Are children safe in our hospitals?
Debbie Mahoney
This has been submitted to The Oregonian.
Doernbecher Children's Hospital fails to screen volunteers
"Volunteer accused of molesting children at Doernbecher!" That headline has
not yet run on the front page of The Oregonian, but it will. It's just a
matter of time. Unless we, the voting public, demand that preventative
measures be taken.
I volunteer at Doernbecher Children's Hospital, where I spend time with
chronically ill children, attempt to cheer them up. I've been doing this
for a few months now, without the hospital ever attempting to train me for
the work. That's pretty bad, given that the best of intentions, without
proper training, can still lead to disaster; but worse still is the fact
that the hospital never bothered to confirm my identity.
Sure, they gave me an extensive application to fill out, and that
application included all of the vitals: Name, address, Social Security
number, place of employment, etc. They asked me to complete a
questionnaire, and they asked for a list of references. But the volunteer
coordinator never asked to see identification, to prove that I was whom I
claimed to be. She never phoned my place of business, to ensure that I
actually did work there. She never phoned my references.
We tend to envision child molesters as brutes in ski masks, prowling the
streets in windowless vans, waiting for errant children who fail to follow
Mom and Dad's orders to "come right home after school." Yeah, that monster
is out there, but the more frightening - and more prevalent - incarnation
is the "camouflage" expert, the molester who proclaims himself a warrior on
behalf of children's rights ... all the while working to get closer to his
next victim. How often do we hear of the teacher, priest, or baby-sitter
that shocked his or her neighbors? We simply accept too much at face value.
It seems that every day's newspaper brings a new story about child abuse.
Those who study the abusers come to the same conclusion - the abuse, even
if sexual in nature, stems from a need to dominate or hold power over the
child. What better victim, then, than an ill child? One who has come out of
surgery, or is heavily medicated? Today's predator knows where the hunting
is easiest. And the folks at any care-giving facility should be watching
for him, not handing out free hunting permits.
(Incidentally, the hospital also gave me an official identification badge,
again without confirming my identity against any other document. So even if
I never was "Lou Bank," I now have photo i.d. "proving" I am -
identification authenticated by OHSU. That's the kind of "hunting permit"
one of these predators could use to get into any other care facility in the
Pacific Northwest, given OHSU's clout.)
So who is at fault here? Is it the volunteer coordinators at Doernbecher,
who failed to confirm my identity? The management of the hospital, who
failed to establish a system for proper identification, and for proper
training of employees? Truthfully, while I think both should have raised
their hands long ago, I think we, the voting public, are at fault.
We're more concerned with protecting property than protecting people -
Measure 47 is the most concrete example of that. Another example: When I
went to sell my used compact disks, the store manager required me to show
my driver's license; no one at Doernbecher ever bothered to do that. The
store makes it policy to obtain i.d. from anyone selling them goods, in
case those goods are stolen. The hospital doesn't even bother. Instead,
they ask, "Who would want to hurt a child?," as if it were a rhetorical
question. There is, in fact, an answer to the question, an ugly answer, and
we see it in the news daily. And yet we still leave the barn door open for
wolves.
The only time we pass legislation protecting people is following a major
disaster, the kind that makes headlines. The most obvious laws are not
enacted until humans have paid for that legislation with their lives or
their souls. How many plane crashes did it take to give us the FAA? How
many children died before we had what everybody now takes for granted ...
CPS?
There are no laws that require caretaking facilities - hospitals, homes for
the elderly, day care centers - to check out their employees, volunteer or
otherwise. Each sets its own criteria for selecting and training employees.
And I think it's pretty clear that those criteria, at least in the case of
Doernbecher, are sorely lacking.
There should be laws that require these facilities to do thorough
background checks. There should be standardized forms that document these
background checks, and the Oregon Health Related Licensing Board should
conduct quarterly reviews to ensure that each employee has had the full
check; failure to do so should result in fines, and chronic failure to do
so should result in closure.
The sick, the elderly, and our children deserve better than to have anyone
off the street tending to them - and we deserve better than to have to
worry about the people with whom they come into contact. Whoever suggested
that you "shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth" probably didn't rely on
that horse for his livelihood, and he certainly didn't rely on it for his
family's well-being.
Let's be proactive. Rather than waiting until The Oregonian runs that
horrifying headline, let's establish a system to minimize the possibility
that such a headline will ever come to pass. Write a letter to Governor
Kitzhaber; demand that he endorse legislation that would require
comprehensive background checks for anyone working within any caretaking
facility; demand that he establish a schooling process for those workers,
one which teaches the basics of child care, similar to those established by
the CIVITAS Partnership Program at the University of Michigan; and then
back up that letter with your support at the ballot box. It's been said
that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, but I don't believe
that 1 to 16 ratio is anywhere close to accurate when it comes to
preventing child abuse.
Written by Lou Bank
Florida House Bill 335 Home Page
http://pages.prodigy.com/gorran/bill335.htm
Please go and sign the petition. This is not just for Florida residents,
the petition allows for other state signatures.
--
Debbie Mahoney
Safeguarding Our Children - United Mothers
http://www.tracy.org/soc-um
"A child's innocence can never be replaced"
CRaymoRT
Lou,
I see your point, but I think you are being a tad dramatic. It is
true that child molesters do, often, try to put themselves into a position
to have easy access to children, but you make it sound as if half of
everyone who works with children are pedophiles. That is not true. While
the application process of Doernbecher (hope I spelled that right) is
lacking, I don't think that it is the widespread problem you make it out
to be. I have, in the past, volunteered at two children's hospitals in
Atlanta. In both cases, my background was thoroughly checked (I had to
have notarized copies of ID, and show my ID). I would think my experience
to be the norm.
The best way to see that facilities that have inadequate screening
processes improve is not through legislation, but through the hospitals
risk management dept. They are responsible for seeing that the hospital
is legally protected in all cases, and they have big power to change the
way the hospital does business. I'm sure if concerns were addressed to
them, they would take steps to improve both the screening process and the
training process.
Again, regarding your lack of training at this facility, that does not
indicate a national problem, but a very local one (like within that
hospital). On the subject of training, you are muddling up, what I
perceived as, the theme in your posting. All the training in the world
will not stop a child molester from perpetrating his evil. It does not
support your argument very well.
It is good that the inadequacies you have experienced have raised your
ire, that is what drives people to change things. You said you sent a copy
to the Oregonian. Did you also notify the hospital of your concerns?
In spite of the problems that you have brought to light, It is my
opinion that yes, children are safe in our hospitals.
Chuck Raymo