Editorial

Editorial SEXUAL ABUSE The issue of the sexual abuse to deaf children in residential schools has come to national attention over the last few years. Unfortunately deaf children in residential as well as in mainstreamed settings are sexually vulnerable to predatory perverted adults. Often these adults are normally hearing members of the school staff, sometimes they are deaf, and frequently they are older school mates. The administrators of a school or any adult who knows about a situation where a deaf child is being exploited sexually has a moral obligation to protect that deaf child. This should be the first consideration and take precedence over all others. The issue is how it should be done. Should criminal charges be brought against the offending persons? Can they be fired without legal proof of the offense? Must the child testify? Should the abuser be encouraged to resign, only to go to another school and repeat the same offense? Some of these questions are difficult to answer . A lot depends on how much proof is available , how willing the victim (and family) are to testify, and what the effects will be on the child and the school. Realistically, isolated instances of homosexual and heterosexual abuse of deaf (and hearing) children inevitably occur in almost all schools, camps, church programs, and many other settings. Even the most concerned administrator is unable to guarantee such instances will not occur. However, when repeated offenses by the same individual occur or when such activity is organized and sustained in a school the administration and the professional staff have a responsibility to act in the strongest way possible to protect the children and punish the offenders. If they fail to do so, it is criminal negligence and should result in dismissal and criminal prosecution. The best approach to the problem is prevention . Careful hiring procedures are a first step. For example, depending on letters of reference about a new applicant is not enough. References and other sources should be contacted by telephone. The extra time required is actually the best time investment a school can make. Far more frank, honest data will be provided over the telephone than will ever be put in a letter of reference. Compared to the huge number of problems a sexual pervert or otherwise undesirable employee can cause, the difficulty of checking references by telephone is minor. The issues of sexual behavior between consenting adults and the sexual abuse of children are fundamentally different. The former, in my view, is a private matter between the parties involved. Consenting adults deserve the right to express their sexuality as they see fit. However , no adult has the right to physical sexual interaction with a child. Such abuse should never be tolerated in any school or other agency serving deaf children. The persons who have the courage to speak up and act to protect deaf children who are victims of sexual abuse deserve our deep respect . They are not as prevalent as they should be. Like the "whistle-blowers" who inform on federal budget waste, those with the courage to report sexual abuse of children often face the ire of incompetent administrators. NOTES California State University at Northridge (CSUN) celebrated 25 years of its cooperation with the Rehabilitation Services Administration . Awards went to the Honorable Dr. Terrel Bell, Secretary of Education and Dr. James Cleary, President of CSUN. The Florida School for the Deaf and Blind reports a highly successful reverse mainstreaming program. The idea offers residential schools some excellent opportunities. McCay Vernon, Ph.D. Editor A.A.D I September 1984 351 ...