Tuesday, May 17, 2005
Do You Have the Right to Discriminate Against Working Alongside a Child Abuser?
I don't see too many people concerned about this question, but I certainly think it's a highly important question. I believe most people don't ask it because the cloud of social denial hanging over the issue of child abuse in society is still profoundly thick. Most people don't want to acknowledge one or more of their co-workers (who seem so nice at work) could be abusing a child.
This issue came up on a comment at Onkroes, also blogged here, where he said:
My reply:
Hi, you wrote:
Can we do anything about it? No.
-----------------
Never think like this! :-)
I've actually given some thought to this question: statistically speaking, large companies such as yours will contain sexual abusers and other dysfunctional people.
1) I believe the company should do more to find out who of its employees are child abusers, specially if it's ongoing.
2) I believe there are certain rights issues regarding you are your co-workers. Who has the right to force you to work alongside a child abuser? Should you not be able to have the right to choose?
3) Making child abusers unemployed does not solve the child abuse problem unless there are strong services in place to shelter the kids. The foster parent scheme is a disgrace and highly abusive. It's a larger problem.
4) I think it's your fundamental responsibility to care for and shelter your kids, but don't forget there are other children who are being tortured. We can't turn our backs on them.
Just thinking outloud here, one idea that came to mind was that a company would have its employees do a lie detector test every 1-5 yrs regarding child abuse activities.
I am sure there are tons of legal complications involved, but isn't that a starting point for thinking about what a company could do to identify abusers? Rapists too.
I sent an email to the Volokh blog inviting them to discuss the matter. Any other thoughts from anyone?
.
This issue came up on a comment at Onkroes, also blogged here, where he said:
Thanks for popping in Alessandra, and needless to say I agree. If we kept it in mind we couldn't function, out of fear if nothing else.
The thing that keeps getting to me is this: I work in a large company (employees 40,000 people worldwide), and it stands to reason (and probability) that a percentage of them are indeed very sick or twisted individuals. Yet they will almost certainly come across as 'normal' if you met them in your everyday life. And every company or group of people stands comparison to the same laws of probability. Worrying? Probably. Can we do anything about it? No.
Just be very choosy about your friends, eh?
My reply:
Hi, you wrote:
Can we do anything about it? No.
-----------------
Never think like this! :-)
I've actually given some thought to this question: statistically speaking, large companies such as yours will contain sexual abusers and other dysfunctional people.
1) I believe the company should do more to find out who of its employees are child abusers, specially if it's ongoing.
2) I believe there are certain rights issues regarding you are your co-workers. Who has the right to force you to work alongside a child abuser? Should you not be able to have the right to choose?
3) Making child abusers unemployed does not solve the child abuse problem unless there are strong services in place to shelter the kids. The foster parent scheme is a disgrace and highly abusive. It's a larger problem.
4) I think it's your fundamental responsibility to care for and shelter your kids, but don't forget there are other children who are being tortured. We can't turn our backs on them.
Just thinking outloud here, one idea that came to mind was that a company would have its employees do a lie detector test every 1-5 yrs regarding child abuse activities.
I am sure there are tons of legal complications involved, but isn't that a starting point for thinking about what a company could do to identify abusers? Rapists too.
I sent an email to the Volokh blog inviting them to discuss the matter. Any other thoughts from anyone?
.
