser.  The abuser threatens to ruin  the girl, or threatens that no one will believe her. Fear is a powerful motivator in these cases. 

The R Kelly case demonstrates that wealth, celebrity, and the very specific targeting of a very specific type of child, can and often does let a predator go unpunished.  

Regarding the controversy that was rekindled by Kelly's appearance Sunday night, I can only say this, no amount of fame, talent or money will change the fact that he's a predator and his targets are still roaming Chicago playgrounds. 

An Open Letter To Governor Bruce Rauner

Dear Governor Rauner,

Let me introduce myself, my name is Patrick pronounced with the Atrick, (sorry I'm a sucker for Digital Underground). Anyway there's a few things that we need to discuss.

I've been a loyal, hard working State of Illinois employee for 21 years.  I make a middle class salary that supports my wife and two daughters. You claim that you are for the middle class, but recent behavior on your part suggests that you are ready to lay off or lock out 30,000 plus middle class workers and I really wonder why that is?

I mentioned that I've been a loyal employee, but I should probably expand on that.  I'm a child abuse investigator for DCFS.  I've routinely seen things that few people have the stomach for and fewer still have the emotional capability to handle.  Horrible things Governor, death, broken bones, sexual assault. Things that people don't want to admit exist, much less see and investigate.

I'm not pretending that I have the toughest job in the state. I know that all State employees have their difficult days.  People don't realize that we work for children, elderly, poor, and disabled people.  We protect your highways through the State Police and we build your highways through the DoT.

You, Governor Rauner have vilified State Employees. You routinely belittle what we do with hare brained schemes like trying to hire back retirees to replace us. You demean our dedication and service to the public. We're not the problem, sir.

I'm sure you know, sir, that all State Employee's salary combined makes up 7 % of the State of Illinois budget. 7% of a 31 billion dollar operating budget is 2.17 billion.  Your personal wealth is rumored to be over a billion dollars perhaps as much as the 2.17 that all state employees make.

You have lost your ability to empathize with common people. You said publicly that you would debate anyone any time regarding your economic plan. As evidenced by your dodging debate with Representative Mike Smiddy you've shown you're all hat and no cattle with regards to challenging people to debate.

Maybe it was an empty promise or maybe you felt that Smiddy would be polished enough to clean your clock.  So here's the thing, I will challenge you to a debate. I'm a common man. I have a mortgage and debts and I make a middle class wage. I'm no orator and I'm no politician.  I will give you the respect your office deserves if you will give me the common decency my service deserves.

My job is difficult but I love it.  All of us love it. We love working for the people of the State of Illinois.  We're not greedy, we're not lazy, we're not dumb. We love our state.  We love serving the people. I'd love to have this debate in person and I hope you take me up on my offer.

Sincerely,

Patrick Perion AKA Quad City Pat

The Duggar Debacle

Trigger Warning

I wasn't going to write about the Duggar clan and the story about Josh molesting his sisters and a babysitter when he was a teen.  Then Megyn Kelly of FOXNews interviewed Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar.  It's hard to put into words how colossally self serving the interview was.  Not only that but it minimized one of the most serious issues of our time, the sexual abuse of children.


First lets start with the facts as they have been presented by the family.  When Josh Duggar was a teen he confessed to Jim Bob that he had touched his sisters and another girl over and under their clothing while they were "sleeping".


In the interview Jim Bob and Michelle claimed that the girls didn't know because they were asleep.  I've literally interviewed hundreds if not thousands (the cases run together trust me) of children.  Many of them say, "he touched me when I was sleeping" or "I was pretending to sleep".  For the elder Duggars to assume  that the girls didn't know is ridiculous at best and an outright lie at worst.


Jim Bob stated that "it wasn't like rape".  I'd like to respectfully call bullshit.  Sexual abuse does  have different degrees but the it's still a violation and one victim may be just as traumatized by touching as another is by rape.  The degree of victimization is in the mind of the victim, not the parents and not the public. 


Jim Bob and Michelle talked about being devastated when they found out.  The did send Josh away for a while, but paid no mind to the trauma their daughters experienced.  If this had been handled properly at the time Josh and his sisters would have been sent to specialized treatment for offenders and victims. 


The Duggar family has made terrible mistakes in this case, but they are hardly alone.  Sibling abuse is very common. The families that take it to  the authorities, despite how difficult it is are the families I truly admire.  Covering up for you child isn't being a good parent.  Confronting the issue, is.


Since the Duggar's failed all of their children miserably, here's what should be happening now.  If this case was in Illinois, there would be a hotline report on Josh's own children for Risk of Sexual Abuse.  This is taken when an offender has access and it is unknown if he has completed treatment and or an evaluation determining that he is at low or no risk to reoffend. 


As is evident in the show, Jim Bob and Michelle still allow Josh to be around his siblings who are still minors, so a report of risk would be taken on  them too.  If Josh sees an evaluator who determines him to be low risk, the reports would be unfounded. If not he would be indicated (founded) as would the elder Duggars and the family would be ordered into counseling.


Despite their best efforts to paint themselves as victims, the Duggars have only shed light on small part of their creepy family.  If any good comes of this, I fervently hope that kids who are being abused speak up. I hope that parents that find out about sibling abuse come forward.  Coming forward takes courage. In the end, Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar aren't just failed parents, they're cowards. 

No, White People and Media The "Mom in Yellow" Isn't a Hero

In the ongoing unrest and rioting in Baltimore and the media coverage of it, several narratives have emerged. The one that is getting all kinds of play is the "Mom in Yellow", Toya Graham.  People from the Police Commissioner Anthony Batts to Lester Holt have praised Ms. Graham for grabbing and beating her son on camera to get him to disengage from potential rioting. This thinking is naive at best and dangerously reckless at worst.

There has long been a myth in America that says, essentially, 'Black parents need to beat their kids so the cops won't have to.'  This myth is not just perpetuated by African American people but is reinforced by White people who think if African American people are "respectable" they won't get harassed by law enforcement. 

This myth has led to an uncountable number of child abuse reports that I have investigated in the last 21 years. Nationally African American children make up 14% of the population yet 31% of the foster care children are African American.  In Illinois the numbers are shocking. Black children make up 18% of the population and 68% of the foster care population.

The fundamental problem with the "Mom in Yellow" narrative is the underlying racism that blames Black mothers for their sons being hassled by police. "If only they had raised their boys right" I hear it from a few African American people, but I really hear it all the time from White people. Unfortunately I hear it from far too many colleagues. Sadly, this myth has not prevented incarceration or death for African American people. It's only reinforced generation after generation of whites thinking that if 'they' just 'behave' they won't be unfairly targeted.

Now, specifically referencing the Ms. Graham, I fundamentally get that she was trying to save her son. I have no problem with that. My quarrel is that by physically hitting and punching him, she was not only lauded as a hero, her behavior reinforced so many stereotypes of Black mothers, it made me a little sick. 

Ms. Graham's physical assault reinforced the myth I've described above, but it also reinforced the myth and extremely racist trope of the "angry black woman".  It reinforced the racist trope that the only way to control a young black man is to be more violent. Commissioner Batts actually said he 'wished more parents would take control' of their children like the Mom in Yellow did.

All of this thinking is exactly why Baltimore happened. Beating African American children hasn't solved the problems of cops targeting African Americans. Black people being respectable hasn't stopped their oppression by Whites. Freddy Gray was probably disciplined by his parents and told to watch out for the police and he's still dead.

It's incredibly easy to offer simplistic solutions like "I wish more parents were like the Mom in Yellow".  The complex issues that affect the African American community aren't so easily answered. Those issues will continue to plague Baltimore and America forever. No amount of "beating them before the cops do" is going to change the color of black people's skin. 

Mary Kay Letourneau Fualaau is a Female Predator

On April 10th, ABC's 20/20 featured a new Barbara Walters interview.  The subjects were Mary Kay Letourneau Fualaau and her husband and victim Vili Fualaau.  The hook for the interview was that that Fualaau's are soon celebrating their 10th wedding anniversary. To call this entire thing creepy is an injustice to creepiness. 

During the interview, the audience was treated to some inner details of Letourneau's abuse of Fualaau How she was smitten with a 12 year old boy when she was 34, and how one kiss turned into "an affair" Letourneau detailed a night when a shared a kiss after spending the summer helping him develop a gift for drawing.

"The incident was a late night that it didn't stop with a kiss," Mary said. "And I thought that it would and it didn't."

The problem with this entire interview is that this wasn't an affair.  It was child sexual abuse. Period. Mary Kay Letourneau was the first female predator of the modern media era. Her abuse of Fualaau was just as heinous as Jerry Sandusky, and she employed many of the same techniques. 

Developing a bond with the child over some months before making a sexual move. Using her authority as a teacher to enhance that bond and no doubt fawning over his drawing skills are textbook predator moves. I've written extensively about how the really good predators take their time. She was a really good predator. 

People don't like to think of women as sexual predators, and I have only done a few cases in 21 years involving female perpetrators of child sexual abuse.  Female predators do exist, but they tend to be under reported. Even a Google search of "Female sex offenders" turns up little in hard data. There is however, a copious amount of anecdotal information. 

What many female predators have in common is that they usually seek out their victims in situations like schools and day cares. Like male predators they choose their victims from vulnerable populations, kids with dysfunction at home. Kids who are needy. Vili Fualaau "grew up impoverished without a father and a tumultuous relationship with his mother. In other words, a perfect victim. 

Tracking down and locking up female predators is often times difficult, especially if the victim is a teen, these women aren't seen as predators or abusers. The boys who are abused by attractive young teachers are hailed as conquerors and not given the societal permission to understand that they were abused. 

The media reports abuse of boys by female teachers as "threesomes".  Other outlets report that the teacher "solicited" the student. In the case of Letourneau- Fualaau ABC chose to call it an affair. All of these cases are child sexual abuse. Attaching the words "child sexual abuser" to these cases gives them the stigma they deserve. 

In the 20/20 interview, Mary Kay Letourneau-Fualaau said she wanted to be taken off the sex offender registry. She said she wants to return to teaching. This should never happen. She may think she has atoned for her abuse but listening to her husband tells me that his pain lingers.

During the interview Vili Fualaau describes a dark journey since he was 13. Stating "I'm surprised I'm alive today" describing bouts of depression and substance abuse. Both common reactions of sexual abuse victims. 

In what may be the most surreal part of the interview, the Fualaau's were asked what their reaction would be if their daughters came home and told them they were 'sleeping with' AKA being abused by their teacher. Their response? They both said they'd be shocked and upset. Vili stated “I don't support younger kids being married or having a relationship with someone older,” Vili said. “I don't support it.” 

Vili sounds like a guy who totally wasn't abused doesn't he? 

Female predators are real. Sexual abuse of boys like Vili Fualaau is far more common than reported. Mary Kay Fualaau is the most famous case, but there are dozens and dozens every month. The victims are preyed upon just as surely as if  the perp were a man. Mary Kay Letourneau Fualaau doesn't deserve to be removed from the registry. She made her bed (literally) and now she has to continue to lie in it. 

Who Judges the Judges?

Trigger Warning Child Sexual Abuse 

This week in a ruling that shocked people across the country, A California judge reduced the sentence of a man who was found guilty of raping a 3 year old. Orange County Superior Court Judge M. Marc Kelly said that the rapist, Kevin Jonas Rojano-Nieto didn't intend to harm the girl. . In 21 years of investigating child abuse, I can tell you that thinking is not isolated, it's shockingly common.

The sexual abuse of children is something that most people don't like to think about.  Americans for the most part don't understand or want to understand how prevalent it really is. When a shocking story like the Sandusky Penn State case hits the media, people are aghast. Most people assume that convicted child rapists like Sandusky go to prison forever. Sadly that is not the case. Nationally the average sentence of child sex abusers is seven years.

In the Rojona-Nieto case, Rojona-Nieto cornered his 3 year old cousin in a garage and raped her. When her mother came looking for her, Rojona-Nieto covered the child's mouth to stifle her screams. It was only after the child complained of pain that her mother started asking questions that led  to the arrest and conviction.

Judges like Kelly are hardly rare. In the counties where I work, we've had similar issues with minimal sentences for child sex abusers, depending on the whim of the judge. Some judges do understand the seriousness of the conviction, other's adhere to the "the child must have done something" or in the case of teen victims the child was "as much in control of the situation" as the rapist.

A number of years ago I worked a case in which the perpetrator was convicted of sexual penetration of 4 children under the age of 4. In Illinois that is a class X felony punishable by a sentence of 6-30 years on each count. He was sentenced to a total of 40 years of a possible 120. Part of the rationale was that his offense was oral penetration, not vaginal or anal.

In another case, the judge convicted the man on fondling charges to 4 years in prison but found the man not guilty of sexual penetration because the girl said the man put his penis in her 'butt' but did not say that it hurt. This despite the legal definition being 'any contact however slight' so literally touching a child's anus or vagina with the penis is sexual penetration in Illinois.

In yet another case a judge found a man not guilty of raping a teen aged boy because the boy was chubby and the man's penis "couldn't possibly penetrated the boy in the way the boy described". These are just three cases that I'm personally aware of. There are dozens and dozens more and that's just in 3 relatively small counties.

Part of the problem is lack of understanding by judges.  As mentioned above people don't like to think about this subject.  There has been improvement in sentencing and in the understanding of victim's credibility in recent years due to a concerted effort to educate the judiciary, but there is still a long way to go.

Judges need to be educated not only about the suffering of victims, they need to understand that the intent of the perpetrator doesn't matter. Remorse doesn't matter. The involvement of alcohol and substances doesn't matter. All that matters is that they sexually assaulted a child.

Judges also need better understanding of recidivism of child sexual abusers. Studies vary but anywhere from 15-40 percent reoffend and are caught.   That number is conservative because child sex abusers who are released from prison are much savvier in their approach and often don't get caught.

Judges like Judge M. Marc Kelly are commonplace.  Judge Kelly stated that the perpetrator did not intend to harm the child and was remorseful.  I'd ask what part of forcible rape isn't harmful? As to remorse, every child rapist I've helped put in prison is remorseful. Remorseful that they got caught.

NBC's 'The Slap' Trivializes Child Abuse

Last week, NBC aired the premiere of it's mini-series "The Slap."  It's based on an Australian miniseries of the same name. According to promotions across the network, especially on the Today show, the incident that gives the show it's title is supposed to 'spark a conversation'.  I'm sure it has in some circles, but frankly, it's sparking the wrong conversation.

First, a brief synopsis (spoilers).  The Slap revolves around a relatively well to do family in quickly gentrifying Brooklyn. The family has gathered for a 40th birthday party and  there are a number of adults and children in attendance. As the day wears along, the children get exceedingly restless.

One of the children is acting out and his parents are seemingly oblivious. An adult cousin with a temper takes exception and when he confronts the child, the child kicks him. He responds almost automatically with a slap to the face.

That's it, the slap to the face of a child is the precipitating event that "tears a family apart" and forces them all "to choose sides".  Puh-leese.  If you've got so few problems in your family that this is the worst thing that happens? You're doing okay.

As a 21 year veteran investigator of abuse and neglect, let me make it clear, slapping or spanking a child is discouraged in my state and every other, but the reality is, it does happen. In Illinois, for instance we weigh factors such as age of the child, use of an instrument, location on the body, what happened immediately before the incident. There are better punishments than slapping or hitting, but not every hit or slap is child abuse by definition.

I frequently tell the story of one of my earliest cases. The report was a teen aged child slapped by step mother with a mark on the child's face.  I was so gung ho before going out.  I was sure it was an indicated report.  When I got there, I found the teen had called step mom a bitch and then called step grand mom a 'mother fucking cunt'.  Step mom slapped the teen out of reaction. Not the best choice, but not child abuse given the factors we use.

What really bothers me about the premise of The Slap is that there is so much physical and sexual abuse that is far worse than a slap.  Abuse like breaking a child's arm, sexually abusing them, beating them with switches, or killing them are all things I've investigated. Those are the kinds of child abuse that tear families apart.

In the last statistical year, 2013 there were over three million cases of child abuse reported  to hotlines across the nation.  That report also shows that there were over three million children identified as alleged victims of which almost seven hundred thousand were identified as indicated or founded victims of abuse or neglect.

Twenty three percent of all victims in 2013 were under 1 year of age. Sixty thousand kids were sexually abused, One hundred twenty two thousand were physically abused. Almost six hundred thousand were neglected.  In the latest reporting year on child death, 2012, sixteen hundred children were killed by abuse or neglect. The majority of those were under the age of 4.

I have seen families torn apart by abuse and neglect.  The death or sexual assault of a child tear families apart.  The unique phenomenon of a mother standing by an alleged perpetrator in the face of overwhelming evidence of abuse, is something I've seen time and again.  The extended family's response to the mother's intractability tears the fabric of family.

What 'The Slap' fails to see is that there are also countless families that take a situation like a slap to come together and grow,  Children are especially resilient.  One little girl I worked with who was sexually assaulted in the early 2000's, has grown up, graduated high school and college, and is on the way to her masters.  She's just one example of hundreds I know and hundreds of thousands nation wide.

Child abuse is terrible. It is real and it is epidemic. A national conversation on child abuse is a good thing. The problem is that NBC's The Slap trivializes a serious subject and fails to see that while a slap to the face of a child is a bad thing, the slap to the conscientiousness of America they hoped to deliver, went wide of the mark.

Is Lena Dunham a Sexual Abuser?

Trigger Warning Extreme Sexual content

Last month, Lena Dunham published a memoir “Not That Kind of Girl”.  In it she discusses numerous sexual trysts and her own neuroses about them.  Last week Kevin Williamson at NRO wrote a very pointed article accusing Dunham of sexually abusing her sister Grace who is 6 years her junior.  Williamson’s work was decried as conservative hit piece on a liberal feminist icon. 

While Williamson’s work would certainly qualify as a hit piece, it’s important to understand that he used Dunham’s own words to frame his work.  The issues that he brought up are not political.  Sexual conduct with a child isn’t a right/left issue.  It’s an issue that everyone should be disturbed by and Dunham’s accounts of what happened should give everyone pause no matter who they voted for.

 

When I saw the pull quotes from the book, I realized I needed to read it for myself to determine what may have been appropriate childhood curiosity and what was possible sexual abuse.  I obtained a copy courtesy of Mikki Kendall (@Karnythia on Twitter) and read the memoir.  

Aside from the astounding narcissism, there were several incidents between Dunham and her sister that were troubling at best and abusive at worst. 

In the passage that Williamson references in his piece,  Dunham describes and incident when she was 7 and her sister Grace was 1.  

“Do we all have uteruses?” I asked my mother when I was seven.

“pYes,” she told me. “We’re born with them, and with all our eggs, but they start out very small. And they aren’t ready to make babies until we’re older.” I looked at my sister, now a slim, tough one-year-old, and at her tiny belly. I imagined her eggs inside her, like the sack of spider eggs in Charlotte’s Web, and her uterus, the size of a thimble.

“Does her vagina look like mine?"

One day, as I sat in our driveway in Long Island playing with blocks and buckets, my curiosity got the best of me. Grace was sitting up, babbling and smiling, and I leaned down between her legs and carefully spread open her vagina. She didn’t resist, and when I saw what was inside I shrieked.

My mother didn’t bother asking why I had opened Grace’s vagina. This was within the spectrum of things that I did. She just got on her knees and looked for herself. It quickly became apparent that Grace had stuffed six or seven pebbles in there. My mother removed them patiently while Grace cackled, thrilled that her prank had been such a success.

There is a whole lot wrong with that passage.  

First, Dunham does herself no favors by writing about it in such a lurid way.  Grace offered no resistance because she was one! The fact that Dunham classifies Grace's behavior as a prank is incomprehensible.  One year old's can't comprehend pranks beyond playing peek a boo.  

Second, I have dealt with my own daughters when they were one, and countless other girls through investigations over the years.  I have never heard of a child inserting 6 or 7 pebbles into their own vagina.  I’m not saying it didn't happen, but the likelihood is very small.  

One year olds may stick stuff up their nose or in their ear.  They might even stick one pebble in their vagina, but multiple pebbles seem beyond the norm. One year olds simply don't have the manual dexterity to do it. It has been postulated that Dunham may have done it then called for her mother’s help, which is possible, but its only speculation at this point. 

I have done numerous investigations in which a 7 or 8 year old has fondled or penetrated another child.  Most of those cases have resulting in finding out that the perpetrating child was abused sexually and are displaying sexually reactive behaviors. 

Dunham examining her sister’s vagina and moving her labia is on the line between normal childhood curiosity and molestation.  The law regarding molestation is pretty specific that the touching has to be done for sexual arousal or gratification, which doesn’t appear to have happened.  If this were a case in my jurisdiction it most likely be investigated as a "Risk of Harm" rather than a sexual assault. 

Later, in the chapter detailing her relationship with her sister, Dunham writes:

As she grew, I took to bribing her for her time and affection: one dollar in quarters if I could do her makeup like a “motorcycle chick.” Three pieces of candy if I could kiss her on the lips for five seconds. Whatever she wanted to watch on TV if she would just “relax on me.” Basically, anything a sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying. 

What a cruel and callous thing to write. This shocking passage not only acknowledges a predatory bent in Dunham's affection for her sister, it essentially makes fun of people sexually abusing children. What a lark! I'm just like a sexual predator wooing a small suburban girl. 

This passage is particularly offensive given the cases I've seen in which candy, money and fear have been used to groom a child.  Dunham clearly has little or no understanding of how things work in the world, and clearly has no empathy for victims. 

The passage of the book that is hardest to reconcile comes in section 1 chapter two, "Platonic Bed Sharing":

I shared a bed with my sister, Grace, until I was seventeen years old. She was afraid to sleep alone and would begin asking me around 5:00 P.M. every day whether she could sleep with me. I put on a big show of saying no, taking pleasure in watching her beg and sulk, but eventually I always relented. Her sticky, muscly little body thrashed beside me every night as I read Anne Sexton, watched reruns of SNL, sometimes even as I slipped my hand into my underwear to figure some stuff out. Grace had the comforting, sleep-inducing properties of a hot-water bottle or a cat.

Again with the lurid language "sticky, muscly" body.  Dunham's admission that while her sister, 6 years her junior was laying next to her as she "slipped her hand into her underwear to figure some stuff out" means that she was masturbating possibly as old as age 17 while her sister (11 at the time) was in bed with her.  

In Illinois, "self masturbation in presence of a child" is investigated as Sexual Exploitation. I researched New York law regarding child sexual abuse and it's a little less concrete.  I was unable to find a "Sexual Exploitation" allegation, but numerous references of sexual conduct with a child. 

If I were investigating Ms. Dunham, my questions would be: Did you masturbate next to your sister? Yes. You're indicated for sexual exploitation. (Please note, 'Indicated', means "a reasonable person would conclude abuse or neglect occurred, it is not a criminal  indictment)

Having said all of this, given what Dunham has written, I think she would have been indicated for sexual abuse for the masturbation incident.  I don't think, however, that she is a child sexual abuser in the classic sense, meaning that I don't think she'd go out and abuse a child today.

I think that she was horribly sexually inappropriate with her sister. I think that she walked right up to the line.  She has no boundaries whatsoever as evidenced by her writing.

Dunham purports to be a feminist, an edgy provocateur and a voice of her generation.  Sadly that voice makes light of horrible situations.  That voice betrays a lack of understanding of the horrors of the real world.   

Dunham's  casual and flippant tone in discussing these experiences clearly show a lack of empathy for victims of sexual abuse.  This isn't a game. This isn't 3 pieces of candy for a kiss.  Children's lives are ruined every day, yet Dunham casually jokes about being a predator.  

In the end, Dunham's behavior with her sister is disturbing.  Even more disturbing is the fact that Dunham doesn't have a clue why people are rightly calling her out.  Dunham is about Dunham. Narcissists are like that.