If it was never about the money, tear up that contract!

zod

The Catholic Church have always maintained that there was no cover up within the higher echelons of their hierarchy with regard to sexual abuse by their dominions.

The Church have said that the deal that was reached with the Government was done hastily to enable compensating abuse victims quickly - never to limit the amount the Church would have to pay out. The 100 million maximum liability agreed to by the Government was a side issue when it comes the real need of helping the victims.

With the total amount of claims for sexual abuse at the hands of priests et al to be reaching 1.3 billion, will the church NOW rip up that contract and pay over the fair amount ??

Rev Hellfire

I'm a curious sort, where did the 1.3 billion figure come from ?

robindch

> I'm a curious sort, where did the 1.3 billion figure come from?

It's an estimate by the Comptroller and Auditor General in the Dail recently. There are around 15,000 claimants under the legislation, and so far, each successful applicant has won an average of around EUR80,000. Plus costs, that adds up to around 1,300,000,000 euro.

Rev Hellfire

Interesting, and you wouldn't happen to know what the success rate for the claiments is. You can see this becoming quite the cashcow for people. Not to say that there aren't valid claims mind you before anyone thinks I'm implying that.

Asiaprod

Rev Hellfire wrote:

Interesting, and you wouldn't happen to know what the success rate for the claiments is.

Thats a good question, also
How do the claiments prove their claim?
And who decides?

robindch

> you wouldn't happen to know what the success rate for the claiments is.

I believe that around 75% of claimants are found to meet the criteria which are listed on the Residential Institutions Redress Board website at http://www.rirb.ie.

> You can see this becoming quite the cashcow for people.

Hmm... I take it from this comment that you weren't one of the victims.

Here's a link to the full article which appeared in last Friday's Irish Times:

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2006/0127/1436132223HM1ABUSECOMPENSATE.html

...which explains fully where the figure came from, and the qualifications which surround it.

Rev Hellfire

robindch wrote:

Hmm... I take it from this comment that you weren't one of the victims.

You take it correctly and I did state that I wasn't dismissing the claim's at the time of the post.

The facts are that there was wide spread abuse; noone deny's that. But some would argue that there is to a degree a witchhunt occuring at present with respect to the church (I'm not one of those I simply dont care if I'm to be honest).

I was merely curious as to if anyone is taking advantage of the situation to line their own pockets, something which wouldnt be unheard of in this country.

robindch

> some would argue that there is to a degree a witchhunt occuring
> at present with respect to the church

Some would think it ironic to see the church at the receiving end of a witchhunt, rather than at the delivery end

Anyhow, I do agree with you that a few people certainly do believe this, but I think that most of them are members or employees of the same church and perhaps not in the best position to see how it all looks from the outside.

> I was merely curious as to if anyone is taking advantage of the situation
> to line their own pockets

I'm sure some have tried to, but the guidelines are pretty clear and, as above, not everybody who makes a claim receives cash.

zod

Update here

I notice that none of the religious on this forum have answered this question?

JimiTime

zod wrote:

I notice that none of the religious on this forum have answered this question?

Maybe because this relates to the Catholic Church. You'll find that most of the 'religious' here are not Catholic.

Dave!

robindch wrote:

> some would argue that there is to a degree a witchhunt occuring
> at present with respect to the church

Some would think it ironic to see the church at the receiving end of a witchhunt, rather than at the delivery end

Anyhow, I do agree with you that a few people certainly do believe this, but I think that most of them are members or employees of the same church and perhaps not in the best position to see how it all looks from the outside.

> I was merely curious as to if anyone is taking advantage of the situation
> to line their own pockets

I'm sure some have tried to, but the guidelines are pretty clear and, as above, not everybody who makes a claim receives cash.

I seem to remember a story recently about a bloke who fabricated a story of abuse... He got found out though. Not sure what penalty he receieved, but what a scumbag.

zod

ok, so some people tried to cash in, that's inevitable.

Now. Do you think the church should pay their fair share ?

JimiTime

zod wrote:

ok, so some people tried to cash in, that's inevitable.

Now. Do you think the church should pay their fair share ?

If they are guilty, absolutely! Why shouldn't they have to?? If an organisation sets itself up as a moral guardian and abuses its position in such a horrid manner, it should be chastised accordingly.

Fanny Cradock

zod wrote:

Update here

I notice that none of the religious on this forum have answered this question?

Not every Christian is of Catholic persuasion, so I wouldn't look into that too much.

zod

JimiTime wrote:

If they are guilty, absolutely! Why shouldn't they have to?? If an organisation sets itself up as a moral guardian and abuses its position in such a horrid manner, it should be chastised accordingly.

Guilt is not at question here, each case is investigated. No doubt the overall process would have a small margin of error.

The question is - did the Church cover it up, and then only when they had no choice threaten to stall unless a limit was placed on their liability.

Was it always about the money.

Hivemind187

Of course it was about the money. The church is a business and any business will seek to limit the expenses it has so it can maximise profits. Morality, contrary to their claims, has sod all to do with it.