Insure this!

mpbrockman · Post by **mpbrockman** » July 16th, 2007, 6:20 pm

Reading an AP article concerning the latest payoff of abused children (and their lawyers) by the Catholic church I was stunned by this sentence:

"The deal settles all 508 cases that remained against the archdiocese, which also paid $60 million in December to settle 45 cases that weren't covered by sexual abuse insurance."

Sexual abuse insurance?! They plan ahead based on the assumption that some of their people are going to f*** kids?

I suppose my surprise shows naivete on my part - but putting child molestation under the rubric of "cost of doing business" is really... stunning...

arthursimone · Post by **arthursimone** » July 16th, 2007, 6:31 pm

death to catholics

really, they suck. really.

ducksrfr · Post by **ducksrfr** » July 16th, 2007, 7:04 pm

i'm sure "sexual abuse insurance" is something that's standard with a lot of business-place insurance policies, especially one's that interact with children.

for ex: when i worked for the ymca 4 years ago, i know they definitely have an insurance policy for that kind of stuff

York99 · Post by **York99** » July 16th, 2007, 7:18 pm

arthursimone wrote:death to catholics

really, they suck. really.

Get your broad stroking brush out of my church.

mpbrockman · Post by **mpbrockman** » July 16th, 2007, 8:01 pm

ducksrfr wrote:i'm sure "sexual abuse insurance" is something that's standard with a lot of business-place insurance policies, especially one's that interact with children.

for ex: when i worked for the ymca 4 years ago, i know they definitely have an insurance policy for that kind of stuff

Wow (he said, as his few remaining shards of idealism crumbled into dust).

This does give an idea for taking this post in a slightly lighter direction, though. What other businesses should have (or do have) insurance against the unthinkable. i.e. "disgruntled gun-toting ex-employee insurance" for the post office.

Or "emperor" insurance for the CO Capitol building...

Jessica · Post by **Jessica** » July 16th, 2007, 8:44 pm

I believe most churches have insurance and to be insured they must have "child abuse insurance." I guess it is not that different from saying that we don't want little old ladies slipping on the steps and breaking their hips, but in case they do, we have insurance so the whole church doesn't go under. Still the idea that you could pay someone as compensation for that kind of horror seems wrong. On the other hand, most of the places that now have strong policies in place to prevent child abuse are there because of insurance and the possibility of law suits. Yea, lawsuits.

Wesley · Post by **Wesley** » July 16th, 2007, 9:38 pm

I'll give someone a dollar to call their agent ans ask how much a policy would cost just for themselves, "You know, in case I slip up."

mpbrockman · Post by **mpbrockman** » July 17th, 2007, 12:24 am

ducksrfr wrote:for ex: when i worked for the ymca 4 years ago, i know they definitely have an insurance policy for that kind of stuff

Upon further thought, the YMCA policy bothers me less because the YMCA doesn't present itself as the moral center of the world, doesn't claim it's workers are "born of a call from God" or refer to director Neil Nicoll as the "Vicar of Christ".

York99 · Post by **York99** » July 17th, 2007, 9:15 am

mpbrockman wrote:
ducksrfr wrote:for ex: when i worked for the ymca 4 years ago, i know they definitely have an insurance policy for that kind of stuff
Upon further thought, the YMCA policy bothers me less because the YMCA doesn't present itself as the moral center of the world, doesn't claim it's workers are "born of a call from God" or refer to director Neil Nicoll as the "Vicar of Christ".

Plus the artwork at the YMCA sucks. Go Catholics!!