Child Lures Exchange
Excerpts from an e-mail exchange between Dr. Sue Johnson (mother of seven), Silver Spring MD, January 2005, and the CHILD LURES program, Archdiocese of Washington DC
—– Original Message —–
Dr. Johnson Contacts the St. Joseph Foundation
January 25, 2005
To: Luis Dellert
Subject: St. Joseph Foundation Contact Form: Lures Program
Our parochial school is implementing the Lures program which is a program to educate the children (K-8) on the issue of sexual abuse. This is mandated by the archdiocese. We are told that we are not able to opt out of this program. I don’t know if this is the type of question you have answers for, but I would appreciate any help or suggestions.
Thank you.
Sue Johnson
After Contacting the St. Joseph Foundation, Dr. Johnson Contacts National Coalition of Clergy and Laity, January 25, 2005
Hi –
My two daughters are enrolled at our parish school. We have opted out of the sex-ed program. Now, the archdiocese is mandating that all the schools introduce the Lures Prevention program. It will be 30 minutes a day for two weeks. We are told that we are not allowed to “opt out”. The program is for all grades from Kindergarten to 8th. I would appreciate any thoughts or suggestions you have. Thank you.
Sue Johnson
NCCL Responds
January 26, 2005
From: Gregory Lloyd
To: Mrs. Sue Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: your mail [inquiry about archdiocesan “Lures” program]
Dear Mrs. Johnson,
I encourage you, to phone me . . .
Gregory Lloyd
Mrs. Johnson Replies
January 26, 2005
Thank you so much for your reply. Yes, this is somewhat urgent. I thought that I had the answer when the principal said that if you had a doctor’s note, you could be exempted. SO, I spoke with my pediatrician who agreed with me to write the note. Today, the principal called me to tell me that would not work. I asked her to put that in writing and she sent me the email that I am forwarding to you. I will call you tomorrow to discuss this further.
Sue Johnson
NCCL Responds
January 27, 2005
Subject: Re: Fw: Child Lures Curriculum [Archdiocese of Washington]
Dear Dr. Johnson,
Thank you for your prompt reply, and for the correspondences.
Do you get the feeling the Archdiocese and the NCCB are interested in protecting children … in order to protect themselves? Do they hold-out for the sake of morality, or money?
Had the principal requested a letter of exemption from your lawyer rather than your pediatrician, do you think it might have gone differently than up to now?
Urgent, indeed: please do phone me tomorrow morning at 10:00. I eagerly look forward to speaking with you. Until then.
Gregory Lloyd
Mrs. Johnson Informs NCCL January 27, 2005
Subject: Fw: Child Lures Curriculum
Dear Mr. Lloyd,
Here is the correspondence between the principal and me. I am available tomorrow all day until 2:30. If you have a convenient time to talk, let me know and I can call you. Several other parents are looking to me for guidance on this issue. The program has already started in the upper grades and we need to act fast.
Thank you.
Sue Johnson
2 Enclosures
Dear Mrs. Cantwell,
It has been recommended and endorsed by our pediatrician that our daughters Brigid (2nd grade) and Onora (kindergarten) do not attend the Lures program. I will send a copy of the letter to the school nurse, but as I understand the program is beginning sooner than expected, I wanted to make sure that this was communicated to their teachers. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me. Thank you.
D. Johnson, MD
Sue Johnson, MD
January 25, 2005
Dear Drs. Johnson:
Per our phone conversation, I am writing to inform you that after consultation with Dr. Kathleen Schwartz, Assistant Superintendent of Elementary Schools for the Archdiocese of Washington, I must inform you that it is not the policy of our schools to exemption students from instruction that is part of our mandated curriculum.
As you are aware, the Child Lures program is part of the Archdiocesan Health and Safety Curriculum and all children attending our schools will receive this instruction.
Please feel free to call me with any further questions.
Sincerely,
Mrs. Janet M. Cantwell
Principal
January 26, 2005
To: Weitzel-O’Neill, Patricia
Cc: Schwartz, Kathleen
Subject: Fw: Child Lures Curriculum
Dear Dr. Weitzel-O’Neill,
We are writing concerning the Child Lures program to be implemented at our school. After reviewing the program and giving thoughtful consideration to our particular children, we know that this is not in their best interest. We discussed this with their pediatrician, who agreed with us that it would be not in their interest and possibly harmful to them. Despite this, we are being told that they cannot be exempted from the classroom participation in this program. If this is indeed for the protection of the children, is the Archdiocese saying that they know better than my pediatrician what is beneficial for my child in the area of health? We look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
D. Johnson, MD
Sue Johnson, MD
To: Sue Johnson
Cc: Schwartz, Kathleen
Sent: January 27, 2005
Subject: RE: Child Lures Curriculum
Dear Dr.Johnson:
I am in receipt of your e-mail regarding the Child Lures Protection program. You have indicated that you would like your child to be exempt from participating in this program. This is part of the curriculum and as such your child may not be granted an exemption.
The Child Protection Policy, adopted by the Archdiocese of Washington, requires all parishes to provide programming for all students in Catholic Schools and in our Religious Education programs. This is a mandatory requirement as set forth by the Bishops at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and clearly delineated, in detail, on pages 13 and 14 of the Archdiocese of Washington Child Protection Policy handbook. I urge you to review that booklet and in particular pages 10 to 14. As you will note the most important issue is the safety of our children. In fact as noted on Page 10, “By educating children on how to be safe and stay safe, the Archdiocese will enhance the ability of children to protect themselves and encourage an environment that allows children to communicate potential endangerment”.
This is an educational program focusing on safety and like other educational programs has not direct impact on the health of the children attending the class.
Thank you for your interest and commitment to Catholic Schools. I know you are seeking the best for your children and we hope that we can meet your needs. I know if you review the Child Protection Policy book, you will understand that this is a directive that has been designed to help children protect themselves.
Patricia A. Weitzel-O’Neill, Ph.D.
Superintendent of Catholic Schools
Archdiocese of Washington
The Johnsons Respond to the Superintendent of Catholic Schools
January 27, 2005
Dear Dr. Weitzel-O’Neill,
Thank you for your e-mail of January 26, and for recognizing we seek the best for our children.
That it is the Archdiocese and/or the USCCB which are in need of the protection afforded by the program in question, we do not doubt. But since our children do not have the same need for such a program, there is also no need to our delegating to the school authority to give instruction of the kind prescribed, or the need for you to make it mandatory for them.
Sincerely & respectfully,
D. Johnson, MD
Mrs. D.(Sue) Johnson, MD
cc: Mrs. Janet M. Cantwell, Principal
Mrs. Johnson Contacts NCCL Again
January 29, 2005
Good Morning,
Thank you so much for your help. I do appreciate it. I have some more information that might be helpful. One of the mothers who went to the meeting on January 18th made it quite clear she wanted to be notified before the program would begin. Mrs. Cantwell assured us she would do so. The program began in the upper grades six days later with no notification. The daughter of this woman came home from school and told her mother. The mother said she would go and pull her out of school for the next week. The girl cried and said that she was afraid that the other kids would notice and tease her that she had been abused. Now the girl is having nightmares. My friend who is a lawyer, but not practicing due to being a mother of eight, thought that perhaps we could threaten to sue for intentional infliction of emotional abuse if they ignore our requests and make the children attend the classes. Any thoughts? I am hoping that the mother whose daughter has been traumatized is willing to do something as well. Again, it was great talking and I really appreciate the help!
Sue
The Johnsons Contact Cardinal McCarrick
February 8, 2005
Dear Cardinal McCarrick,
I am writing concerning the Child Lures program at St. Bernadette School. After reviewing the material and discussing the program with my pediatrician, we decided against our children participating in the program. I was informed by Mrs. Janet Cantwell and Dr. Weitzel-O’Neill, that there were no opt outs for this program. Dr. Weitzel-O’Neill came to the parent information night and the the parents, “If you don’t like the program, then you need to find yourselves a new school”.
Well, that is very difficult to do in February as most schools will not accept transfers at this point. It would also be difficult financially as we paid for the entire year last summer. Being a military family with seven children, tuition is a financial sacrifice for us. I am basically being told that because we disagree with our children attending this program, we cannot receive a Catholic education in the Archdiocese of Washington So, for the two weeks the program is running, I have no choice but for my children just to be absent. So, now they are at home, missing school because the Archdiocese of Washington is not honoring my wishes and the recommendation of my pediatrician.
Sine the program was not part of the curriculum when we signed our contract for this year, I am imploring you to give Saint Bernadette School the ability to give a temporary otp out for our children’s education.
I know that you have the children’ best interest at heart. I will continue to pray for you and our Catholic schools.
In Christ,
Sue Johnson, M.D.
D. Johnson, MAJ, USA.
The St. Joseph Foundation Replies to Dr. Johnson
February 18, 2005
Subject: RE:Lures Program
Mrs. Johnson:
Thank you for your patience. Attached are the comments of a Foundation canonical consultant. I hope they will be of some use to you. Please advise if we may be of further assistance.
Respectfully,
Lou Dellert
Case Administrator
The Saint Joseph Foundation
11107 Wurzbach, no. 601B
San Antonio, TX 78230
NCCL Responds March 3, 2005
Re: Reply from St. Joseph Foundation – re: Lures Program – Sue Johnson
Dear Dr. Johnson,
What was the date on your letter to the Cardinal? Have you been asked for friendly or other advice by the parents whose children are suffering emotionally from the program? Has the mother whom the Lures creator phoned kept notes of their chat? It’s a very good idea to resubmit your query to St. Joseph Foundation. Do let me know what they reply, as soon as you have it. There are parents in Philadelphia also running into opposition, similar to what you (all) are experiencing in the D.C. Archdiocese, when they have decided to opt-out their children from the VIRTUS program in use there. your experiences and also St. Joseph’s evaluations/involvement could turn out to be helpful to them. let’s see how things develop.
Greg Lloyd
Executive Director
NCCL
Dr. Johnson Contacts NCCL again about her letter to the Cardinal.
March 2, 2005
Dear Greg:
No response from the Cardinal. But, there is at least two more families whose children are having nightmares, emotional difficulties, due to the program. Also, the guy who developed Child Lures called the mother of the children that were expelled. . . . I am willing to recontact the St. Joseph foundation and see what he will say.
Thank you for all your help.
Sue
NCCL Contacts Dr. Johnson
March 2, 2005
Dear Dr. Johnson,
Thanks for the forward, i.e., the attachment of a document prepared by a canonist from the St. Joseph Foundation, in response to your inquiry.
The canonist fails to include in his evaluation (and the recommendation), over and above your “inalienable right to ensure that [your] children are not compelled to attend classes which are not in agreement with [your] own moral and religious convictions”, that your exercise of this natural authority may not result in reprisal to you and/or the children.
Confer specifically paragraph 120 in “The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality”. it’s language is not as forceful as one may like — it says: “Neither the children nor other members of the family SHOULD ever be penalized or discriminated against for this decision.” [emphasis mine]. Nevertheless, with that fact, your case takes on dramatically added strength, canonically speaking I should think. you might wish to ask the St. Joseph Foundation’s canonist to (re-)evaluate your case based on that point.
Have you received reply from the Cardinal? (if not, what is the letter’s date which you last mailed to him?) I assume the Principal has not taken further action to expel your Daughter or anyone else at All Saints?
Greg
Dr. Johnson Contact NCCL again about her letter to the Cardinal.
March 2, 2005
No response from the Cardinal. But, there is at least two more families whose children are having nightmares, emotional difficulties, due to the program. Also, the guy who developed Child Lures called the mother of the children that were expelled. . . . I am willing to reconnect the St. Joseph foundation and see what he will say. Thank you for all your help.
Sue
NCCL ask about Dr. Johnson’s Unanswered Letter to the Cardinal
March 3, 2005
Dear Dr. Johnson,
What was the date on your letter to the Cardinal? Have you been asked for friendly or other advice by the parents whose children are suffering emotionally from the program?
There are parents in Philadelphia also running into opposition, similar to what you (all) are experiencing in the D.C. Archdiocese. They have decided to opt-out their children from the VIRTUS program in use there.
Greg Lloyd
www.national-coalition.org
THE OUTCOME
The Johnson parents acted on their own, using the guidelines in Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality. They withdrew their children from school for the duration of the Lures program. They received no reply from their Cardinal to date. They acted in the best interest of the children. The school ignored the absence of their two children and continues to enroll their children. Although it was a victory for the innocence of children and parental love, how many other children were adversely affected.
Sue Johnson