I can’t help but think that this was the goal of those who proposed this bill in the first place: to financially destroy the Church. So many states, including New York, have passed or are considering similar bills. They’re not about protecting children, but enriching lawyers and giving politicians coverage by allowing them to vote for bills that make it look like they’re protecting children. How do I know this? Because the bills don’t include public institutions, only private and religious ones. More often than not, when covering the progress of these bills, the news reports don’t mention that fact.
A couple of years ago, the Colorado legislature considered the same sort of bill. When it came out that it did not include public institutions, the outcry was such that the bill was amended to include public institutions and the Catholic bishops gave it their support. But it didn’t pass. Why? Because the public schools pressured the legislators to kill it. So much for protecting children.
In most states, if a child is abused by a public school teacher, he or she has months, not years, to report the abuse and seek restitution. Even if the victim wins, the amount of restitution is limited by law to a few thousand dollars. Trial lawyers aren’t interested in taking those cases because the pay off is too small. So, for victims of abuse in public schools (a figure that is thousands of times larger than that by priests and religious) there is little hope of restitution or even of the perpetrator being punished. I suppose this doesn’t bother as many people as abuse by priests because public school teachers are OUR employees and the money that would be paid out to offer restitution would be OUR money.

This is just another case of atty.s afraid that thier pay off is going to be smaller than than they had planned on. They get the rules changed to suit them (statute of limitations) then want to fight and cry when the other side tries to protect themselves and the atty’s clients. Boo hoo! They should continue thier carreers in politics if they want to continue getting some thing for nothing.

The article mentions that the diocese has between $50 and $100 million in assets and between $100 and $500 million in liabilities. That is some rather fuzzy accounting.
Where is the offering going? Perhaps the laity should consider earmarking all their donations, so that their money is put to better use.

DML,
By “offering” I assume you mean the Sunday offerings that are collected in each parish. That money belongs to the parish and, contrary to popular misconception, is not available to the diocese. In that sense, when a Catholic puts money into the Sunday collection, they’ve already “earmarked” it for use by the parish.
There are in most diocese separate collections for the needs of the diocese. This money is usually designated for particular needs, such as seminarian education, Catholic Charities, retired clergy, etc… I suppose a diocese could use money from such a collection to help defray the costs of these lawsuits, but I suspect they would have to designate it as such, and I doubt it would come anywhere close to covering the costs of these lawsuits. The way dioceses traditionally pay for these abuse cases is by insurance policies. If that doesn’t cover it, they start selling assets, like land and buildings the diocese owns but is not currently using, and/or cutting back on services and ministries.
I certainly don’t blame the victims for what I regard as outrageous payouts as compensation for the abuse they’ve suffered. I blame the trial lawyers. They’re the ones who actually profit from these cases, sometimes their “take” of the settlement being even higher than what the victims get. And they’re the ones who jack up the payouts, exploiting sympathy for the victims to line their own pockets. They hardly consider the effect it has on all of the the innocent people who never abused anyone, but whose jobs are at stake if diocesan institutions have to close or cut back services to pay for these lawsuits.

I would concur with Bob on the nature of these statutes, adding that the other party who profits is psychiatrists who have counseled the victims and established the nature of the damages.
We do not hear as much about the sexual abuse rampant in the mental health profession and unlike the dioceses, the trade associations of psychologists and psychiatrists are not being sued (as they should be) for their role in covering up sexual abuse within those professions.

It is obvious these massive lawsuits and bankruptcies will continue because the church heirarchy and its conservative Catholic apologists still don’t get it. To them, and most of you, it’s all just a conspiracy by the liberal media, the “Catholic bashers” (whoever they are, trial lawyers, whiny victims, etc.
Lost in the sophomoric smoke screen is the core of the issue. You remember, the whole predatory abuse of kids. Not just that, a decades long policy and culture by the institution which enabled and concealed these crimes, and intimidated victims. If it hadn’t been for statutes of limitations and the political deference the church enjoyed for so long, this wouldn’t be a matter of financial settlement. Everyone involved would be looking at centuries of jail time, every parcel of property would have been seized and no one would look twice. If it were just some secular band of pedophiles, I don’t think there would be this whole cottage industry of apologists trying to cast them as the real victims in the matter (I might be wrong on that point, re the Roman Polansky thing).
As for the notion that the victims are just greedy, I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that not many 14-year old boys set out to seduce priests in the hopes of a big payout in 35 years time. Are there trial lawyers and rabid atheists exploting the situation to the hilt? Of course, but they wouldn’t be in a position to do so if the actions of bishops hadn’t given them the keys to your kingdom.

Bob, not all the money given in Sunday collections stays in the Parish, I believe most dioceses get a “tax” of a certain percentage. I have been told that in our diocese that “tax” is 11%. We can avoid that by specifically earmarking a donation for “fuel expenses” but I suspect that all other Parish income gets docked the 11 %.
It seems to me that the real people responsible for this mess is the abusing priest and possibly the bishop that let the abuse occur and continue. Because of corporate laws the diocese then becomes legally responsible. I don’t care how many years have passed, one who has been raped does deserve some justice.

kenneth,
Perhaps you should read more carefully. I don’t see where anyone has accused victims of being greedy. Trial lawyers, yes, absolutely. In my mind, the victims are just along for the trial lawyer’s ride toward a huge settlement and huge pay day for the lawyer. Why am I so cynical? Because of the lack of concern trial lawyers have shown for kids abused by public school employees. When you mention, “a decades long policy and culture by the institution which enabled and concealed these crimes, and intimidated victims” you could just as easily, or more easily, be talking about the public schools. The fact is, we have a two-tiered system for abuse victims: those abused by the Church are eagerly served by the law and the lawyers. Those abused by public school employees are SOL. The laws don’t protect them and the lawyers don’t serve them. See my first post on this thread for some of the details. And the numbers of those abused by school employees far exceed those abused by priests. One study estimated that 40,000 kids are abused by public school employees every year in the state of California alone. Google it. So, the number of those abused in one year in California dwarfs the number of all kids abused by priests over the last 50 years. And, while the Church has worked to clean up it’s own house: the number of new allegations of abuse last year was 10 for the entire country, there has been no such effort on the part of the schools. Just more cover-up. You can thank the teachers unions, school districts and state legislatures for that.
Why is this the case? My theory is that there are two reasons: anti-Catholicism and money.
When the priest scandal exploded in 2002 and the Boston Globe ran it’s expose, every paper in the country picked up the story, and the networks ran with it again and again. I’m sure you remember. Two years ago (?) the AP ran a three-part series on abuse by public school teachers and other employees that talked about serial abusers, cover-ups, passing teachers from one school to another, etc… The number of papers that picked up the story? Exactly five. Five. Nationwide. Five. When Obama’s school safety czar knowingly refuses to inform authorities of a 15 year old having a sexual relationship with an adult, that’s page 19 in the NYT. When a priest has a kid out of wedlock with an adult woman, front page above the fold, baby! These are not anomalies. The examples of bias are legion.
Money. When a priest abuses a kid and the Church is sued, that’s the Church’s problem and the Church’s money. But when a teacher does it, that’s your tax money and your public employee. You don’t think that makes a difference in how state legislatures address the matter? How would you like the money you paid in taxes to support your kid’s school going toward a multi-million dollar payout to a trail lawyer (with a few thousand thrown toward the kid and his or her family)? Maybe now you want to sing a different tune when your property tax gets raised 50 cents to every $100, or the school a few blocks from where you live is closed and now your kids are bused across town where the student-teacher ratio is now 35-1 because your town is bankrupt and can no longer afford to keep your neighborhood school open. Wake up, kenneth, because the fact is, there a lot of secular abusers and the cottage industry of apologists defending them are your teachers unions and state legislatures.
My take: send the abusers to jail, priest or teacher or rabbi or social worker or minister or doctor or whoever. You abuse a kid, you go to jail. Period. Next, level the playing field for abuse victims: no more two-tiered system, as if victims of abuse by public employees aren’t just as much victims. Rape is rape is rape-rape, no matter what Whoopie thinks. Next, provide reasonable compensation. Do away with these multi-million dollar payouts that only make lawyers wealthy and abuse the innocent who abused no one but whose job is now on the line because offices, ministries and services are shutting down and institutions decades later are forced into bankruptcy. The victims deserve just compensation, but they’re too often not getting it under the present system.

Two years ago (?) the AP ran a three-part series on abuse by public school teachers and other employees that talked about serial abusers, cover-ups, passing teachers from one school to another, etc… The number of papers that picked up the story? Exactly five. Five. Nationwide. Five.
Actually, 90 newspapers nationwide ran it on the front page on the first day the series appeared. It was picked up by hundreds of newspapers across the country. It was everywhere, including on all three broadcast networks and most cable news shows.
When Obama’s school safety czar knowingly refuses to inform authorities of a 15 year old having a sexual relationship with an adult, that’s page 19 in the NYT.
He was 16, which was the age of consent in that state. Still a story, but not the one you think it is.

According to an article on the AP series on teacher abuse, posted by NCRegister.com on 11/27/07:
“Paul Colford, corporate communications director for the AP, said he was inundated with complaints from people wondering why their newspapers were not carrying the series.” …
[Catholic League President Bill Donahue] conducted a search of Nexus, a central database for newspapers to archive articles. Two weeks after the series was released, Donahue found, the search indicated that only five newspapers carried the entire series.” …
“‘A Nexus search is a very poor indicator of how many papers have published a story,’ Colford said.” …
[John Affleck, editor of the AP's national reporting team] said his own research revealed that the series had been promoted with a teaser in 90 newspapers the day it was released.”
There seems to be some discrepancy about how many newspapers picked up the entire series. If I was wrong in using the Catholic League info of five papers, I happily stand corrected. Nevertheless, I still think my point that coverage of the abuse of kids by school teachers has been comparatively under-reported is valid. I still think that anti-Catholicism is at the root of that discrepancy. Neither the LA Times or the Boston Globe, who have been all over the priest scandal, carried the AP series in their print additions.
Kevin Jennings, the school safety czar, himself identified the boy as 15 years old in his memoirs. If the boy is now saying that he was 16, so be it. But, based on his own recollection, Jennings apparently THOUGHT the boy was 15 at the time, and so was obliged to report it. The investigation that should have taken place would then have discovered the boy’s real age.
Regardless of why the situation is the way it is, the bottom line is: we simply cannot tolerate a two-tiered system of abuse. Abuse by clergy is taken seriously by the law and the lawyers. Abuse by public school teachers is not taken seriously, either by the law or by the lawyers.
I would point out, too, that these windows of opportunity that allow anyone from any time to file a complaint are inherently unfair. There is no way any institution, private or public, can defend itself against allegations of abuse that supposedly occurred fifty years ago by a priest or teacher who has been dead for twenty years.

I think different newspaper coverage of school districts and the Church rests (albeit not entirely) on one point you miss: school districts are and are perceived to be local entities. There is no central governing body. The Church is a corporation with one head. The perception is that the pope could have stopped the abuse had he wanted to.
Another point: abuse is horrific no matter who does it, but a priest is perceived to represent God. How much worse is it if God’s representative is the abuser?

Another point: I read the AP teacher stories in five different local newspapers in central Illinois, not including the Chicago Tribune. I wouldn’t trust the Catholic League about anything.

Of course priests represent God in the eyes of Catholics, which exacerbates the abuse a hundred fold. But, they don’t represent God in the eyes of the law or the secular media. So, if the abuse of kids by teachers is as big a problem as the AP and other sources suggest it is, local newspapers ought to be printing dozens of stories every year and state legislatures and local school boards ought to be up in arms about the matter and aggressive in stopping it. I don’t see that happening where I live. How about Illinois?
Also, states have no business passing laws setting up a two-tiered system for bringing these cases to justice. Why are legislatures passing laws that hold private institutions liable, but give a pass to public institutions?
In 1978, Pope John Paul II initiated a reform of Catholic seminaries in the US. Since then, the number of new abuse allegations has declined dramatically. One is too many, but ten is better than 100. Unfortunately, John Paul’s reforms, and the success of those reforms, is another part of this story that has been largely unreported. Other problems with the reporting include: the mis-identification of the scandal as largely one of pedophilia abuse when less than 2% of cases involved pre-pubescent kids, the homosexual nature of the scandal, where 80% of cases were cases of homosexual statutory rape, the mis-identification of the problem as unique to priests, when priests, as a professional group, have lower abuse rates than protestant ministers, therapists, teachers and others. And, just in case you’re wondering, none of these facts came from the Catholic League. The sources are: George Weigel, the John Jay investigation of the scandal, and Philip Jenkins.
Children need to be protected. Abusers need to be in jail, whether they’re local parish priests or big time movie directors. Laws need to be written that provide protection for all children and recourse to justice for all victims, equally.

if the abuse of kids by teachers is as big a problem as the AP and other sources suggest it is,
It isn’t. The story was an appalling misuse of statistical evidence.

If so, that only confirms the incompetence or duplicity of the press. Though I would be interested in your citing the sources criticizing the series and other sources for their appalling misuse of statistical evidence.
In any case, can we agree that state legislatures ought not be passing laws on child abuse that target private institutions while giving public institutions a pass?