Shellon

Case 4. A federal court in Iowa ruled that a woman who had been seduced by a priest could not sue her church and diocese for violating the federal Violence Against Women Act. An adult female claimed that when she arrived at church one evening to participate in the choir during evening mass she was sexually assaulted by her priest. As a result, the woman claimed she suffered severe emotional trauma. She later sued the priest, her church, and diocese, on the basis of a number of theories. The first count of her lawsuit asserted that the priest’s actions amounted to a violation of the federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). VAWA, which was enacted by Congress in 1994, declares that all persons “have the right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender.” It further specifies that a person who commits a “crime of violence” motivated by gender “shall be liable to the party injured” for both compensatory and punitive damages. VAMA defines a “crime of violence” as an act or series of acts that would constitute a felony. The woman claimed that the priest’s behavior would constitute a felony under a state law making it a crime for a pastoral counselor to engage in sexual contacts with a counselee. The Iowa statute in question prohibits “exual exploitation by a counselor or therapist.” Iowa Code § 709.15.1.f. A “counselor or therapist” is defined to include members of the clergy “or any other person, whether or not licensed or registered by the state, who provides or purports to provide mental health services.” Mental health service is defined as “the treatment, assessment, or counseling of another person for a cognitive, behavioral, emotional, mental, or social dysfunction.” The woman alleged that the priest “served as a counselor to [her].” A federal district court in Iowa ruled in favor of the woman, and also found that the church and diocese were liable for the priest’s behavior on the basis of negligent supervision. A federal appeals court reversed the lower court decision for two reasons. First, the woman failed to prove that the priest was her “counselor or therapist” within the meaning of the Iowa statute. Second, for the priest’s actions to violate VAWA, they would have to be a “crime of violence” amounting to a felony under state law. The court concluded that this requirement was not met. Under the Iowa statute, a “pattern or practice or scheme of conduct” to engage in any sexual conduct with a patient or client is a felony. Sexual conduct with a patient or client that is not part of a pattern, practice, or scheme is an aggravated misdemeanor. The court concluded that the one instance of sexual conduct alleged in the lawsuit did not constitute a pattern, practice, or scheme of conduct within the meaning of the statute. Therefore, the most serious violation the priest committed under state law was an aggravated misdemeanor. This case illustrates a new basis of liability for churches. In those states in which sexual misconduct by a minister with a counselee is a felony, a church may be liable (for both compensatory and punitive damages) for its minister’s acts of sexual misconduct with a counselee on the basis of the federal Violence Against Women Act. Ministers who engage in counseling activities are subject to criminal liability in many states for engaging in sexual contact with a counselee, and so the importance of this case to church leaders is clear. However, as this court noted, this basis of liability is subject to important limitations. Most importantly, the acts of the minister must constitute a felony under state law. As a result, the requirements of applicable state statutes must be reviewed to determine a church’s potential liability under the Violence Against Women Act. In many states, this will be a new basis of liability. Doe v. Hartz, 134 F.3d 1339 (8th Cir. 1998).

A widow is a woman who's husband has died and she is without an adult son, therefore no guardian. That was me, yup, uhhuh. 36 years old with a brand new title. Widow. ew and yuck too. Widows weren't 36, they were 90, what the he!!? So, indeed, the men in the church circled me and decided they'd cover me and my daughters, assist in the decision making process of my home and family and be my head. This got much more interesting once I got my footing regarding the Life Insurance Money, which took me a long time since money and I are rarely on the same speaking terms and I avoid said discussions when and where possible. I filled out their paperwork to get the insurance check, the autopsy report was complete, death certificate issued, signatures placed in all the right places and they said "check to be issued in 45 business days, Mrs. North". I did not want that money. Simple as that, I didn't want it, was not going to watch my mail box for the little slip that said I had a certified letter waiting for me, was not going to discuss the money and refused to answer 'what are you going to do with the insurance money' questions. I wanted my husband, not money. What money? This was made even more interesting for me when TWI someone said that I, of course, would Abundantly Share from the money, yes? What money? "You are obligated to give at least 10% of that to the ministry, Shellon. 15 - 20 % would be well received" What money? yeah, you get the idea, right? If I didn't have the money, if I didn't see the money, if THEY didn't know I had or saw the money, the starers would leave me alone about it. The check arrived, of course and I held on to the Post Office notices for about a week, avoiding the picking up of the "award". Yeah, award. I called my mother, all three of my brothers, I called an attorney. I wanted someone to tell me something like 'you don't have to accept the money. Yes you are the beneficiary, yes it is in your name, but no, you can ignore it and it'll go away'. Then I got practical, since we were still without a vehicle, rent had to be paid every month, I had to keep fruit loops on our table, baby needed a new pair of shoes and I had done nothing about work. I realized that if I collected the money, TWI would know it like they seemed to know everything else and it would be one more thing I had no control over, again. And the TWI lawyers contacted me about the final balance due our Government after tax court. Crap.

Other cases Other courts have addressed the criminal liability of clergy for sexual contacts with adults. Consider the following examples. Case 1. A Minnesota minister was convicted on four felony counts of "psychotherapist-patient criminal sexual conduct" for engaging in sexual relations with a female counselee. The minister served as senior pastor of a Christian Missionary Alliance Church. He was approached by a married female member who desired counseling for low self-esteem, suicidal thoughts, grief, compulsions, an eating disorder, and premenstrual syndrome (PMS). The first several counseling sessions consisted of a discussion of Bible passages. In time, the pastor began discussing sexual issues although the woman insisted that she had not sought counseling for such matters. The pastor persisted in discussing sex, saying that sex was a "gift from God" and that he was "working" with her on her sexuality. After several sessions, the woman’s husband and a close friend advised her to seek other help since she did not appear to be improving. The pastor insisted that terminating the counseling relationship had to be a mutual decision, and that it was "nobody else’s business". At the conclusion of one counseling session that explored the subject of grief, the pastor gave the woman a brief hug, which she thought was appropriate but did not want to continue. The following week she asked the pastor if they were engaged in "normal counseling," and he replied that he loved her. The session ended with the two engaged in hugging and passionate kissing. Two days later, the woman went back to clarify that their relationship would remain "platonic" and non-sexual. At that meeting, the two engaged in hugging and kissing. The pastor gave the woman a rose as a symbol that their relationship would forever remain "pure and chaste from afar" and that he would "maintain her virginity". A couple of weeks later, the woman returned to the pastor’s office one evening and again the following morning. The two engaged in sexual fondling. This conduct was during her menstrual period, and the pastor assured her that their behavior would "help her work through negative issues about her menstrual period." A month later, the two went to a motel and engaged in sexual intercourse for the first time. The woman testified that the pastor assured her that it was a "good" sexual encounter because he was unselfish. He also informed her that sex between a counselor and counselee was a felony in Minnesota. Shortly after this incident, the woman gave the pastor a signed letter stating "I, the undersigned, have given [my pastor] control of my life--my future--out of my abiding love for him." The two engaged in sexual intercourse on at least two other occasions over the next few months. The woman testified that the pastor assured her that sexual intercourse was consistent with her "treatment" because it would remove her inhibitions about sex and "set her free" from her sexual "hang-ups". A short time later, the two left town at the pastor’s request. At his request, the woman issued him checks amounting to $11,000. The pastor was later prosecuted for four felony counts of criminal sexual contact. Minnesota law imposes a penalty of up to 15 years in prison for either (1) "sexual contact" by a "psychotherapist" with an "emotionally dependent" patient, or (2) sexual contact by a psychotherapist with a patient occurring by means of "therapeutic deception". Minnesota law imposes a penalty of up to 20 years for either (1) sexual intercourse by a "psychotherapist" with an "emotionally dependent" patient, or (2) sexual intercourse by a psychotherapist with a patient occurring by means of "therapeutic deception". A jury convicted the pastor on all four felony counts, and he appealed. In upholding the conviction, a state appeals court concluded that the pastor was a psychotherapist since he had assumed the role of a counselor, and that he had in fact committed both sexual contact and sexual intercourse with an "emotionally dependent" patient, and that the sexual contact and intercourse occurred because of "therapeutic deception". In concluding that the woman was "emotionally dependent" on the pastor, the court relied on the testimony of expert witnesses who stated that "there is a power imbalance in a pastoral counseling setting because the client idealizes the pastor." The court also referred to (1) 32 notes and cards the woman had sent the pastor, (2) the fact that the woman had "signed over her life" to the pastor, (3) the fact that the woman had violated her strongly held religious beliefs and instincts to engage in what she felt was a very sinful relationship, and (4) the $11,000 she gave the pastor at his request. The court also concluded that the sexual contact and sexual intercourse had occurred "because of therapeutic deception". In reaching this conclusion, the court referred to the pastor’s frequent assurances that sexual contact and intercourse were part of the woman’s "ongoing treatment" and were necessary to remove her inhibitions and hang-ups. In rejecting the pastor’s claim that he had a constitutional right to engage in consensual sexual relations with whomever he chose, the court ruled that no constitutional right protects a pastor who engages in sexual activity as part of religious counseling. The court observed: "These statutes are meant to protect vulnerable persons and allow them to reposit trust in those who can help them. The legislature has recognized the emotional devastation that can result when a psychotherapist takes advantage of a patient." State v. Dutton, 450 N.W.2d 189 (Minn. App. 1990). Case 2. A minister was sentenced to two consecutive life sentences for 3 acts of rape and 8 first-degree sexual offenses perpetrated on 4 women. The minister professed his innocence during his trial, but the prosecutor introduced into evidence several “love letters” the minister had written to at least one of the victims, along with several pornographic magazines and videos found in the minister’s apartment. The magazines and videos were introduced by the prosecutor to rebut the minister’s attempt to portray himself as an exemplary “family man” and minister. A North Carolina appeals court rejected the minister’s claim that the 2 consecutive life sentences constituted “cruel and unusual punishment” in violation of the Constitution. This case illustrates the significant criminal liability that clergy face for acts of sexual misconduct. Of course, this is in addition to civil liability. State v. Woodard, 404 S.E.2d 6 (N.C. App. 1991). Case 3. A church hired a minister (the “counselor”) to provide counseling to members of the congregation. A female member (the “victim”) of the church had been experiencing emotional problems, including depression related to her father’s death. She claimed that she was encouraged to seek counseling from the church counselor by a church leader. Shortly thereafter, the counselor allegedly called the victim to offer his services as a counselor. The counselor supposedly told her that she needed secular psychological, and not religious, counseling which he was well qualified to provide. He further explained that such treatment was included in his job description at the church. The victim began psychotherapy sessions with the counselor at his office at the church. According to the victim, the counselor quickly insisted that she increase the frequency and length of her therapy sessions and he told her that “religion does not apply here. Your problems are so deep you need more psychological treatment from me.” The victim contends that she became very involved in her therapy and extremely attached to the counselor. The counselor allegedly represented to her that he was a capable, trained professional who could be relied on to assist her with her serious personal problems and who could be trusted to act in her best interest. Some time later, the victim alleged that the counselor gave her the following ultimatum: “I have been giving to you, and I need something back for my services, you must give back to me or I will not work with you anymore.” From that time on, for a period of nearly two years, the victim’s “therapy sessions” consisted, in part, of sexual relations with the counselor. The victim filed a lawsuit in federal court against the counselor, her church, and denomination. The lawsuit alleged several theories of liability, including professional negligence. A federal district court dismissed the victim’s lawsuit. In rejecting the victim’s claim of professional negligence, the court observed: "In Illinois, while cases such as this one suggest that it may be appropriate, it appears that neither the courts nor the legislature have established a cause of action for clergy malpractice. . . . Moreover, the Illinois legislature explicitly excluded the clergy from the statute which imposes liability upon psychotherapists for sexual exploitation." Dausch v. Ryske, 1993 WL 34873 (N.D. Ill. 1993).

Criminal Liability of Clergy for Sexual Misconduct with Adults By Richard R. Hammar, J.D., LL.M., CPA © Copyright 2004 by Church Law & Tax Report. All rights reserved. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is provided with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. Church Law & Tax Report, PO Box 1098, Matthews, NC 28106. Reference Code: m67 m29 m37 c0504 Doe v. F.P., 667 N.W.2d 493 (Minn. App. 2003) Article summary. Ministers who engage in sexual contact with adult members of their congregation expose their church to potentially substantial liability. Many of these cases have been reported in this newsletter. But, such behavior has other consequences. One of those consequences is criminal liability. Several states have enacted laws that make sexual misconduct by clergy in a counseling relationship a crime punishable by imprisonment. This article addresses this form of liability. It reviews a recent case in which a minister was prosecuted under such a statute, and then reviews existing laws in all 50 states. Some ministers have engaged in sexual contact with adults in the course of their ministry. Most of these cases occur in the context of a counseling relationship with a member of the congregation, but they also can occur with staff members. However they occur, such incidents can be devastating to a church. The minister may be suspended or dismissed, the congregation may be divided over the appropriate response, and the church may be sued by the other party who may claim that the sexual contact was nonconsensual. Some of these cases may result in negative publicity in the media, which can be devastating to a church's reputation. There is another possible consequence in such cases that often is overlooked. The minister who engaged in the sexual acts may be charged with criminal behavior and prosecuted. If convicted, the minister faces imprisonment. This article will address the potential criminal liability of ministers for nonconsensual sexual contacts with adults. It begins by reviewing a recent case in Minnesota in which this kind of liability was addressed. The article also reviews the relevant criminal statutes of all 50 states so that churches will be able to assess this risk in their state. facts Mary and her husband and three young children were members of a church. Mary worked part-time as a musician for the church. The church employed a new pastor who became acquainted with Mary in her capacity as a musician and became a friend of family. Mary met weekly with the pastor to plan the music for worship services. They developed what both regarded as a close friendship. In the pastor's words, they "fell in love" and mutually disclosed intimate details of their lives. The pastor disclosed sexual relationships with other women, and Mary revealed her fear of alcoholism and her dissatisfaction with her marriage. The pastor advised Mary to see a counselor for her family problems and a substance abuse expert for her alcoholism; he also recommended a spiritual advisor for her. Mary saw all three of these professionals on an ongoing basis. The sexual component of the relationship between Mary and her pastor began with hugs and progressed to sexual intimacy. A few years later the pastor accepted a position in a church 100 miles away. Mary traveled to be with him on several occasions, and many of these visits involved sexual relations. The relationship ended five years later after Mary discovered that the pastor was sexually involved with another woman. Mary and her husband later sued the pastor and their church on several grounds, including violation of a state law prohibiting "sexual exploitation" of counselees by ministers. The court also ruled that a state law making it a crime for ministers to engage in sexual contact with counselees violated the first amendment's "nonestablishment of religion" clause. The case was appealed. the court's ruling civil liability of "psychotherapists" Mary and her husband claimed that the pastor was liable for monetary damages on the basis of a state law making "psychotherapists" liable for engaging in sexual contact with counselees. The statute permits counselees to sue a psychotherapist for sexual contact that occurred (1) during the period the patient was receiving psychotherapy from the psychotherapist; or (2) after the period the patient received psychotherapy from the psychotherapist if (a) the former patient was emotionally dependent on the psychotherapist; or (b) the sexual contact occurred by means of therapeutic deception. Minn. Stat. 148A.02. The term "psychotherapist" is defined by the statute to include a "member of the clergy . . . whether or not licensed by the state, who performs or purports to perform psychotherapy." "Psychotherapy" is defined as "the professional treatment, assessment, or counseling of a mental or emotional illness, symptom, or condition." The statute provides that "it is not a defense to the action that sexual contact with a patient occurred outside a therapy or treatment session or that it occurred off the premises regularly used by the psychotherapist for therapy or treatment sessions." Mary and her husband insisted that the pastor met the definition of a psychotherapist, and that the counseling he was providing to Mary amounted to psychotherapy. Mary claimed that the pastor had counseled her, and she defined counseling as, "You just simply go talk to someone about your personal problems." In her deposition, she referred to the pastor as a friend of her family and to their relationship as mutual and between equals. She testified that, when their friendship began, the pastor shared with her information about his sexual activities with other women in other churches. She also testified that when, near the end of their relationship, she discovered that he was sexually involved with another woman, she was hurt; the pastor testified that she was jealous. The appeals court concluded that the pastor had not been engaged in psychotherapy. It referred to a case in which the state supreme court found that a minister was a psychotherapist based on the following factors: (1) he referred to his sessions with a couple as "marital counseling"; (2) the meetings with the couple varied from weekly to monthly over two years; (3) he brought third parties to the counseling sessions to assist the couple with their marriage problems; (4) he discussed his psychological coursework and used psychological terminology; (5) he conducted psychological and personality examinations of the couple and assessed their personalities; (6) he attempted to modify one party's behavior; and (7) he challenged the opinions of professional counselors, saying that they did not understand the situation as well as he did and that his advice and approach were superior to theirs. Odenthal v. Minnesota Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists, 649 N.W.2d 426 (Minn. 2002). The appeals court noted that none of these factors were present in this case: The pastor referred to himself and Mary as friends; she spoke of him as her friend and of their relationship as between equals. During the period that the pastor and Mary had regular weekly meetings, the meetings were for the purposes of liturgy planning or choir practice. The pastor repeatedly advised Mary to seek counseling from professionals--not from himself--regarding her depression and her alcohol use, and she often discussed with him what her professional counselors had told her. The pastor had no training in counseling or psychology. When asked if he counseled parishioners going through a death in the family, he said he would "visit with them and be with them in their pain"; when asked if he counseled parishioners about substance abuse, he said, "If they came to me, I would talk with them and refer them." He also testified about his own counseling, using the term to mean scheduled, compensated appointments with a professional psychologist or psychiatrist. He conducted no psychological or personality testing of Mary or of anyone else. He did not provide "professional treatment, assessment, or counseling of a mental or emotional illness, symptom, or condition" within the meaning of [the statute]. Their communications did not come within the statutory meaning of psychotherapy. criminal liability of "psychotherapists" Mary and her husband also claimed that they could sue the pastor on the basis of a state law making it a crime for ministers to engage in sexual contact with counselees. The law provides, Sexual penetration is third degree criminal sexual conduct and sexual contact is fourth degree criminal sexual conduct when committed by a member of the clergy either (i) . . . during the course of a meeting in which the complainant sought or received religious or spiritual advice, aid, or comfort from the actor in private; or (ii) . . . during a period of time in which the complainant was meeting on an ongoing basis with the actor to seek or receive religious or spiritual advice, aid, or comfort in private. Minn. Stat. 609.344. Minnesota courts have ruled that a civil cause of action can be implied against ministers who violate this criminal statute. The pastor claimed that the statute violated the first amendment's "nonestablishment of religion" clause because it singled out ministers for criminal liability. And, since the statute was invalid, he could not be sued in a civil lawsuit for violating it. The trial court agreed that the statue was unconstitutional. It noted that "whether a government action violates the establishment clause is controlled by three factors . . . . The state action must have a secular purpose, must neither inhibit nor advance religion in its primary effect, and must not foster excessive governmental entanglement with religion." The trial court concluded that the statute making it a crime for ministers to engage in sexual contact with counselees fostered excessive entanglement because, to enforce these provisions, courts had to determine whether the "advice, aid, or comfort" provided by a member of the clergy in private was "religious or spiritual." A state appeals court reversed the trial court's conclusion that the statute was unconstitutional. It quoted from the Odenthal case (mentioned above), in which the state supreme court rejected the argument that: because we will have to determine what aspects of the counseling relationship are religious and what aspects are secular, the court will become entangled in religion. However, [defendant] fails to identify how determining whether a person is providing . . . counseling for the conditions described in the statute requires any inquiry into the religious aspect of the relationship. Therefore, we see no need to parse out secular and religious counseling to apply this definition, and its application does not alter or impinge upon the religious character of the relationship. Therefore, applying the statutory definition of mental health services does not excessively entangle the courts in religion. The appeals court agreed, noting that "for us to determine whether the advice, aid, or comfort sought or received by a victim from a member of the clergy was religious or spiritual within the meaning of [the statute] would appear not to excessively entangle a court in religion." The court pointed out that whether a communication is of a religious or spiritual nature "is a question of fact frequently addressed by the courts in the context of the application of the clergy privilege." The court rejected the pastor's argument that the criminal statute was unconstitutional because it singled out clergy as targets for criminal liability. It simply noted that the criminal statute also applied to sexual misconduct by secular psychotherapists, government and private correctional employees, and transportation agents. Like sexual abuse committed by members of these other groups, "sexual abuse committed by clerics during the course of their ministry is treated according to neutral principles of law." The court concluded that "whether the advice, aid, or comfort provided by a member of the clergy in private was religious or spiritual does not violate the establishment clause by fostering excessive governmental entanglement with religion." It therefore reversed the trial court's decision that the statute was unconstitutional. State laws making sexual contact by clergy with a counselee a crime ( I stayed specific with only a couple states for this project) Several states have laws that specifically make sexual contact between a minister and a counselee a crime. Each of these state laws is reproduced below. Minnesota Statutes § 148A.01. Definitions 2. "Emotionally dependent" means that the nature of the patient's or former patient's emotional condition and the nature of the treatment provided by the psychotherapist are such that the psychotherapist knows or has reason to believe that the patient or former patient is unable to withhold consent to sexual contact by the psychotherapist. . . . 5. "Psychotherapist" means a . . . member of the clergy . . . or other person, whether or not licensed by the state, who performs or purports to perform psychotherapy. 6. "Psychotherapy" means the professional treatment, assessment, or counseling of a mental or emotional illness, symptom, or condition. . . . 8. "Therapeutic deception" means a representation by a psychotherapist that sexual contact with the psychotherapist is consistent with or part of the patient's or former patient's treatment. Statutes § 609.345. Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree 1. A person who engages in sexual contact with another person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree if any of the following circumstances exists . . . (h) the actor is a psychotherapist and the complainant is a patient of the psychotherapist and the sexual contact occurred: (i) during the psychotherapy session; or (ii) outside the psychotherapy session if an ongoing psychotherapist-patient relationship exists. Consent by the complainant is not a defense; (i) the actor is a psychotherapist and the complainant is a former patient of the psychotherapist and the former patient is emotionally dependent upon the psychotherapist; (j) the actor is a psychotherapist and the complainant is a patient or former patient and the sexual contact occurred by means of therapeutic deception. Consent by the complainant is not a defense; (l) the actor is or purports to be a member of the clergy, the complainant is not married to the actor, and: (i) the sexual contact occurred during the course of a meeting in which the complainant sought or received religious or spiritual advice, aid, or comfort from the actor in private; or (ii) the sexual contact occurred during a period of time in which the complainant was meeting on an ongoing basis with the actor to seek or receive religious or spiritual advice, aid, or comfort in private. Consent by the complainant is not a defense; 2. A person convicted under subdivision 1 may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to a payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both. Wisconsin Statutes § 895.70. Sexual exploitation by a therapist (1) Definitions. In this section . . . © "Psychotherapy" means the use of learning, conditioning methods and emotional reactions in a professional relationship to assist persons to modify feelings, attitudes and behaviors which are intellectually, socially or emotionally maladjustive or ineffectual. . . . (e) "Therapist" means a . . . member of the clergy or other person, whether or not licensed or certified by the state, who performs or purports to perform psychotherapy. (2) (a) Any person who suffers, directly or indirectly, a physical, mental or emotional injury caused by, resulting from or arising out of sexual contact with a therapist who is rendering or has rendered to that person psychotherapy, counseling or other assessment or treatment of or involving any mental or emotional illness, symptom or condition has a civil cause of action against the psychotherapist for all damages resulting from, arising out of or caused by that sexual contact. Consent is not an issue in an action under this section, unless the sexual contact that is the subject of the action occurred more than 6 months after the psychotherapy, counseling, assessment or treatment ended. Statutes § 940.22. Sexual exploitation by therapist; duty to report (1) Definitions. In this section . . . (d) "Psychotherapy" means the use of learning, conditioning methods and emotional reactions in a professional relationship to assist persons to modify feelings, attitudes and behaviors which are intellectually, socially or emotionally maladjustive or ineffectual. . . . (i) "Therapist" means a . . . member of the clergy or other person, whether or not licensed or certified by the state, who performs or purports to perform psychotherapy. (2) Any person who is or who holds himself or herself out to be a therapist and who intentionally has sexual contact with a patient or client during any ongoing therapist-patient or therapist-client relationship, regardless of whether it occurs during any treatment, consultation, interview or examination, is guilty of a Class F felony. Consent is not an issue in an action under this subsection. General sexual assault crimes Every state has enacted a law making it a crime to engage in nonconsensual sexual contact with another person. These laws constitute another potential basis of criminal liability for ministers who engage in sexual contact with a counselee or member of their congregation. A typical statute makes it a felony for anyone to "engage in sexual contact with another person without consent of that person." Assault and battery Every state has enacted a law making assault and battery a crime. These laws constitute another potential basis of criminal liability for ministers who engage in nonconsensual sexual contact with a counselee or member of their congregation. Insurance coverage Church insurance policies exclude any claims based on intentional or criminal misconduct. As a result, ministers who are prosecuted for a sexual offense involving a counselee or member of their congregation ordinarily cannot expect the church insurance company to pay for a legal defense.

I've been poking around lately looking up Precedents in regards to Sexual Criminal Conduct as it relates to clergy and have uncovered a ton of stuff. Since I put it in a document, I choose to copy and paste it here, hopefully in small increments as to ease of read. The citations are throughout the document(s) for you to peruse yourself and find further information as it might relate to you. ---------------------------------- Criminal Sexual Conduct Definitions 1st Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct A. 1st degree CSC requires proof of "sexual penetration" and one or more of the following elements: 1. Victim is under 13 and defendant is over 3 years older. 2. Victim is 13, 14, or 15, defendant is 4 years older, defendant is in Position of Authority over victim, and defendant uses that position so victim will submit. 3. Victim is under 16, and a. defendant has Significant Relationship to victim; or b. defendant has Significant Relationship to victim, and: i. uses force or coercion, ii. uses or threatens use of a real or fake weapon, iii. causes victim reasonable fear of imminent great bodily harm, iv. causes personal injury to the victim, or v. there are multiple sexual acts committed over an extended time. 4. Victim has reasonable fear of great bodily harm. 5. A dangerous weapon is used or threatened. 6. Defendant causes personal injury to victim, and: a. defendant used force or coercion; or b. defendant knows or has reason to know victim is: i. mentally impaired, ii. mentally incapacitated, or iii. physically helpless. 7. Defendant is aided or abetted by accomplices, and: a. an accomplice uses force or coercion, or b. an accomplice uses or threatens the use of a real or fake dangerous weapon. 2nd Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct A. 2nd degree CSC requires proof of "sexual contact" with elements the same as 1st degree. 3rd degree Criminal Sexual Conduct A. 3rd degree CSC requires proof of "sexual penetration" and one or more of the following elements: 1. Victim is under 13, and defendant is less than 3 years older. 2. Victim is 13, 14, or 15, and a. defendant is 2 years older 3. Victim is 16 or 17, and a. defendant has Significant Relationship to victim; or b. defendant is in Position of Authority over victim, and defendant is over 4 years older, and uses that position so victim will submit; or c. defendant has Significant Relationship to victim, and: i. uses force or coercion ii. uses or threatens use of real or fake weapon, iii. causes victim reasonable fear of imminent great bodily harm. iv. causes personal injury to the victim, or v. there are multiple sexual acts committed over an extended time. 4. Defendant uses force or coercion. 5. Defendant knows or has reason to know victim is: a. mentally impaired b. mentally incapacitated, or c. physically helpless. 6. Defendant is aided or abetted by accomplices, and: a. an accomplice uses force or coercion, or b. an accomplice uses or threatens the use of a real or fake dangerous weapon. RAPES IN A THERAPEUTIC SETTING 1. Defendant is a psychotherapist, and a. victim is a patient, and the act occurs during a therapy session; or b. victim is a patient or former patient, and the victim is emotionally dependent on defendant; or c. victim is a patient or former patient, and the act results from a therapeutic deception. 2. The defendant is a health care professional, and the act occurs by means of false representation that it is for a bona fide medical purpose. 4th Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct A. 4th degree CSC requires proof of "sexual contact" with elements the same as 3rd degree. Other elements are: 1. Victim is 13, 14, or 15, and a. defendant is 4 years older; or b. defendant is in a Position of Authority, and uses that position so victim will submit. 5th Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct This statute makes any nonconsensual sexual contact a gross misdemeanor. 1. Includes removal or attempt to remove clothes over intimate parts. 2. Excludes touching clothing over the buttocks.

When I was attempting to make a sound decision about my job at the local High School last year, one of the legal counsel I confered with gave me this site as to pointing me in the general direction of "hostile environment" http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-hostile-work-environment.htm It didn't benefit me in terms of what to do, but it kept it simple enough for someone like me who needs to see concrete information. Plus the environment at work was so often like trying to manuever in TWI and not being sure where to stand, what to look at and how hard I might have to duke it out with someone. TWI, without question, provides hostile environment. What did occur to me back then in 1997 when we'd finally settled in our new house for the most part is that nothing would ever be the same. Not because I was now a widow (I hate that word so much) and a single mom, but because as much as I hated TWI's term of "my head" now being dead. For me it wasn't so much that I was now the head of my household or that I had to make all those daily decisions, but that I had to do it all alone. More alone than I'd even remembered being. I think that was the moment of invisibility. God showed me some picture, literally, of a fruit market where I was in the middle, surrounded by fruit but I had no limbs with which to reach. But I did have a mouth with which to speak and I got it, very vividly and clear. There was another meeting; crap I came to hate meetings. This one was with yet another Limb Coordinator, To* Mu!!ins and my fellowship coordinator and 2-3 others, all men. And me. They had been putting their heads together (smirk) to figure out 'what do we do with Shell now' and they wished to share their findings with me. They would be my head, a collective of several men who would each have a need specific duty where they'd serve in my family. I understood, didn't I? Oh yeah, I understood alright. I thanked them profusely (why do I think of a hemorrhage there?) of course. By this time, also, my oldest Samantha had begun looking for a family that loved her, anyone who she thought might support her and provide her the comfort she needed. She was closer to her dad than to me; she and her dad were great friends, as much as father and daughter might be and they shared a great and sweet bond that had been ripped out from under her and she was in a great deal of pain. Drugs became her comfort and hiding place. Any drug, just so long as it dulled the pain or allowed her to go away from it.

Good idea, putting that, or anything that helps on a napkin! Fits better in the wallet too eh?

I'd hoped to be able to contribute something helpful but as I consider your original thread and understand it more, I hope, I can only add that I think life is like that sometimes. We get up every morning and do the best we can, do our best to make sound decisions and choices that aren't going to purposely hurt other people or ourselves and put head to pillow hoping it all went ok and we get another shot at it in the morning. I include you in our prayers around here and hope that your answers are received. Hang out here if you want to and glean what works for you, toss what doesn't. For YOU!

Amen Watered Garden they are one of the best, aren't they? I hate, most, the days that I feel somehow a little responsible 'cuz I did nothing to stop any of it. That, however, is for me and my own conscience and shrink to work out. Should I have adhered to my marriage promise such as I did or should I have taken my chances and our daughters and ditched? Should I have gone the way of a lawsuit later when invited to do so, but thus dragging those same daughters through that process? I don't have the answers to those questions. Copenhagen, I do understand and I shall be here if and when........ ============================== I didn't know about the meeting I spoke of until perhaps 3-4 years later, I think someone told me in Waydale Chat and while it stung; he!! it hurt bad, it didn't surprise me at all. Moynihan might be a bully but like most, he's not a stupid bully. It's probably good I did not have knowledge of the meeting at that time; I was really never sure what might tip me over the edge. We were going "home", back to Arkansas so I was on phone with folks back there getting housing so that we'd have a place to land and not have to be guests of anyone. I rented yet another house without seeing it, but didn't care; it was ours. The company that was evicting me had paid for our U-Haul to florida, and given our circumstances I asked them to pay for our return U-Haul, to which they agreed but not until I convinced them I really needed to get back there and even then, after their promise, the day I went to pick it up, it had not been secured. They had "forgotten". More time spent straightening that out, arrangements were made for a driver in our Florida fellowship to take it while towing my piece of crap car behind it and my brother in law purchased three airline tickets for July 18, 1997. Then a storm hit Little Rock and one of the trees in the yard of our new place fell through the house, essentially cutting it in half. The instructions were that no one was to tell me and if I called to see how the setting up was coming along, lies were to be told and told well. When I called to set up the gas utility, that was when I found out, as the customer service lady said "that address hasn't been repaired yet and is still not habital" so they had to come clean. July 17, the staring people packed our belongings into the U-Haul, we spent the night at someone's house, couldn't tell you who and Moynihans were to pick us up at dark thirty the next morning to dump us off at the Orlando Airport. Someone had packed our airline tickets in the U-Haul. I still, 12 years later, have no idea how THAT happened, since I'd had those tickets in my bag, but they were on their way to Arkansas and our flight was leaving in an hour. The company had deposited Bob's final paycheck into our joint account, so I spent that on three more tickets at the counter, holding my breath about the money, since the IRS was staring at me, the other signer on the account had just died and I was fast learning to trust no one. While I was somewhere between Orlando, Florida and Little Rock, Arkansas, my mother and step father's house burned to the ground; thankfully they were not home at the time. We arrived, an escort was provided to our new home, where I found our fellowship, the one we'd been in before, putting the final touches on our just repaired house and my coordinator said "hello, start cleaning the walls, we're running behind". You know what I did, don't you? Welcome Home.

Someone had authority to get into our personal finances, Lind?, and within about a week Moynihan showed up again and said "you're got problems". No shi+, really?? Tax season was something I had learned to not participate in, it was fodder for marital arguements and I stayed out of the way. Also there was plenty of instruction on how to work under the table, set up business's that couldn't be sued and not giving the Government what they said was owed them. One of the individuals who taught my husband how to do this spent some time in a Federal Prison for this exact thing and while it was being taught in my home, I knew something stunk, I just didn't know how to verbalize it since I was not at all educated or informed in business stuff. I stopped saying "something stinks" after awhile, handed over any receipts I had and stayed out of the way. I had a 13 grand tax bill that TWI lawyer found, what was I going to do with that, tell us now please. Since I, of course, had nothing more than confusion, it was presented to me that the TWI attorney would go to Tax Court in my stead, he'd petition for "ignorant spouse" defense and also ask for penalties and fees to be reduced if not evaporate. Heck yeah, I accepted that. In the meantime I was packing our home to reverse the move and find our way back to Little Rock, Arkansas, starting the second week following his death. There wasn't time to wait and rest and think, the company he worked for had sent me notice that the job benefit of our rent payment was only effective until July 15 since the recipient had died, thus my notice of eviction was attached. I had a yard sale and sold most of his tools and sports equipment such as fishing poles, gave away all but one box of his personal belongings and got our lives down to much more manageable stock. Then the Limb Coordinator of Florida, Mr. Bob Moynihan, had a meeting with his Limb lickers to hold my just dead husband up as an example of what happens when believers don't believe God, have weakness and fail to adhere to the promises God offers. "Do you see, we told you!" I was not invited.

I keep thinking about the opportunities that were afforded me and it kinda makes me cry with a smile at how well intentioned people really are while they're asking you so politely to bend over but you never consider to ask "you're using lubricant, yes?" You assume they're kind enough to remember that little detail and assume they've taken your best interests into mind and he!! it's rude to ask. Then it's rude to cry out and ya do whatcha gotta til they are finished and you can scurry away and quietly (always quietly) attempt to repair the damage to your soul. Then you make sure you never have your back to the door so you are ever vigilant for their return. You KNOW you can not answer their knock, pretend to not hear it, whatever...... but the cost will be even greater when they bust in the door. Holyshi+, that was my life in TWI. And maybe yours.

You see, I was used to this, this was my normal. I was raised to sit still, stay quiet and do what I was told. My parents, both successful professional business people, both raised in homes of strength and strong values, didn't waste that on us; they taught us to do whatever we had to do to survive and raise as little fuss as possible while doing it. The problem with this theory was that I had come from the womb, I think, screaming to be heard, busting to not take whatever was dished out to me and yet knew I couldn't, somehow; the two never matched up but I learned fast that if I kept my busting to myself and accepted what was told me, life was just easier; it just was. It fit really well in the slot of raising as little fuss as possible. This was and still is all very good and well in situations like formal balls that I attended in elite country clubs or when visiting royalty or other such hoopla; I was well trained and prepared and I can rise to whatever occasion is presented me. But while I'm doing all that, I'm only thinking of getting home to my comfy jeans and raggedy t-shirt with a book and a cup of coffee. It makes no sense to me either. But it was the reality and so long as I was a good girl, so long as I stood where they put me, so long as I complied, so long as I answered correctly, so long as I went in the direction they pointed, life was generally comfortable and safe. I never fit. So I was, of course, a perfect fit for TWI, aside from the fact that I'd made promises to a man 'til death parts us' and by God I was not breaking that; I just wasn't, end of story. He!! yeah I was ideal for TWI. In my childhood, my youth, my early adulthood, my marriage and TWI, no one had to fight me, no one had to convince me that I needed to stand, go, act, or speak the way they'd said. Any of you know someone in your world who you don't necessarily think about as weak or a victim, they just are~? It's not written on their face anywhere, it's just ............there. Then one day they do some weird incredible hulk shi+ and everyone around them is agape and actually afraid. Chances are pretty good, too, that the hulk will quickly go back to being the quiet easy mild mannered one as soon as is comfortable for everyone else. It makes life easier and causes as little fuss for others as possible. It's a really odd way of doing things and I'm not proud of it, at all. I really do not think that TWI or others had some meeting that had any kind of "Shellon is a 90 lbs weakling, we can kick sand in her face all stupid day and she'll ask for more". Bullies and manipulators know, instinctively, where the victims are and they've honed their powers of persuasion and ugly. I never want to disappoint, I never want to hurt, I never want to offend, I just want to be flippin' polite and kind and gentle. It's easier and less invasive to others' lives and space and time. It just never fits me, it's always ! too tight; always. Balance and boundaries are beautiful things, yes?

Now we had Fathers Day 3 days after the memorial service. Yeah, now what? How do we celebrate that one? (And it was not fathers day where we'd met all of Florida's "believers", of course, it had been Mothers Day in May.) But here we were, the holiday to celebrate Fathers and my children's father had just died, exactly one week prior. Someone decided, and this one might have been me, that we'd go out for breakfast and "celebrate". Tough to believe it was, actually me since I hate breakfast, but there we were in a Big Boy place for Fathers Day. My brother was gone by then and my youngest brother in law was still there. My oldest was more lost since Fathers Day was something that the two of them had enjoyed for 14 years and always spent together, without me even. Their thing was to see how gaudy and tacky of a gift she might find for him and they'd shoot hoops, go eat, go fishing, just hang out; it had been their thing and I wasn't her father so I loved it, wanted nothing to do with it, necessarily and now I had to do something. I was, from now on, to be some sort of father figure in their lives? Crap. However it did start a new tradition for us that lasted nearly 10 years. I bought them each a gift in thankfulness for making their dad a father. And this was the day, too, that I began to work up a really big pi$$ed that would last for a very long time and carry me through alot of situations, sort of propelling me along on the days when I wondered if I should. Three weeks later was Kelly's 2nd birthday and our fellowship wanted to throw her a birthday party; I was to bring the gifts and the cake. Three days after Fathers day, Moynihan and someone else, I have no idea who, showed up at my house with information that would rock my world further and set about a course that I am still not off of. They had been in touch with Headquarter regarding my "situation" and wanted me to know that the TWI legal department had offered to take over the financial affairs. I did what I always did and said "sure, ok, thanks" God I was exhausted.

Someone had taken my babies to their aunt's house and someone else had deposited me at my house to change and arrive at aunts house later, I guess. Interesting, now, since I still had no wheels. My parents each shot me a look of absolute and total disappointment, unlike any I'd ever viewed on their face where I am concerned and no words were exchanged. My brother, on the other hand said one word to me; "talk". The hard part for my baby brother was that I had no answers to give him, not even one. He had obviously just spent about 2 hours with our parents and we'd known each other long enough for me to know that if there is one way to pizz him off it's hurt our mama. I had enough remorse to fill the state of Florida but it was ineffective. I had more questions than he might ever dream up, but it didn't matter. I had pain I was carrying around that threatened to consume me, but it wasn't for him to fix. I had confusion that already had consumed me, but I was used to that. What else might I say to this man I had grown up with, who loved me as much as he did, who had just taken vacation from his job and life to come and be with his sister who's husband had just died? The fact that I had nothing hurt him as much as the betrayal he'd already seen that day and so many before it. I left my family sitting there in my house and went to whatever after funeral gig my sister and brother in law had put together for "family" and when I got home, my parents were gone.

Psalm, nice to see you again! Praying for you in this move !

Somehow the day of the Memorial Service showed up, it was a thursday. It felt like we'd lived three years in the 4 days since he died. It was pre-arranged by someone that the girls and I would receive an escort by Moynihan's right hand man P*ul B#ook$, who showed up at the given time they'd told us to be ready. My parents were waiting for my brother to arrive and wouldn't come with me and their grandchildren and things felt extremely tense. I asked my driver (that sounds strange) to wait, lets stall the service for awhile, surely my brother would arrive any minute. I was told that was not an option, we had to go and "your family is not invited anyway, Shell, you knew that". No, I didn't know that. I guess I was to assume that since the bruhaha in my kitchen the night prior, my dad and by default my mom, had been uninvited. If they ever were actually invited in the first place. And my gay brother.....HA! no way, I did know that one was going to be a huge hiccup, but I also knew that neither he nor I would be making any grand entrance or announcement; he'd just go to his brother in law's funeral; this is America after all. This brother had held up our wedding for over an hour. We realized at the last minute that we didn't have enough adult beverage and he offered to go, we had about an hour to spare, I was sobbing in some closet somewhere with my dad, my mom was wandering around chewing out anyone she thought might look like they had an ounce of TWI in them and Samantha, who was 2, was dancing; no problem, run for more booze, brother. He got lost somehow on the way back, we didn't have cell phones and he couldn't remember the name of the venue. I was not getting married without my brother there, it flat and simply was not happening. I kept peeking my head out the closet door and upon finding he'd still not shown up, hollared "We'll wait". Wait we did and the 6 P.M. wedding finally heard the first notes of "Here comes the bride" about 7: 15 when my baby brother had found his way. I was not coming out of the closet until my gay brother was at my wedding, dammit. I had no reason to consider that I could not repeat this years later at the memorial service of my husband. I tried refusing to get in the big 'ol black car, I stalled, I accidently forgot things and had to go back in the house. He didn't arrive and the man told me that we had to go. But not before he put his arm around me and told me he wanted me to know something. He said "Bob has all of his rewards". And so we went to the service, my parents fuming mad in my living room, my brother lost again for all I knew and my children more so. I have fuzzy memories of pulling up to the Limb home but we were sort of hustled into Moynihan's office, where I sat; the girls with me. He told me the general program and did I want to add anything else, had I changed my mind about speaking. I had not. He told me what song we were to walk into the living room to, where three chairs would be in the front row and the there would be sandwiches and punch and coffee afterwards. Before he left the room, he told me there would be a sort of receiving line where the girls and I were to stand "by the tall lamp" and greet each guest who wanted to offer their love and condolences and speak kind words of a man they'd just met within the last 6 weeks. I got the giggles during "When the roll is called up yonder" because Bob hated that song; hated the word yonder in a hymn for some reason y'all. They did the usual, stories about a man they didn't know, songs from Sing Along The Way, Moynihan was the only one who spoke. Probably alot of pretty words about The Hope 'n stuff. We found our way to form the receiving line, alot of holy kisses given and words of comfort like "you're young, you'll find love again" and "He was such a wonderful man of God" and "You're so lovely, you won't be alone for long, God knows this". People say stupid things rather than just shut up huh? Again, my upbringing, finishing school and christian ettiquete over 36 years had trained me very well to keep my face shut, smile where necessary, say thank you alot and keep going no matter how loudly I wanted to shout things like "I don't recall you ever meeting him, how do you know if he was a wonderful man of God", not to even begin to mention the inappropriate comments about me finding love again AT MY HUSBANDS FUNERAL. Someone shoved a plate of food in my hand, which I deposited onto someone else's plate when I thought they weren't looking, the juice given me fed the Moynihan's fern, Samantha disappeared again and Kelly was entertained until it was time for Moynihan's man to return us home where I had to face my parents and hopefully my brother. He was there and he was livid.

You're welcome Newlife ~! I'll never be able to fully express my thankfulness that you're still here.

I called my firstborn and asked her what was going on in her head that week, was I looking at her yet right through her, I'm sorry! She said her heart was 'bumpy' and she felt lost and alone and confused why her dad would be there one minute and gone the next, how he could pop his head into her room when he arrived home and say "hey how's it going, turn that shi+t down, I'm gonna lie down then we'll hit the mall" and the next minute I'm yelling for her to take her sister into the dining room, don't come out no matter what she sees or hears but call her Aunt first and tell her that something is wrong with dad, we don't know what yet, get here. She said after they told us he was dead at the hospital, she left the building. Didn't seem like there had been enough time for her to go out and come in before we had conversations with doctors and family. During the week when so many people were camped out at our house, she said she snuck out her window alot. She said when she ventured into the living areas to look for me, I was no where to be found or talking to someone or on the phone. She added that she heard me on the phone agreeing to have her dad cremated and knew enough of what that was and she couldn't come out and listen anymore. Ow ------------------------ I don't know how long my dad and Bob Moynihan argued in my kitchen and I know they asked me a few more times to decide about my dad speaking at the service. My mom stayed silent, rocking our toddler. Everyone was out of character that evening. Somewhere in this time period, I received an invitation from the Board of Trustees (Craig Martindale, Don Wierwille, Howard Allen) to have my husband's cremated remains buried in the Way Woods, at the edge of the campfire area. Given how much he loved the Way Woods and how many times he'd sat at that campfire; fire going or not, he just liked it, it was not a stretch for me to accept their invitation. I also had the issue of not having really given much thought to 'what the heck are we going to DO with the remains' and I knew I'd have bills I'd have to figure out from hospital over what his insurance might pay, ambulance, funeral home expenses and God only knew what TWI might charge me to do whatever the he!! it was they were doing. Saying yes to releasing my husband's remains to TWI, to Bob Moynihan, was not difficult. What I'd give now to have had a crystal ball back then.............. The job that had caused us to move there offered life insurance, health insurance and my husband was classic "we don't need that stuff, nothing is going to happen, we'll believe God" and didn't sign the paper, didn't sign them and did NOT sign them. I bugged him, often, why not get it, we've never had that stuff before, we have kids! The deadline was June 1 and on May 31, I stuck the papers under his nose, said "sign this now" went into his home office, made a copy and put the papers in his briefcase, on top. Eight days later he would have a massive heart attack in our home, leaving me and our children with no income, a hefty emergency services bill and I would find out two weeks after his death that I was the "Responsible Surviving Spouse" for nearly $13,000 owed to the IRS that I had no knowledge of until that moment. I had no way of knowing that the signing date on that paperwork would later bring about accusations that I was also responsible for his death.

The judge gave the feller 10 years.......... My link

I hate wearing dresses, always have and one way to get to spend time with my mom was to ask her to shop for dresses for myself and the girls for the memorial service. Just me, Samantha and my mom, no other family, no handlers, no followers. My dad had agreed to stay with Kelly. But we had to be creative, I was very good at this shi+ with TWI. It got us about 2 hours the afternoon before the service to just be quiet together, for her to hold my hand and us to relax a little. I had always wondered what people do with themselves when someone that close dies; just a curiosity of mine that I no longer had questions about, sadly. I still hate that we had to sneak away, however and not have their support and comfort and understanding that my mom had just lost her son in law, a man she loved and she was hurting too. I recall no one asking her how she was, did she need something, expressing condolences to her. When we got home, all he!! had already begun, it just wasn't obviouse yet, not too clear, just something in the air. I asked my dad where all the people were and he said "gone" to which I, of course said "where, what do you mean gone?" and of course his response was "just gone, Shellon". He was piszed off about something and I had no more energy to get into it, especially with my mom and children right there. Ok, gone, good. It occurs to me now that so much of this week, I had no idea where Samantha was. If you know me, you know that's just not an option, not knowing where one of my children is; it's simply not. But now I couldn't tell you. I have no memory of our usual goodnight routine, I don't recall getting after her once about her teeth numbing music or where the phone was and who was on the other end, our normal stuff. That makes me sad that I lost touch and was so lost that I didn't know where my child was. Kelly was 23 months old so she was on my hip or hanging with grandpa or contently off to the side coloring or singing or watching video's. I can still recite the entire 30 minutes of SPOT from the video she watched over and over and ....... But Samantha......no. Fifteen years old and her father, her best friend, had just died and her mama didn't even know...... Dammit, therapy is brutal. After dinner,Bob Moynihan showed up, announced, uninvited, again. My dad had been drinking shots of Black Velvet in memory of his son in law. The two together was a sure bad mixture and I knew it, but there was no where to hide and I knew that too. Was I hoping to keep these two men apart? Maybe, but here it was and it was ugly right from the start. I introduced Mr. Moynihan to Mr. and Mrs. Fockler; my parents Dale and Phyllis. "hello, nice to meet you, bless you, we sure enjoy your daughter around here, yes thank you we think she's pretty wonderful too" Whew, not so bad. My dad was the first to speak. He announced to Moynihan that he expected to be able to speak at Bob's service tomorrow. Moynihan said that was not possible, he has a ministry service that was protocol and there was to be no other additions. Dale Fockler repeated himself, Bob Moynihan repeated himself and on it went, louder and louder and moved into the middle of my kitchen. I'm still not sure which one, I think it was my dad, who said "We'll ask Shellon". It had to be my dad, Moynihan would never ask me if I wanted to breath if he could help it. There was no time for escape, the distance from my kitchen to my living room was but a few short feet and two very irate faces were looking to me to give the right answer. I looked at the Limb Coordinator or Florida and I ditched my own father. I replied "I do not know what the procedure is, Dad, but Rev. Moynihan has to do it a certain way". I had just stolen my dad's one opportunity to be a part of his son in law's funeral, I had just turned my back on my family again for a religious organization that had turned it's back on me over and over again. I had just insulted my mother yet again, I had let my children down some more. Standing there in front of my parents, the people who raised me to be honest and straight up, to never back down from anything, to hold to what I believed no matter who stood with me, the people who had raised me. And I betrayed them. Again.

My dreams at first involved the loss of my children and it took years for the dreams to relax into less horrific stuff. I had to understand that they were normal as time went on and that my life or theirs wasn't actually in danger from some TWI activity. Most were unreasonable even. When my oldest went to TWI headquarters at the fifth anniversary of her dad's death to visit burial site, I was a mess of worry whether awake or in dreams, but it always involved her calling and saying "what's the problem, this place is great and I'm staying". It's a process, that's for sure.

Decisions at the time of loss are everywhere and since I was the wife, of course I had to make the really tough ones like "We are going to cremate your husband's remains at 1:00 pm tomorrow afternoon, would you like to attend?" Attend WHAT? The autopsy had been performed and the cause of death determined to be Atherosclerosis, he had 90% blockage in the majority of his heart, 100 % in some vessels, not compatible with life. No, I didn't not want to attend my husband's cremation, even though it was explained to me that I didn't have to necessarily stay and watch the process, but they like someone to view the remains a final time and nod through a glass partition that in affirmation that yes that is the right person. The choice to stay until the ending was an option. Sometimes I read medical books for fun, I knew exactly what was fixin' to happen and no, I did not want to sit with a cup of coffee and watch. But my dad offered to go, which I thought was a great idea so I handed him the keys to our car and took a really long, thoughtful walk, understanding what he was seeing, knowing he'd give me the full report and understanding that this was, somehow, the most final of it all, I had no choice but to accept this loss now. So vivid in my memory is one of the strangers that kept hanging out at my house pulling up beside me during this walk. Now what, was all I could think, until they told me. My dad had called my house. The car, our car, the only car we had, was broken down and what did I want to do. I wanted to suggest that since they'd been making all of my other decisions for me, they could figure it out, but this was something I could have control over, maybe. Here was a thought; 'go pick up my father and call a tow service to get my car home too, how 'bout it?'. I have no memory of how my dad did get back to my house, but he did so without my car as it was deemed "needs engine replacement, will not operate". Weird. The man who had just been cremated did all of his own mechanic work and his vehicles always ran very well. This inconvenience only left me more at the whim and mercy of the TWI staring people. Somewhere in this mess, we met in the Moynihan's living room to talk about a memorial service; Bob's family that had arrived and me. My parents, of course, were not invited and sadly I did not insist they be included. In fact I don't even know where my parents were. In this little meeting, we told Bob stories, we discussed how the service would work, who would do what. By 'we' I mean Moynihan and family, not myself. I had never wanted to get out of a room so badly or swiftly. Where were our children in all of this? It felt like I had not held my babies or talked to them in days.

Thank you grand-daughter, I was thinking of your Nathan, as well, the other day in terms of how grief was stolen from us. Too many parents like yourself, spouses such as myself, children and other loved ones never being allowed to just feel their grief and make decisions according to their need. Such a sad and tragic shame. Waysider, no kidding eh? All under the pretense of loving people through their loss and mourning process? I think not so much.

I didn't want to call my parents. Yet I was already offended that in the emergency room and since getting home, I'd spoken with every one of my inlaws; but of course they needed to know that their son/brother had just died so unexpectedly, so suddenly. My parents and brothers were never really a part of our family, sadly, and this was no different. unbelievers outside of the household, outside of the family of God and one of them gay. Uhhuh, not a part of the general consideration, sadly. I understood later I didn't want to talk to my parents because I couldn't stand any more "what do you want me to do?" And where my parents were concerned, I'm afraid the answer might have been 'get me the .... outa here'. I called my big brother, Steve. He and I had never been emotional together, sharing of anything that might require discussion beyond benign things just wasn't his gig. He rose to the occasion for which I needed him and was my spokesperson until the middle of the night, when I was finally ready to talk to our other two brothers. My parents had talked to him and were on their way the next day and I should have been looking forward to their comfort, their console, their presence. Instead I found myself dreading what was likely going to happen with them and the TWI folks. For the most part, we had never put our two families together, save for our wedding, I think, and now I had to deal with that alone. There was the TWI family/ household, my husband's family within the household who had just been dealt such a tremendous tragic loss and there was my family; three very different dynamics in my world. People were everywhere, where did all those people come from, people I'd recently only met at a Fathers Day Limb picnic and never really spoken to, people who only heard of us as 'the new family from Arkansas'. They were in my house, caring for my children, fixing our meals, doing our laundry, staring at me. When I'd go into the bathroom, someone would wait outside the door. When I took my children for a walk, someone kept a fair distance, but followed behind. When I went to the bank to get money out before they learned of his death and froze that bad boy, someone had to come with me. Exhausting. The funeral home people wanted answers from me; that hadn't occured to me until they called with the question "Mrs North, what are your wishes regarding your husbands remains?" Remains? My husband had been reduced to "remains". The Christmas before, there had been family discussion about cremation and he had briefly said he liked that idea. Someone else said that because he was only 35 and died so suddenly, it was legally required that an autopsy be perfomed. No, I don't care what anything legal says, there will be no autopsy, oh he!! no. They told me they didn't have to have my permission, legally, but they'd prefer I sign the permission sheet to allow them to examine my husband pathilogically. Because it's what I did, I called Moynihan and he said I had to comply, I had to follow the laws of the land, indeed I had no choice. My parents arrived shortly after Bob's family but I couldn't get to them. We had a little extra sitting space where our office was and my parents sat on the couch in there with me finding my way to them eventually but only to be called away to greet someone, take another call, make another decision. My parents were completely ignored, so uncomfortable, felt most unwelcome. I looked again and they were gone, assumingly to their hotel. Other family members had been offered and arranged escorts, housing and other needs, but not my parents; they were alienated, set apart, not "household". What was going to happen when my gay brother showed up in a couple of days for the memorial service. The Way International's care of family at it's absolute worst.

I was allowed in to the trauma area where my dead husband lay, but suddenly realized while standing there that my fellowship coordinator was standing there too. He, at least, was gracious enough to give me a few minutes alone, but still stood "just outside that door right there". Kinda makes me giggle now, but sure wasn't funny for a very long time. I looked into the now quiet face of the man I'd vowed to live life with, raise children with, grow old with. The man I'd struggled with through 15 years of life, grown up with, laughed and cried with. The man I'd seen heal others' lives with his calm words of compassion and gentleness. The man who only 2 years before had been wracked with sobs of joy at holding his newborn baby. He was gone. I'd never been of the mind of "I could never live with out him, I'd just die if he did" probably cuz that's a silly thing to wish on our children, but i did entertain the thought for a short time; I didn't want to do this without him, we'd finally gotten to a better place in this life, he had finally been what I thought was truly happy in his work, he had begun to see some end to some of our daily struggles and felt like he was taking care of his family. I removed the sheet covering they'd put on him and touched his entire body, searching for some way to come up with a goodbye to this fascinating, interesting, loving and good man. What felt more right was that he looked so quiet, so asleep and he'd wake up and be irritated that I was staring at him. Where was his sock ! ? He only had one sock on and for some reason that pisxed me off. These are the things that come and go in our minds in crisis. A sock. Somehow my oldest and I were in a little room with Bob Moynihan and our fellowship coordinator and we were discussing important things, I assume. The most important, to me, was when Samantha said "can we go home now?" meaning back to Little Rock where we'd just lived a short 6 or so weeks earlier, where her friends were, where alot of her dad's family was. We were strangers her and dealing with this immense loss with them. Yes we could go home now. Someone gave us a ride back to our house where I found, to my further exhaustion and ire, people. Alot of people. Someone had arranged for people to come to our home before we got there and clean up, finish the lunch I had been fixing a few short hours ago and prepare it on my dining room table. Remembering this now, I have no idea who these people were and the instructions to eat something, coupled with a sea of emotions and questions, only served to further make me mad. A phone in our house kept ringing but others answered it and responded to whomever was calling. My children were being seen to by other strangers. Someone began to do dishes in my kitchen sink, I heard a vacuum. Someone handed me a pill and a glass of wine. I flushed the pill in the toilet on my way into our bedroom, thinking a glass of wine in the last place I'd shared with my husband was a good idea. I wanted to be alone and think. I didn't get further than the doorway into our bedroom when I realized that these strangers had cleaned it. This somehow brought the grief of what had just gone down in our worlds to the front of my life sooner than I was ready to see it. The room looked as if nothing had happened in there. I wanted to see the bed askew where the paramedics had shoved it to make more room, I wanted to clean up the 'mess' from my CPR and his body's reaction to it. I wanted to put the laundry away that I had been working on when he collapsed. I longed for something normal. None of it was there; everything done for me. Where was that damn sock.