Police and DCS Response to Allegations of Sexual Abuse in Church Childcare Setting

Beginning in this post, I am going to start sharing my #churchtoo story. I plan to share the story in stages for specific reasons. To begin, this #churchtoo story demonstrates the need for new laws in Tennessee to protect children in classrooms and group childcare settings in which allegations of abuse or neglect arise against an individual in a supervisory role. The first is that a mandatory notice should be given to parents and/or guardians of minors who were under the supervision of an individual in which allegations of abuse have been reported.

Within this post, I am not going to name the church or the city of the church. The reason that I will refrain from doing so is that there still may be families unaware of the risks their children were exposed to in this church. I have contacted and shared the information with those families I know personally, but I personally did not know many families. I have asked all parties involved in this case to take action on behalf of the children in this situation without success. The church’s disclosure minimized allegations, downplayed the risks the very young children were exposed to, and provided false assurances of safety. We didn’t understand the risks our own child was exposed to, and I know others misunderstood as well. My hope is that those in positions of power and trust will take action on behalf of the vulnerable in this situation so that the families can hear this information in a kind and supportive manner.

For context, the criminal misconduct incident involved allegations of a violent sexual attack against a very young child by a male Sunday School teacher. This teacher pled guilty to a lesser charge and was convicted. From what I have been told, he received no jail time.

Once the parents of the disclosing victim learned of the incident, they called to make a report to DCS. A police investigation ensued. The police and DCS told the church not to inform families whose children were under supervision the alleged offender. The alleged (now convicted) offender held this supervisory position teaching toddlers and preschoolers for multiple ministry years. Despite the fact that the offender held a supervisory role over very young children for multiple ministry years, the investigation was limited to the one disclosing child and the rest of the children in his classes were completely ignored either as witnesses or potential victims. We consulted with the various leaders and learned that no one could provide us any assurance that our child was safe from harm while under the offender’s care.

Sometime later on, I did cross paths with a woman whose son was is the offender’s class the ministry year prior to the incident – which happened less than a month before the reported incident. She and her husband did not receive a notice prior to the court hearing. Church pastors did not respond to inquiries she sent to the church once she learned of the conviction.

We sought out legal and spiritual guidance. Initially I called up attorney Allison Bussell to ask her advice on the matter. I didn’t know if she could help since her husband worked for a church. Yet, I was looking for someone who had some familiarity with working in churches. She said something about representing the “criminal side” and referred me to Nick Tidwell.  When I spoke to Nick, he repeated my concerns regarding the conduct of the church. Then he said, “Sounds like a cover-up.”  He also asked me questions such as, “Are you sure you are not a victim?” and “What about your son?” He referred me to Larry Crain and said something about not working with the media.

When we met with Larry, he asked a lot of unusual questions such as, “Are you sure your email is secure?”  He also advised that I archive all of my emails. I don’t delete my emails and shared this information with the attorneys.  After asking a few questions and discussing the situation, he told me that I had a lot of sensitive information. He said that we are going to handle this one step at a time.  I didn’t know what he meant by that.

Larry listened to our concerns, which he considered troubling. We discussed with him an upcoming meeting with church pastors. He said that he believed all of the children should be evaluated for harm. We pursued evaluations and consulted with him until we had tangible evidence of harm for our child. He said that he was hoping to be able to meet with the church board, but that was not going to be able to happen.

Prior to learning about the conviction, we had left the “incident” church and began visiting another church. Upon contacting this new church, we were put into contact with a care pastor who had past experience as a victim’s advocate for juvenile victims of violent sex crimes. We scheduled a meeting with the “incident” church pastors and this care pastor, Brandy Whitehead, came with us a  witness/advocate.

After these conversations, we continued seeking medical, developmental, and psychological evaluations and treatment. We updated the church after we had tangible evidence of harm and asked them to notify families and the church. We also asked for their advocacy with DCS.

Shortly after we learned about the allegations, conviction, and that the various leaders could not provide us any assurance that our child was safe from harm, I called to report suspicions of abuse. I was transferred to the detective who was on the case. He told me that some people are in denial there are deviants. The onus of disclosure was on the church. They have a lot to answer for. He also told me that he would not be taking down a report and would not be asking what my concerns for my child were.

We believe our son did not have the cognition or communication skills to provide a spontaneous, unsolicited disclosure of abuse at the age he was in the classroom. In a later phone call with the detective on the case, I asked him on what basis did he consider there to be no additional victims in this childcare setting. He said it was because there were no additional verbal disclosures. This is a developmentally inappropriate standard for toddlers and young children. In our son’s situation, it is doubly inappropriate as he had been certified speech and language impaired by the state of Tennessee.

Shortly after the last communication with the detective, I wrote a letter to the police department, Representative Charles Sargent, and the city mayor detailing my concerns. The police responded promptly, and I met with the police chief, assistant police chief, captain of the criminal investigations division, and the detective from the case. I brought them up to date with my son’s issues, and we discussed the overall handling of the situation. They told me no laws were broken in the way things were handled following the original reported incident. They told me they were interested in seeing results from his next round of medical testing.

I contacted them again after that round of testing. I communicated with the captain of the criminal investigations division and a new detective.

After I sent in a few emails, I received an email from the captain of the criminal investigations division, which reads in part,

“I want to ensure you again that we are committed to giving the parents of children harmed the best possible information so they can properly care for their child. If this investigation reveals enough evidence for additional criminal prosecution, we will present the information to the district attorney’s office for prosecution.”

I continued communications with the next assigned detective hopeful that families would be contacted.

abbreviated police communications names deleted

Several months after the police closed the file, I began advocating for new laws. I sent in a letter to Representative Charles Sargent, Senator Jack Johnson, the city mayor, and Governor and First Lady Haslam. In it, I detail the need for a law mandating a notice of allegations against an alleged offender in a supervisory capacity over juveniles.

I received a reply from Senator Johnson’s office, and I met with him over the issue several weeks later. He agreed that families should know of allegations in various childcare settings. During our communications, he indicated need for legal research. I have followed up on this issue, but have not received a reply.

I also heard from Governor Haslam’s office.

Governor Haslam Reply Advocacy

Governor Haslam suggested that I take up my concerns with Department of Children’s Services.

I sent in a letter dated October 23, 2017, directed to Ms. Hommrich which stated that I had contacted multiple officials within DCS asking questions pertaining to the investigations of allegations of sexual misconduct.  In a reply to my multiple communications, several of which Ms. Hommrich was included, Ms. Coble offered me sympathy but no answers.

I sent a record of my prior communications.

I re-stated my unanswered questions from these correspondences, some of which are listed below:

1.       I have heard that DCS typically talks to parents and children in a setting where an alleged perpetrator has been in a care giving role with multiple children, such as a classroom setting.  Would you explain to me why neither we nor our son were interviewed or contacted by DCS in this instance?
2.       Should families in Tennessee with children exposed to an alleged offender come to expect no contact either as a witness or a potential victim if this exposure occurs in a church childcare setting?
3.      Following a report to DCS, are each of the party’s(church, police, and DCS) responsibilities delineated in such a way that each party can meet the minimum requirements of the law and fulfill the function of their agency, yet classrooms full of children under the supervision of a convicted offender for a year or more are completely ignored as potential victims or witnesses?  
4.       Do you not feel that those knowledgeable that there were many children under the supervision of the convicted offender have an obligation to act on behalf of the health and well-being of the children beyond just removing the threat of future abuse?
5.       Since that(#4) did not happen in this child care setting, do you think it is worth looking further into what led to this outcome?

I mentioned in a prior letter to Ms. Coble that because DCS works together with law enforcement and child care facilities, I believe it is important that DCS understands what is going on behind the scenes within these other organizations.

The church, police, and DCS all had prior ongoing relationships with each other.  The city’s police officers were on the church campus every weekend providing security in the church nursery and children’s classes and traffic support.  In addition, the children’s pastor had been involved with DCS with various foster care and adoption initiatives. If there were a situation I would have considered a “best-case scenario” for the three agencies to come together on the behalf of the health and well-being of the children in the class, this was it.   

Perhaps each of the parties acted completely independently of each other and had no idea that institutions and offenders were effectively protected.  Maybe one party expected one of the other parties or the individuals knowledgeable of the risks and dangers to these very young children to take some steps of care on their behalf.  Instead, everyone was effectively relying upon the vulnerable children to speak up for themselves in order to receive help and healing and no meaningful care was provided to those who were potentially harmed.

Bonnie Hommrich 2017-10-30

This story demonstrates that we need new laws in Tennessee to protect children in classrooms or any group childcare settings in which allegations of abuse or neglect arise against an individual in a supervisory role. Examples of these kinds of settings can include sports teams, mother’s day out programs, Sunday school classes, and gymnastics and dance classes.

A mandatory notice must be given to parents and/or guardians when there are allegations of abuse against an authority figure.  Parents need this information in order to make informed parenting decisions regarding the mental and physical well-being of their child.  This is especially important when dealing with young children or those with developmental disabilities. Above all, the physical and mental health and well-being of the vulnerable children who have been under the supervision of an alleged offender should be the top priority.  It is an unfair burden to place on a young child to verbally disclose abuse in order to receive help and healing. Compared to older children and adults, there is a shorter window of opportunity in which to administer a productive interview.

Adverse childhood experiences such as child sexual abuse can have a long term impact on a child’s mental and physical health and well-being.  I believe the state has an obligation to act on behalf of children exposed to an alleged offender that has been in a repeated supervisory role over young children.  After an initial report has been made alleging abuse against an authority figure, I am concerned that each of the involved party’s responsibilities may be delineated in such a way that each party can meet the minimum requirements of the law and fulfill the function of their agency, yet classrooms full of children under the supervision of a convicted offender for a year or more are completely ignored as potential victims or witnesses and parents and other caregivers are left completely unaware of the risks of which their child was exposed.

The notice needs to be within a designated time period and forthcoming.  Waiting almost a year after an allegation and after charges have been filed is much too late.  In addition, describing a violent sexual attack against a very young child as an “incident of a sexual nature” grossly minimizes the very severe allegations against our child’s teacher and the grave danger of which our child was exposed.  It was not until after the teacher’s conviction that we learned important details such as the allegations, incident date, and age and gender of both the offender and victim.

Not only is the health and well-being of the young children at issue here. When an investigation is limited to considering only the one disclosing child, there is a missed opportunity to uncover the potential full scope of the situation. With young children, there is a limited window of opportunity to do an interview as their long term memory is not as developed as an older child or an adult. Parents learning of an incident one year or more after exposure is too long to wait. No one can say for certain the offender didn’t attack multiple children multiple times. Potentially, he could present more danger to the community than a one-time offender.

In addition, I have reasons to believe that the involvement of the three community organizations, the inaction of police and DCS, and the declaration of the incident as a one-time occurrence may have dissuaded some parents from considering their child’s behavior and/or physical signs to be potentially related to abuse. This messages came from the church, which many in our community put their complete and unquestioned trust in. This allowed some families to understand that the authorities were in agreement with the truthfulness of the church’s statements. It also gave the impression that the church, police, and DCS acted in solidarity and integrity.

Just imagine if charges would not have been filed in my son’s teacher’s case.  I am not certain that we would have ever been given any notice regarding the allegations of abuse.  That is precisely what I am concerned may be happening in other settings in Tennessee. Sexual abuse allegations are very difficult to substantiate and prosecute, particularly for young children and those with developmental disabilities, but that does not mean it did not happen and that the vulnerable were not at risk for abuse and in need of intervention much like my son.  

I believe a mandatory notice would provide motivation for organizations that provide oversight to minors to shore up their abuse prevention protocol and training.  If there are allegations of abuse and protocol was not being followed or an organization cannot say for certain they are, they should have to answer to parents and guardians regarding the lack of oversight within the organization.  This is a reasonable minimal expectation for organizations that take on the task of providing care and protection over minors and the vulnerable.

I propose the following at a minimum for a notice:

1.      A copy of the notice given should be provided in writing and a record should be made of it.  All parties involved in a case should have access to these written records, including the dates, contents, the recipients of the notice, and the specific periods of time the children were under the supervision of the offender.
2.      If law enforcement feels like a delay in the notice is warranted, that needs to be made in writing as well along with the specific reasons.  
3.      It is to be given to all parents whose children have been under the supervision of an alleged offender – whether the accused individual is a lead instructor, assistant, floater, or minor.  If the alleged offender has held a position over children in previous ministry years, school years, semesters, or seasons, the parents of those children must be notified as well.
4.      The ages and genders of the alleged offender, the incident date, and the allegations will be presented.
5.      No false assurances of safety should be given.
6.      No statements or conduct should follow the notice that would have a silencing effect such as directing concerned parents to individuals who have access to funds for counseling which would include confidentiality agreements.
7.      The notice will be made as soon as possible.  The first contacts should be made within three days, and the contacts should be completed within two weeks of the initial report.

I want to clarify that I am not proposing that the standard for criminal prosecution be lowered. I am proposing to change the standard for disclosing incidents to families whose children have been under the supervision of an alleged offender so that proactive action on behalf of the health and well-being of children and vulnerable be taken.

This has been a very challenging past couple years for our family. I am not the only one who was under the false impression that authorities would investigate the presence of additional victims in a classroom abuse situation with severe allegations. In the aftermath of discovering the allegations, the lack of involvement of authorities has been an impediment for our family in receiving treatment and support. As time went on and typical causes to my son’s symptoms were ruled out, my concerns regarding potential sexual abuse began to be taken more seriously – which I believe led to more appropriate evaluations and discovery of causes of symptoms. Having walked through this experience, I would not wish it on another family. I would like to make certain processes are in place so that there is not a repeat of what has happened to our family.