Push to Require Clergy to Report Child Rape Stalls in Mormon Utah

A push to mandate members of religious clergy report child sexual abuse when it's brought to their attention is facing pushback from churches throughout the United States

By Associated Press

March 1, 2023, at 1:01 a.m.

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Lindsey Lundholm looked out over hundreds of people at the Utah State Capitol last year and felt a deep sense of healing. Abuse survivors, religious leaders and major party politicians were all gathered to rally for an end to a legal loophole that exempts religious clergy from being required to report child sexual abuse once it comes to their attention.

Lundholm, one of the rally's organizers, recalled telling the crowd how, growing up as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Idaho, she told her bishop about her painful abuse only to see it go unreported.

Unearthing the trauma wasn't easy, but back in August she hoped reforms could be forthcoming so others would not face what she did.

“There was really a lot of momentum," said Lundholm, now a teacher in northern Utah. “Everyone we were talking to was like, ‘This is a no brainer. This is something that needs to be changed.’”

It hasn't.

Proposals to reform laws that exempt clergy from child sex abuse reporting requirements went nowhere in Utah’s statehouse this year, failing to receive even a hearing as lawmakers prepare to adjourn for the year. Efforts were stymied by a coalition of powerful religious groups, continuing a yearslong pattern in which Catholics, Latter-day Saints and Jehovah’s Witnesses have defended the exemptions as survivors like Lundholm fight for reform.

In Utah, where the majority of lawmakers are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, state law requires most professionals — therapists, doctors and teachers among them — report abuse, yet clergy are exempt from alerting authorities about abuse they learn of through confessions.

Republicans and Democrats announced plans last year to reform laws that exempt religious clergy from reporting child sexual abuse cases revealed in conversations with parishioners.

Behind-the-scenes conversations between legislative leaders in Utah and what Senate President Stuart Adams said was “a broad base of religious groups” helped thwart four separate proposals to add clergy to the list of professionals required to report child sexual abuse.

“I think they have First Amendment rights and religious protections,” Adams, a Latter-day Saint himself, said, noting fears among religious leaders that clergy could be punished for breaking vows of confidentiality.

Each proposal was introduced or announced after an Associated Press investigation found that the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' sexual abuse reporting hotline can be misused by its leaders to divert abuse accusations away from law enforcement and instead to church attorneys who may bury the problem, leaving victims in harm’s way.

In lawsuits detailed in the investigation, attorneys from the faith widely known as the Mormon church have argued clergy-penitent privilege allows them to refuse to answer questions and turn over documents about alleged sexual abuse.

Church officials declined to comment about the stalled legislative efforts. The Catholic Diocese of Salt Lake City did not respond to requests for comment but campaigned against them, saying in January that priests and clergy were different from other professionals mandated to report sexual abuse.

“Legislation that would require a priest to (report sexual abuse) violates our right to practice our religion,” Bishop Oscar Solis, of the Salt Lake City Diocese, wrote in a Jan. 25 letter to parishioners.

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox last month said he “had no problem with the bills moving forward” and receiving consideration in the statehouse.

“I think it’s an important conversation to have. We’ve encouraged the Legislature to look at this and make sure that our model is the right model,” he told reporters.

Marci Hamilton, chief executive of the abuse prevention nonprofit Child USA, said churches have maintained the same playbook for decades in opposing more disclosure.

Routinely it involves a two-pronged approach, defending clergy-penitent privilege in statehouses and using it to avoid damaging disclosures in court cases, said Hamilton, also a University of Pennsylvania law professor.

"They have not veered from it. Both institutions are hoping that time will simply let everybody start trusting them again," Hamilton said, referring to Catholics and Latter-day Saints.

But, she added, "by preventing the public — and especially the sincere believers — from getting the full story you don’t create the accountability that these organizations should be held to and the secrets continue.”

“The problem in the United States — and this is particularly acute in state like Utah — is that the lobbying power of these religious organizations is so extraordinary,” Hamilton said.

Laws in 33 states exempt clergy — regardless of religion — from laws requiring people report child sexual abuse allegations to authorities. Religious leaders have systematically fought efforts to expand the list of states. They currently oppose efforts from Vermont to Washington, where a proposal advanced through the state Senate Tuesday.

Kansas lawmakers introduced multiple proposals on penalties for not reporting suspected child sexual abuse, including one in the state Senate that would have added clergy to a list of mandatory reporters. It faced especially fierce public rebukes from Catholic leaders because it didn’t exempt confessions. No proposal received even a hearing before an initial deadline this year.

In the wake of the AP's investigation last year, Republican state Rep. Phil Lyman and Democratic Rep. Angela Romero announced plans to reform Utah's clergy-penitent privilege loophole. Lyman, who served six years as a Latter-day Saints' bishop, said at the time lawmakers should want to reexamine the loophole “regardless of religious or political affiliation.”

“People should be able to go and confess their sins to their bishop without fear of being prosecuted up until when they are confessing something that has affected someone’s else life significantly,” he told the AP in August.

Lyman ultimately released a proposal that broadly affirmed clergy's exemption from mandatory reporting. It didn't advance or receive any hearing as lawmakers prepare to adjourn Friday. He did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Proposals from Democratic Reps. Romero and Brian King, and Sen. Stephanie Pitcher to close or narrow the loophole have also not moved forward amid opposition from religious groups.

Both Pitcher and Romero, who is Catholic, said they planned to reintroduce their proposals next year.

“With AP uncovering what they uncovered, you'd think this would be a matter of urgency for this Legislature and for Legislatures across the country. But again we are allowing these institutions to dictate what we mandate,” Romero said, referring to the Catholic Church.

Several Utah lawmakers told AP that opponents of limiting clergy-penitent privilege regarding child sexual abuse had circulated research that they claimed suggests mandatory reporting reform doesn't result in more confirmed reports of sexual abuse and may deter perpetrators from speaking to clergy.

“What most of the research shows is that if people aren’t able to come to them for fear of being reported on, they’re not able to provide the help and support they need,” Sen. Ann Milner said.

However, conclusions drawn from the study, which the Catholic Diocese also circulated in opposition to a similar bill from Romero in three years ago, have been challenged by its authors.

University of Michigan law professor Frank Vandervort and his co-author, Vincent Palusci, a pediatrics professor at New York University, told the AP last year the study was limited, partly because churches often wouldn’t give them access to relevant data.
“A single article should not be the basis for making policy decisions,” Vandervort said. “It may be entirely the case that there’s no connection between the changing of the laws and the number of reports.”

Lundholm said Utah lawmakers adjourning without having a “true public discussion” on any clergy-penitent privilege reform proposal provoked eerily familiar feelings for survivors. Though she never expected political change to happen overnight, she said survivors like her who had abuse go unreported — once again — feel unheard.

“Maybe the worst part is that this is something that survivors experience often, and unfortunately, it’s rare when their stories are heard,” she said.
___
The story has been updated to correct the spelling of the first name of Lindsey Lundholm.
___
Associated Press writers Joey Cappelletti in Lansing, Michigan, and John Hanna in Topeka, Kansas, contributed to this report.
Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 
Why is it one or the other? "Dude, we shouldn't be worried about these child touchers, there's these other child touchers too." Really strong argument.

I never said it was one or the other. It just seems from your comments in this and other threads, you would like this priority number one for some reason.
 
For what good reason shouldn't a supposed priest report child abuse to the police? That's what you're defending here.
In the Catholic Church, only for one reason - the Sacrament of Confession. What is said in there is completely sealed (and in fact a priest speaking about it is a very, very serious crime under Canon Law) but there is nothing stopping the priest from telling the child to immediately report the abuse he heard once he or she leaves the confessional.

Under no circumstances is this supposed to be breached. If a crime can only stand upon what was said in the confessional, there's no room to prosecute.

However, there's no sacramental equivalent in Mormonism.
 
In the Catholic Church, only for one reason - the Sacrament of Confession. What is said in there is completely sealed but there is nothing stopping the priest from telling the child to immediately report the abuse he heard once he or she leaves the confessional.

Under no circumstances is this supposed to be breached. If a crime can only stand upon what was said in the confessional, there's no room to prosecute.
Okay, it's just dumb church tradition then, explains Ortho Sped jumping thorugh logical hoopes to defend this. Gotta defend the child molestation factories over something Jesus didn't even teach you had to do.
 
Last edited:
In the Catholic Church, only for one reason - the Sacrament of Confession. What is said in there is completely sealed (and in fact a priest speaking about it is a very, very serious crime under Canon Law) but there is nothing stopping the priest from telling the child to immediately report the abuse he heard once he or she leaves the confessional.

Problem is other with canon law. They use secrecy of confession to keep in secret many things, even results of internal church prosecutions and don't share evidence with judical system.

Other think is how oftem pirest meets a abused child confession, and how often a confession of predator. I think the second option is more popular.
 
Like priests, lawyers also don't need to report "blatant, serious crimes"-- inasmuch as they're completed-- because it would impair the ability to do their particular work on a fundamental level. Same for psychiatrists and psychologists. Some American jurisdictions have limited privilege for spousal and physician-patient communications.
It should impair their ability to work if they know someone killed or raped someone. That's the idea.

These people don't exist expressly to hear confessions of child rape.
Of course, but when they do hear it, or about a murder or something, they should be compelled to report it.

nobody's going to tell their business to someone who can tell their business to anyone
Sucks to be a rapist or killer, I suppose.
 
Okay, it's just dumb church tradition then, explains Ortho Sped jumping thorugh logical hoopes to defend this. Gotta defend the child molstation factories over something Jesus didn't even teach you had to do.
Unless he's St. John Vianney, your average parish priest is hearing confessions maybe an hour or two a week (if not less...). There's nothing stopping any child from telling the priest, deacon, parish staff or anyone else about the abuse any other time.


Regarding your second comment, here's a nice piece on this very important sacrament.
 
Gotta defend the child molstation factories

You just outed yourself. Schools have 100 times the rate of child sexual abuse. They would be considered actual "Child abuse factories". Yet you keep going back to the Church. My comments on other more pressing, high child population, high child risk industries, are continually ignored or deflected.

This is about the Church for you. Not children.
 
For what good reason shouldn't a supposed priest report child abuse to the police? That's what you're defending here.
I’m in favor of abuse being easier to report, however, if there is zero penalty for a false accusation, it can be abused. Not everyone that claims they were raped actually was, and they only make it harder for actual victims to come forward since false accusers get little to no penalty most of the time. If you have a legitimate case, the last thing you would want is association with fakers.
 
Unless he's St. John Vianney, your average parish priest is hearing confessions maybe an hour or two a week (if not less...). There's nothing stopping any child from telling the priest, deacon, parish staff or anyone else about the abuse any other time.


Regarding your second comment, here's a nice piece on this very important sacrament.
"Dude the adults shouldn't have to report the children being raped, because the kids could do it later." What if the child is too afraid to do anything else about it? What if the child ends up dead? In that case, the priest has some culpability much like a spouse that just looks the other way when her husband is doing the abuse. Good god, you're placing legalistic nonsense over stopping a child from being harmed. I'd say justice in that case would be putting a bullet in both the abuser and the priest's heads. They're both going to hell anyways.
 
You just outed yourself. Schools have 100 times the rate of child sexual abuse. They would be considered actual "Child abuse factories". Yet you keep going back to the Church. My comments on other more pressing, high child population, high child risk industries, are continually ignored or deflected.

This is about the Church for you.
She just hates me man. I've been all across the country to many wards, all of us are very protective of our children. We have so many, kinda have to be. Have there been cases of people in power abusing their authority? Yes. Then the church feeds them to the fucking wolves when it finds out, because they know things might just go beyond a little casual violence, things might go Gary Plauche. Look up trials of our bishops. The church doesn't give them a legal fund or anything. We leave them to the justice system, because it is far kinder than us.
 
I’m in favor of abuse being easier to report, however, if there is zero penalty for a false accusation, it can be abused. Not everyone that claims they were raped actually was, and they only make it harder for actual victims to come forward since false accusers get little to no penalty most of the time. If you have a legitimate case, the last thing you would want is association with fakers.
Children that report being raped should be given a high priority in all circumstances. If the police beleive it's not real, it won't lead to a prosecution. I can't believe you're so autsiticaly mad at me you're saying child molestation shouldn't be reported and investigated and using Twitter whore metoo cases as pretext.

You just outed yourself. Schools have 100 times the rate of child sexual abuse. They would be considered actual "Child abuse factories". Yet you keep going back to the Church. My comments on other more pressing, high child population, high child risk industries, are continually ignored or deflected.

This is about the Church for you. Not children.
It's the topic of the thread. You want your thread, go make one.

She just hates me man. I've been all across the country to many wards, all of us are very protective of our children. We have so many, kinda have to be. Have there been cases of people in power abusing their authority? Yes. Then the church feeds them to the fucking wolves when it finds out, because they know things might just go beyond a little casual violence, things might go Gary Plauche. Look up trials of our bishops. The church doesn't give them a legal fund or anything. We leave them to the justice system, because it is far kinder than us.
For one, I don't care about you at all, neither hate or anything else. You're on the internet. Chill out. lol

Second, you're not addressing the topic of the thread. If Mormons were so concerned with stopping child abuse, how about passing the law in OP instead of obstructing it? What harm could it possibly cause?
 
Last edited:
Second, you're not addressing the topic of the thread. If Mormons were so concerned with stopping child abuse, how about passing the law in OP instead of obstructing it? What harm could it possibly cause?

Probably because the DOJ and Media now pushes Christians of any stripe are potential terrorists? So if I was a Christian I wouldn't trust them even if I was falsely accused of just grabbing someones ass.

doj.jpg

8484.jpg
 
"Dude the adults shouldn't have to report the children being raped, because the kids could do it later." What if the child is too afraid to do anything else about it? What if the child ends up dead? In that case, the priest has some culpability much like a spouse that just looks the other way when her husband is doing the abuse. Good god, you're placing legalistic nonsense over stopping a child from being harmed. I'd say justice in that case would be putting a bullet in both the abuser and the priest's heads. They're both going to hell anyways.
I understand where you're coming from, but these circumstances are so exceptionally rare they will have no impact on sexual abuse, at least in the Catholic Church. Other than a handful of sacramental Protestant churches like the Anglicans or Lutherans, I don't know of any Christian denominations with a similar sacrament, let alone a derivative religion of Christianity like Mormonism.

If the law was modified to exempt the seal of confession, the Church would have no problem with it. This seal is extremely, extremely important.
 
Probably because the DOJ and Media now pushes Christians of any stripe are potential terrorists? So if I was a Christian I wouldn't trust them even if I was falsely accused of just grabbing someones ass.

View attachment 4685020

View attachment 4685018
Mormons are not Christians.

I understand where you're coming from, but these circumstances are so exceptionally rare they will have no impact on sexual abuse, at least in the Catholic Church. Other than a handful of sacramental Protestant churches like the Anglicans or Lutherans, I don't know of any Christian denominations with a similar sacrament, let alone a derivative religion of Christianity like Mormonism.

If the law was modified to exempt the seal of confession, the Church would have no problem with it. This seal is extremely, extremely important.
The Catholic Church has rampant sexual abuse problems that have completely devasted its reputation. I'd say that's more importnat than some legalistic autism over the sacrements.
 
Back