MK forum

Discuss anything MK here
It is currently Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:10 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: NTEC
PostPosted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 4:30 pm 
IF you wanted to, the teachers and dorm parents you should look into are Art Gualteri (was removed from dormparenting after avery short time) Marty Larson (He resigned from the mission--I know this one was investigated as I was asked questions) and I think some more. Sometime between 1984 and 1990.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: NTEC
PostPosted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 4:33 pm 
I know for a fact that there were things that happened at NTEC in Chiang Mai that were not right. Those things may only classify as borderline sexually abusive (if there is such a thing), but they were definitely wrong. That is all I have to say about that.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: NTEC
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 867
To: Another student

A careful reading of the Fanda Eagles website confirms that very often victims of abuse, especially sexual abuse, are not aware that anyone else was so treated. Sometimes (often?), victims who were abused AT THE SAME TIME are not even aware of one another. Such is the nature of this hideous abuse; such the strategy of the abusers.

One of the benefits of this forum is to bring to light these abuses, borderline or otherwise. I would encourage you to post those incidents that you know to be facts - with a special emphasis on the word "facts."

To protect other victims, you may want to post in general terms: "In the 1981 school year, one of the dorm parents did such and such."

Other details will give added context: Was this reported to anyone at the time? Was the Field Committee aware of this/ these incident/s? Were other adults at the school aware? Were any parents aware? Did the students talk among themselves about it?

Others who have experienced the same or similar treatment may be emboldened to come forward. If there was inappropriate behavior, it certainly needs to come to light.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: NTEC
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:10 pm
Posts: 867
To: A Student

You mentioned in your post that you were questioned regarding one of the dorm parents. Would you feel comfortable giving more details? What questions were you asked? Were you a minor at the time? Were your parents present when you were questioned? By whom were you questioned - not names so much as postions: no official capacity, school leaders, school teachers, field committee, MK shepherding, etc.? Were you encouraged to "keep these things to yourself"? Were you ever told what the outcome of the investigation was?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: NTEC
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:56 pm
Posts: 165
Art Gualtiri (or whatever his name was), dorm dad at NTEC sometime in the early '90s for a brief period. Hot temper, liked to slam doors and yell at people. Did not experience and did not hear of anything beyond that. Was promptly removed from the dorm after his behavior was reported by the dorm kids.

There were some fairly aggressive "spankings" in the 1980s...but I do not think there would be any utility in mentioning names on this forum. Agressive spankings seemed par for the course back in those days, and most adults (parents or otherwise) would be guilty of some undeserved spankings. Nothing of which I am aware was to the extent where I think an investigation would be merited. Don't know what the policy is currently, but would highly recommend disallowing this type of punishment across the board at MK schools. People will typically forgive their parents for an occassional undeserved spanking or two, but they typically will not forgive anybody else for the same. In addition, there is simply too much room for abuse. One more thing: hanging various instruments of such infliction around classrooms merely to inflict fear in students probably is not a good idea.

I am personally not aware of any other activity that I would say rises to the level of sexual or physical abuse at NTEC. I am aware of some activity that I would characterize an inappropriate and ill-advised. I am aware of some potential victims who could not recall any specific sexual abuse but were convinced that there probably was some such abuse after they were asked to try to recreate what may have happened in their minds so that they could deal with it. At the end of the day, these potential victims were not sure whether or not any abuse had actually occurred or whether the idea had merely been planted within them by whoever was giving them counsel at the time (i know this from personal conversations with at least two potential victims). However, I am aware of an environment at NTEC that, if abuse had occured, the victims likely would not have had a sufficient means of recourse or a sufficient means of avoiding the repetition of such abuse.

I am not saying that abuse did not occur. I am not saying that the potential victims mentioned above were not in fact abused. I am not claiming that some would not characterize some of what I am aware of or experienced as abuse. I am merely stating the facts as perceived by me, and I am communicating my interpretation of these facts. The facts of which I am aware (personally or as communicated to me) do not justify, in my opinion, the conclusion that sexual or physical abuse definately did occur. However, these facts also do not indicate that abuse definately did not occur. Perhaps others are aware of additional facts that would create some definity.

A word of caution, however. Disclaiming certain facts in a public forum such as this one should be done with care and only if there is utility in doing so. This is serious stuff. Lives are on the line. Reputations are on the line. The potential to prevent future abuse is also on the line. To the extent that somebody has knowledge of certain facts, the disclosure of which may prevent future harm, these facts should be disclosed to the relevant persons who can take the relevant actions to reduce the likelihood of future harm. Whether that be on this forum or not, I cannot say. To the extent that protecting children from future harm requires that names be disclosed and reputations be destroyed, names should be disclosed and reputations should be destroyed.

In addition, for those of you, if any, who read my comments above and who were in some way "disappointed" that I said I am not aware of sexual abuse, etc., you may want to check your motivations and attitude. This is not a witch hunt in which you hope there are additional witches to find. This is a witch hunt in which you should hope there are no additional witches, but that if there are witches, you find them. To the extent you are disappointed when one stone unturned does not reveal a witch, you may want to take a closer look at the potential witch within yourself. This last paragraph likely does not apply to anybody reading this post, but trust me, there is a reason I said it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: NTEC
PostPosted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 3:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:58 am
Posts: 51
To Thai MK -

I am concerned because it seems that you are carelessly using the word "fact" The many "I am not aware of", "I am not saying" and other similar phrases confuses me. It has my head spinning in circles. Frequent use of the word "fact" connected with what sounds like multiple implications can be misleading and harmful. It sounds like you are making implication in such a way so that if confronted you could say "I never said that." Please do stick with true fact. Fact is objective, not based on hearsay or subjective perception. Fact is "so and so did such and such" and you can only state it as fact if you have firsthand knowledge.

You say - A word of caution, however. Disclaiming certain facts in a public forum such as this one should be done with care and only if there is utility in doing so. This is serious stuff. Lives are on the line. Reputations are on the line. The potential to prevent future abuse is also on the line.

I think these sentences should be repeated using the word CLAIM. As in...
A word of caution, however. CLAIMING certain facts in a public forum such as this one should be done with care and only if there is utility in doing so. This is serious stuff. Lives are on the line. Reputations are on the line. The potential to prevent future abuse is also on the line.

Your first sentence begins with a name and you say (or whatever his name was) Setting aside the question whether stating the name on this forum is helpful..., I am concerned with your "whatever his name was." Do you or do you not know the name with certainty? If you do not, you are inciting witch-hunt emotions to state a name. I am also uncertain from your words if you know this information factually. Please remember that repetition of negative second-hand information is slander.

Lest you, or anyone else think I am trying to defend perpetrators, I will tell you a bit about myself. I was an MK boarding student, although not at Fanda or NTEC. I was not abused in boarding school. However, I have experienced abuse and am still healing. I am aware how easy it is to let my emotionally intense, totally valid desire for justice bleed out into lashing out at anyone in the vicinity. When I hear anyone even slightly dismissive of claims of abuse I feel rage rise in my heart and picture myself vehemently attacking that person. I am ANGRY at any unrepentant perpetrators and I am ANGRY that leadership knew and did nothing, or only token response.

I just ask all of us in this emotionally charged process, that we don't destroy, or even bruise the innocent. Most (I would hope all, but know with sadness it will not be all) of the parents of the abused will feel extreme grief, remorse, and self-blame. Many adults will ache with pain and grief that they didn't protect, even though they didn't know.

And remember, none of us is truly innocent of all sin. All of us need mercy. I am sure that many missionaries did hurtful things to children, their own or others. It is the nature of the beast, sinful humanity, that we sin against even the ones we love. In this process, let us be careful to not swing the scythe too wide.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: NTEC
PostPosted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 1:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:18 pm
Posts: 41
MK Sheri: I was in the mission during the time the abuse occurred and I had no clue that it was going on. I was even overseas temporarily (+6months) on school property (not Fanda/Senegal) and even though I saw students and teachers nearly every day, I did not know if anything was going on. So far, I haven't heard anything about the field I was on, but, Fanda is the tip of what seems to be a large iceberg.

The odd thing is, I was aware of other things that came out, people dismissed, etc., but not a word about the abuse issue (now I know why).

Even though I'm no longer with NTM, the sin brush paints us all, as we are all part of the body of Christ. If a toe hurts, we all hurt, if there is cancer growing somewhere, the whole body is affected. As I have grown older I have come to realize that there is no such thing as isolated sin...it affects us all.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: NTEC
PostPosted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 3:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:58 am
Posts: 51
The odd thing is, I was aware of other things that came out, people dismissed, etc., but not a word about the abuse issue (now I know why).

And remember, just because a person was dismissed does not mean it was because of abuse.


Even though I'm no longer with NTM, the sin brush paints us all, as we are all part of the body of Christ. If a toe hurts, we all hurt, if there is cancer growing somewhere, the whole body is affected. As I have grown older I have come to realize that there is no such thing as isolated sin...it affects us all.[/quote]

Truly, truly.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: NTEC
PostPosted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 3:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:18 pm
Posts: 41
Quote:
And remember, just because a person was dismissed does not mean it was because of abuse


Yes, actually, the dismissals (when they were made known to us and as they were made known to us) were for other things.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: NTEC
PostPosted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 1:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:56 pm
Posts: 165
Sheri,

Just a couple of comments.

The items I stated as fact are fact. First hand fact. The items that I stated that I "heard", I "heard".

The fact that I "heard" certain things is a first-hand fact. The content of what I heard would be second-hand fact. The content of what I heard would only be one level removed from first-hand fact.

The one and only person that I mentioned by name, I mentioned by name because the door had already been opened by a previous poster. When this individual's name was mentioned previously, it was mentioned without any factual details whatsoever, which, in this context implies that this individual may have been engaged in more severe acts than those of which I am aware he was involved in. Perhaps you failed to see that, while I may been disclosing the actual occurrence of certain facts, I am, by inference, implying the non-existence of more agregious facts. My implication of the non-existence of these other facts would not be as creditable if I did not disclose the existence of the facts that I did disclose.

I did not "claim" the existence of any facts that are not in fact true. I did claim that, although I am aware of certain facts, that awareness does not automatically exclude the existence of other facts. In other words, there may or may not have been abuse that I am not aware of.

I stand by everything I said. I did not say anything in order to be able to weasel out of anything. I merely qualified my statements as to not imply certain things that I did not intend to imply.

The item that you stated would be "slander" would not in fact be slander in any court of relevant jurisdiction. And, FYI, factually stating that somebody else has stated X is not slander, even if that person originally stating X is slander, as long as the person that said X actually said X.

I agree with you that the innocent should be protected. I'm not sure how my comments could be construed as to harm the innocent. Did I not say that I was not personally aware of anything that I would categorize as sexual or physical abuse at NTEC? Did I not say that, in the case of certain things that I have heard from "potential victims", that even they were not sure whether abuse had occurred? Did I disclose any names?

Is your head still spinning?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group