Editorial: So-Called N.J. 'Child Protection Act' Has Deceptive, Fatal Flaw

Times of Trenton
April 23, 2012

www.nj.com/times-opinion/index.ssf/2012/04/editorial_so-called_nj_child_p.html

Assemblyman Lou Greenwald

The testimony during the ongoing clerical abuse trial in Philadelphia has been as graphic as it's been heartbreaking.

Powerless victims of sexual abuse at the hands of priests are now old enough to tell their stories – and be heard. They have described methodical and brazen predators, freely roaming among vulnerable children.

Closer to home, New Jersey State Police have rounded up more than two dozen people who are suspected to have traded in child pornography.

As a society, we are more vigilant. We have learned, painfully, that priests should no longer be considered sacrosanct. And the state police have developed a high-tech means of identifying distributors of child pornography.

We still need to do a better job of protecting children.

There's much good in the Child Protection Act of 2012 sponsored by Assembly Majority Leader Lou Greenwald (D-Camden). The legislation would eliminate the statute of limitations for a civil action directly against the abuser as well as expand the category of those who are liable for knowingly permitting or acquiescing to the sexual abuse of a child, those known as "passive abusers."

Greenwald's legislation also would increase penalties for child abuse. And it would institute new training programs and standards for more rigorous background checks for anyone who works with children.

But it falls grievously short of ensuring that institutions, such as the Catholic Church, that turned a blind eye to systematic sexual abuse would be held accountable. While Greenwald's legislation does eliminate the statute of limitations on victims' legal action against abusers, it does so only for future cases.

It dilutes a much stronger bill introduced by Sen. Joseph Vitale (D-Middlesex) that failed to pass in the last legislative session.

In an editorial last week, the Star-Ledger termed Greenwald's legislation a "decoy," noting that "thousands of past victims would be locked out. Moreover, it eliminates legal responsibility for all but the actual abuser, protecting churches' leaders and treasuries."

Greenwald has defended his legislation as a way of moving forward. But we have to look back as well.

The bill itself spells out what molested children may experience – "pain and suffering, medical expenses, emotional trauma, diminished childhood, diminished enjoyment of life, costs of counseling and lost wages."

It can take decades to deal with that fallout, to summon up the courage and stamina to stand up to an abuser.

Abusers hold inordinate power over their young victims. When an institution shelters and shields those abusers, it only enhances their power and immunity.

Those who have suffered because of that imbalance should be guaranteed a path toward justice. Greenwald's bill offers them only a dead end.