Whistle-Blowing: Curse or Salvation?

I’ve previously posted about the whistle-blowing paradox. We say we want whistle-blowers to the point that laws are enacted to protect them. We also say don’t want whistle-blowers if they become troublemakers to the point that they’re portrayed as mentally ill. The tension of whistle-blowing is considered in an article in the New York Times.

As early as 1952, the founder of a Roman Catholic religious order providing care for troubled priests warned in the strongest possible language that pedophile priests couldn’t be cured. He wrote letters to American bishops. He delivered this message to Vatican officials. He spoke to Pope Paul VI in 1963. Documents confirming this whistle-blowing have recently been unsealed in litigation involving the alleged sexual abuse by Catholic priests.

Church officials deflected this concern because early on, cases of sexually abusive priests were considered rare. Also, this priest’s views were considered bizarre because he believed pedophiles could only be treated spiritually, not medically, and should be completely separated from the population as a whole. Finally, it was erroneously believed that proper medical treatement cured pedophiles, resulting in recidivist priests being shuffled from one parish to another.

Had the whistle-blowing priest been taken seriously, the church would’ve been saved from scandal, and Catholic laypeople, particularly children, would’ve been spared the permanent damage caused by sexual predators. The church’s chance at salvation was transformed into a curse because a whistle-blower was ignored.

When we think of whistle-blowing in the context of employment law, we too often think first about a defense against a whistle-blower’s claims. Perhaps our initial thought should be gratitude. Some whistle-blowers aren’t truthful. Some are mistaken. Others are indeed troublemakers. But think of all the employers (Enron, WorldCom, HealthSouth, Tyco, ImClone, Adelphia) that would’ve saved themselves if they had welcomed and listened to their whistle-blowers.

1. 

   E. says:

   April 8, 2009 at 9:00 am

   Very interesting history about the Church’s denial. 9 years ago I read a book by a reputable Catholic Louisiana reporter called “Lead Us Not Into Temptation” by Jason Berry published in 2000. He laid it all out there too, as far as predatory priests are concerned. The shuffling them around…

   He was ignored too. Probably labeled a liberal troublemaker. Of course it all blew up just a few years later.

   The Church’s own history of its negative view of sexuality, and a celibate priesthood, I think, played a big part in its denial. Classic: We just don’t talk about such things in the hope that it would just go away and take care of itself.

   Not so, sadly.
2. 

   John Phillips says:

   April 8, 2009 at 7:06 pm

   Thanks for your input, E.

   The Catholic Church may be the most notable institution to ignore whistle-blowing (I think it’s fair to say that most religious groups don’t want to talk about possible flaws), but denial is a big corporate/business problem as well. Regardless of what company policies say, whistle-blowers are persona non grata. It’s hoped that whatever the situation is will just go away. But as you say, ultimately, eventually, “not so.” Thanks again.

   John