NARTH regrets the Schoenewolf “comments…misconstrued”

NARTH today issued the following apology today in relation to the Schoenewolf article…

NARTH Apologizes For Article

NARTH regrets the comments made by Dr. Schoenwolf about slavery which have been misconstrued by some of our readers. It should go without saying that we do not wish to minimize the suffering of those who have been mistreated because of race, sex, religious beliefs or sexual orientation.

UPDATE: An article by Brentin Mock of the Southern Poverty Law Center provides additional comment from Gerald Schoenewolf, David Blakeslee and your humble host regarding the article about which NARTH today made comment.

Jennings and Shimkus? To tell or not to tell…

Two unrelated items that got me thinking.

1. Rep. John Shimkus, chair of the House Committee that oversees the Page Program has taken lots of heat over his handling of suspicious communications between Mark Foley and underage boys. The Springfield (IL) Journal-Register wrote today: “Shimkus has faced criticism from both parties for not telling the other two page board members last year when the parents of a former page complained that Foley had asked their son to send him a picture of himself. Members of both parties also have said that Shimkus and others who knew about the e-mail should have conducted a more thorough investigation.”

2. Kevin Jennings and GLSEN want to be a part of a proposed White House conference on bullying. Fair enough. I disagree with GLSEN most of the time about this issue. For instance, GLSEN recently criticized a research-based bullying program being used now by the state of VA because sexual orientation was not specifically named in the curriculum. On the contrary, the Olweus program is a fine program that most often gets good results and will make most schools safer.

Seeing Kevin Jennings quoted in the context of current events made me think about how he handled a Shimkus-like issue many years ago when he was a teacher in private school. A young man, Brewster, disclosed to Mr. Jennings that he was engaged in sexual relations with an adult male. Mr. Jennings revealed this to no one at the time. A detailed summary of the Brewster stories is here.

Back to current events, Mr. Shimkus is now being widely criticized for not disclosing the Foley incident, even though, apparently the young man did not want the events disclosed.

Should Mr. Jennings have handled Brewster, the 15-16 year old boarding school charge, differently or was his Shimkus-like approach correct?

Why?

This question, and the details, are what occupies those reporting on the murders of Amish children in Nickel Mines, PA.

The Washington Post reports a detailed account of the events which concluded with comments from Fred Berlin from Johns Hopkins.

Fred S. Berlin, a Johns Hopkins University psychiatrist and expert on sexual disorders, said it would be a mistake to accept Roberts’s statement about molesting children years ago as an explanation for what happened Monday. At most, Berlin said, the molestation, if it occurred, is just one piece of a complicated psychiatric puzzle.

“People can develop a major depression and, in the midst of that, begin to feel very guilty and troubled about perceived bad acts in a way that had not been a problem for them in the absence of depression,” Berlin said. “I’m speculating here, but it’s possible he became depressed and then began to be preoccupied and ruminative and guilt-ridden about these events that occurred so many years ago.”

If Roberts did molest two young relatives 20 years ago, when he was 12, it would not necessarily mean he was bound to repeat the behavior as an adult, Berlin said.

Although many adult pedophiles begin their misconduct as young people, “there’s good evidence that a majority of adolescent sexual offenders — if indeed he was that — do not go on to be adult offenders,” Berlin said. “People assume otherwise, but there’s some pretty compelling data suggesting that there are lots of kids who do things of a sexual nature during childhood that they ought not do, and they don’t do it again.”

While I have much respect for Dr. Berlin, I have a different speculation about killer Charles Roberts. While I believe mental illness is involved, I would guess that delusions are also involved here. This sounds more like a acute psychotic condition than severe depression, although they are not mutually exclusive. It is possible that he never molested anyone but became convinced he did due to persistent and disturbing sexual preoccupations.

I recall a case where a mother asked for her daughter to be excused from school because the daughter required heart surgery in a couple of days. The mother said her daughter would not likely return to school because of the situation. The mother described elaborate plans for her care involving a hospital stay and doctor’s appointments. An astute teacher researched the matter and found no such appointments were made and then called me for a consult. We quickly intervened with protective services. We later learned that the mother’s mental health had rapidly deteriorated and she had planned to murder her daughter and then tell the school that the surgery was not successful. Other than the illogical school request, there were no warning signs. Eventually, the mother recovered and, to my knowledge, there were no further incidents. In the case of Charles Roberts, it appears there were no warning signs at all. Tragic is such a small word in this case; where are the bigger words?

Is the closet to blame for the Foley scandal?

Andrew Sullivan seems to think so. In a post about former Congressman Foley, titled the Closet, Sullivan waxes on about “what the closet does to people.” He says, “the hypocrisies it fosters, the pathologies it breeds – is brutal.”

He continues: “What I do know is that the closet corrupts. The lies it requires and the compartmentalization it demands can lead people to places they never truly wanted to go, and for which they have to take ultimate responsibility. From what I’ve read, Foley is another example of this destructive and self-destructive pattern for which the only cure is courage and honesty.”

So are we to understand Foley’s behavior is causally related to being a closeted gay man? As I understand Sullivan’s argument, the cure for Foley’s pursuit of teenage boys is honesty about his homosexuality. Not that I favor dishonesty, but I am not buying Sullivan’s argument.

I say this, in part, because straights who interfere with underage youth are rarely closeted straights — are they? Debra Lafave was not closeted and still did a very bad thing.

Sullivan also writes: “In some ways, I think it was my pride that forced me to be honest with myself and others; and a deep sense that obviously this was how God made me, and it behooved me to deal with it forthrightly. ” Here he argue that self-esteem is the key – be proud of what you are and then you won’t do such things. On the other hand, I would argue that it is not self-esteem that prevents “hypocrisies” and “pathologies,” but self-control – no matter what your sexual attractions are like. Quoting self-esteem researcher, Roy Baumeister (from Myers, Social Psychology, 2005, p. 64), I agree that: “…self-control is worth 10 times as much as self-esteem.”

UPDATE: Former Rep. Foley now says he was sexually molested between ages 13-15 and that he is gay. The plot thickens…