A Research Study Conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice The City University of New York – March 2006 For The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

The Nature and Scope of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States:
Supplementary Data Analysis for The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Submitted by Karen Terry, Ph.D. Principal Investigator

Margaret Leland Smith Data Analyst

March, 2006

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Washington, D.C.

 IN June 2002 the full body of Catholic bishops of the United States in their General Meeting in Dallas approved the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People. The Charter stipulated that a descriptive study on the nature and scope of the problem of sexual abuse of minors by clergy be commissioned by the National Review Board. This study was conducted by John Jay College of Criminal Justice; its results were released in February 2004. In November 2004 the full body of Catholic bishops of the United States in their annual meeting in Washington, D.C., contracted with John Jay College of Criminal Justice to provide a supplementary data analysis of the material used to conduct the nature and scope study. This report by the John Jay College is authorized for publication by the undersigned.

Msgr. David J. Malloy, STD

General Secretary, USCCB

 Under contract with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, John Jay College of Criminal justice performed a supplemental, independent, objective assessment of the nature and scope of child sexual abuse by Catholic clergy based on data provided by dioceses and religious institutes.

First printing, March 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

CHAPTER ONE – The Shape of the Crisis of Sexual Abuse of Minors in the Church

1.1 Prevalence and regional patterns 4

1.2 Patterns of reporting sexual abuse 7

1.3 Reports of sexual abuse to the Church over time 10

1.4 Estimation of unreported abuse 14

CHAPTER TWO – Diocesan Priests, Religious Priests, and Deacons

2.1 Comparative characteristics of diocesan and religious priests 19

2.2 Comparative distributions of onset of abusive behavior over time 21

2.3 Deacons 22

CHAPTER THREE – Priests with a Single Allegation of Sexual Abuse

3.1 Introduction and definitions 23

3.2 Comparative characteristics of single-victim and multiple-victim cases 24

3.3 Persistence of offending 28

3.4 Coercion, treatment or self-correction? 29

CHAPTER FOUR – Priests with Multiple Allegations of Sexual Abuse

4.1 Patterns of offending 33

4.2 Onset of abusive behavior 33

4.3 Persistence of abusive behavior 35

4.4 Desistance from abusive behavior 46

CHAPTER FIVE – Church Response to Allegations of Abuse

5.1 Distributions of response of dioceses and religious institutes 49

5.2 Outcomes comparison, optimal responses 51

CONCLUSIONS 53

ILLUSTRATIONS

Tables

 Table 1.1. Reports of Incidents of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Priests

Table 2.1. Diocesan and Religious Priests - Comparison of Persistence of Abuse (in years)

Table 2.2. Sex Offender Treatment for Diocesan and Religious Priests

Table 2.3. Decade of Onset of Abuse by Deacons, by First Year

Table 3.1. Decade of Birth, Two Cleric Groups

Table 3.2. Ordination Decade, Two Cleric Groups

Table 3.3. Distribution of Male Victims by Age

Table 3.4. Distribution of Female Victims by Age

Table 3.5. Duration of Abuse (in years), Two Groups of Clerics

Table 3.6. Criminal Justice System Interventions

Table 3.7. Sex Offender Treatment

Table 4.1. Age of Priest at Onset of Reported Sexual Abuse Behavior

Table 4.2. Persistence of Sexual Abuse Behavior for Priests Grouped by Number of Victims

Table 4.3. Cleric Patterns of Offending: Revised Duration of Abuse

Table 4.4. Overview of Grooming Behavior

Table 4.5. Location of Family Socializing

Table 4.6. Use of Enticements

Table 4.7. Use of Threats

Table 4.8. Onset of Offending Behavior, Years in Ministry

Table 4.9. Persistence of Sub-Group Offending

Table 4.10. Explicit Sex Acts and Police Contact

Table 4.11. Socializing, Enticements and Threats

Table 4.12. History of Abuse and Substance Abuse

Table 4.13. Treatment as a Response to Child Sexual Abuse

Table 5.1. Responses of Church Leaders, Dioceses & Religious Institutes with 1 – 6 Accused Clerics

Table 5.2. Responses of Church Leaders, Dioceses & Religious Institutes with 7 – 15 Accused Clerics

Table 5.3. Responses of Church Leaders, Dioceses and Religious Institutes with 15 or more Accused Clerics

 Figures

Figure 1.1. Regional Distribution of Sex Abuse Cases (yearly counts by date of occurrence per 14 regions)

Figure 1.2. Accusation Rate of Catholic Priests over Time, 1950 – 2002

Figure 1.3. Incidents of Sexual Abuse Known or Reported to the Church by 1985

Figure 1.4. Incidents of Sexual Abuse Known or Reported to the Church by 2002

Figure 1.5. Total Incidents, if Estimated Based on 1985 Reporting Patterns

Figure 1.6. Total Incidents Known and Estimated Through 2002, Using 1993 Reporting Pattern

Figure 1.7. Incidents Reported Before 2002

Figure 1.8. Incidents Reported in 2002

Figure 1.9. Estimation of Population of Cases, Including Unreported Cases

Figure 1.10. Significant Breaks in Population of Sexual Abuse Cases

Figure 2.1. Allegations against Diocesan and Religious Priests, by Year of First Incident

Figure 3.1. Ordination Dates by Decade for Two Groups of Clerics

Figure 3.2. Distribution of Birth Decades for Four Groups of Clerics

Figure 3.3. Percentage of Victims by Gender for Four Cleric Groups

Figure 4.1. Incidence of Events of Short Duration (less than one year)

Figure 4.2. Incidence of Events with Duration of More Than One Year

INTRODUCTION

The study undertaken by John Jay College of Criminal Justice in 2003, The Nature and Scope of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States 19502002, sponsored by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, was initiated by the National Review Board and the Office of Child and Youth Protection. John Jay College compiled a team of interdisciplinary researchers to conduct this descriptive study, the results of which were released in February 2004 during a live telecast at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. Study results showed that 4,392 priests had allegations of abuse (representing 4% of priests in ministry between 1950 and 2002), 10,667 victims made allegations, and the Church paid (at the time surveys were completed) $572.5 million for legal and treatment fees and as compensation to the victims. Results also showed that while 55% of priests had only one formal allegation of abuse, 3.5% of priests were responsible for approximately 26% of all allegations of sexual abuse against minors.

The study also provided information on: the circumstances of the abuse (e.g., types of sexual acts, location of abuse, duration of the abusive behavior); the offenders (e.g., year of ordination, age, ministry duties, other behavioral problems); the victims (e.g., age and gender, with whom they were living at the time of the abuse); and the dioceses (e.g., differences in abuse rates by region and population size). The results of the John Jay study will inform a future study on the causes and context of the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church.

The timeline to complete the Nature and Scope study was short; the John Jay research team had less than one year to complete the data collection and analysis and release the report. As a result, the results of the Nature and Scope study were descriptive in nature and addressed only key information sought by the Church. In order to better understand the more complex interaction of multiple variables, the John Jay research team continued to analyze the data from the Nature and Scope study to conduct multivariate analyses on the following topics.

. • Reporting of the abuse and the distribution of offenses. The aim was to explore reporting trends, the patterns of distribution of ages of those who reported the abuse at the time they reported the abuse, and to estimate the number of new cases that may come forward from the past two decades, when fewer cases have been reported. A second aim was to explore patterns of reporting, such as the length of time it takes to report the abuse based upon gender of the victim, victim/perpetrator relationship, relationship between victim and his/her family, type of abuse that occurred, length of time the abuse occurred, etc. Finally, a team worked together to derive a mathematical model of future reporting based on past reporting in order to guide future policy.

. • Comparison of diocesan and religious priests. The aim was to look at patterns of abuse in these two populations to see if there are specific factors that distinguish the two groups that could account for there being twice as many diocesan priests with allegations of abuse than religious priests.

. • Church response to the abuse. The aim was to examine the relationship between the Church’s response to the abuse and recidivism, or continued offending by individual priests. Observing the various actions taken by particular dioceses may lead to information on “best practices” for controlling abusive behavior in the future.

. • Priests with single and multiple allegations. The aim was to explore the demographic, psychological and behavioral patterns of samples of priests, as well as the offense patterns and victims characteristics, to determine if there are differences between offenders with one victim and those with multiple victims. This includes an analysis of the “grooming process” of the multiple offenders to determine how they were able to encourage compliance with the abuse from the children.

. • Treatment. The aim was to look at rates of recidivism based upon the types and number of offenses committed by the priests, the types of treatment they were given, the length of time between when they began offending and the time treatment began, and the types of centers where they received treatment.

. • Regional differences. The aim was to explore further any differences in patterns of offending based upon regional differences and differences based on size of diocese.

 Though this data analysis is far more extensive than what was included in the original report, it is important to understand that there are limits with the data used here. First, the data are likely to be less accurate for allegations that were reported in the early years of the reporting period. Second, it is likely that there were differences among dioceses in record-keeping, and these differences were reflected in the different levels of detail on the completed surveys. Third, there is missing information because not every diocese answered every question on the three types of surveys. This missing data means that the number of cases to be compared is different for almost every variable. Finally, it is important to emphasize that the dataset used is wholly based on information reported to us by the Church. It must be clear to all that, because of the confidentiality provisions used as the data were collected, it is not possible for researchers to identify any diocese or religious order, any individual priest or victim; the data are in aggregate form.

Despite these cautions, this dataset is one of the most extensive collections of information about sexual abuse of minors, and one of a very small number not based on forensic contact. As such, it is a very valuable source of knowledge about sexual offending.

We are grateful for the statistical work provided by Bilal Khan, PhD, from the Department of Mathematics at John Jay College, and for research assistance by John Jay College graduate students Andres Rengifo, Bonnie Starfield, Jennifer Tallon and Brenda Vollman.

Karen Terry Margaret Smith James T. Levine

---

44
acts

This table is a Multiple Response Table. The categories are not mutually exclusive,
as an individual may have participated in more than one act during the course of an incident.

45
1 Dean G. Kilpatrick, Benjamin E. Saunders, and Daniel W. Smith. Youth Victimization: Prevalence and Implications. NIJ
Research in Brief. (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 2003), 1.
2 Dean, 7.
3 Patrick A. Langan and Caroline Wolf Harlow, C. W., Child Rape Victims, 1992, (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1992, Washington, D.C.), 1,
4 Langan., 2
5 Howard N. Snyder, Sexual Assault of Young Children as Reported to Law Enforcement: Victim, Incident, and Offender
Characteristics, NIBRS Statistical Report, (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs Bureau
of Justice Statistics, 2000), 2.
6 Snyder, 2.
7 Langan. 2.

xcxxcxxc  F ” “ This Webpage was created for a workshop held at Saint Andrew's Abbey, Valyermo, California in 2005....x....  ’ “”.