Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

nationalmoz t1_j2a0x72 wrote

You've ended up making way more work for yourself than necessary. Link 2, that you casually dismissed, is a comprehensive analysis by the DOE.

10% of kids get sexually abused at school.

>As a group, these studies present a wide range of estimates of the percentage of U.S. students subject to sexual misconduct by school staff and vary from 3.7 to 50.3 percent (Table 5). Because of its carefully drawn sample and survey methodology, the AAUW report that nearly 9.6 percent of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career presents the most accurate data available at this time.

Approx 4% of Catholic priests pre-2002 were abusers, and vast majority abused one child. Add in those who abused more than one, and you're getting closer to parity.

But they idea that the Catholic church is some outlier and you're not sending your kid into a same level of danger - particularly in today's classrooms - is just silly.

1

TheBlowersDaughter23 t1_j2acako wrote

Great, you gave me a number that I missed while skimming the report. But wouldn't it lower the bar on the right to the 9,600 mark as opposed to the 12,000 mark?

I dismiss the chart entirely because of its lack of substantial and current sources. We're looking at 2004 numbers for teachers, and pre-2002 numbers for priests (which I assume is from the John Jay report). A very different generation of people were active clergy members and active teachers in 2004 as opposed to now.

I'm sure the numbers can fluctuate due to the time elapsed, but this doesn't prove much considering that half of the sources don't work in the first place. Not to mention, less children attend church in the USA than school, so there'd have to be some mathematical adjustments made in order to accurately compare the two sets of data.

6

hecramsey t1_j2elo90 wrote

you are comparing incidents of abuse (DOE) it # of abusers (Catholic). unrelated metrics FAIL

2