Changing law still denies justice to abuse victims

Pennsylvania’s Legislature is once again looking to do right by victims of childhood sexual abuse.

That’s a good thing.

The stain of horror of the sexual abuse of children was made abundantly clear by no less than three Pennsylvania grand jury investigations in the last decade, each seemingly more heinous than the other.

What also has been clear is the Legislature’s clear reluctance to do the right thing, standing up to some powerful institutions that have placed themselves between the victims and justice.

Crucial in this moral — and financial — dilemma have been efforts to open a twoyear window for the victims of decades-old sexual abuse to have their day in court against their abusers and the institutions that enabled and protected them.

Under current Pennsylvania law, victims have only until they reach age 30 to file a civil action. Not surprisingly, the push to open that window has sparked intense opposition from the Catholic church and the insurance industry.

Last fall a measure passed the House before withering in the Senate, failing to get to the floor for a vote.

Now, two state representatives, one from each side of the aisle, are raising the issue again, but with a crucial difference.

There are actually two bills: one once again would eliminate the statute of limitations on filing criminal charges in cases of child sexual abuse; the other would expand the time a victim has to file civil action.

But there’s been a key change when it comes to the notion of justice for those who have waited for years for their day in court against their abusers. Instead of opening the window, the language in the measure more likely once again will slam it shut in the face of victims.

Actually what the new proposal does is tie the question of a two-year window to a constitutional amendment. Good luck with that. In order to get to that point, legislation must be passed by both the House and Senate in consecutive sessions, and that only gets it on the ballot for a statewide vote.

Rep. Mark Rozzi, D-Berks, himself a victim of sexual abuse at the hands of his parish priest as a child and the Legislature’s leading advocate of change on this deeply troubling issue, sees it simply as a way to get something done.

Yes, they would only apply to future cases, but that does not make them any less necessary.

It’s amazing how quickly memories in Harrisburg fade. It was just last summer that the state was horrified at the report of an investigative grand jury that detailed decades of sexual abuse of more than 1,000 children by more than 300 predators priests in six dioceses. It came just a few years after similar grand jury findings in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.

In releasing the lurid details, Attorney General Josh Shapiro called for enactment of the two-year window to deliver justice for victims. Experts in the field agree that it often takes victims well into adulthood to come forward on allegations of abuse.

But the window has not budged in the state Capitol.

So now Rozzi and Rep. Jim Gregory, R-Blair, are trying a new tack.

“I’m hoping that this is one we can not only get through the House, but get through the Senate,” said Rozzi in a clear reaction to last fall’s setback.

So far the bills have made it through the House Judiciary Committee and were overwhelmingly approved by the full House and then sent to the Senate, where fate is much less assured.

At the same time, similar legislation was introduced in the Senate that would eliminate criminal and civil limitations and also change state law to create the two-year window.

The two-year window has consistently been opposed by Republican leaders in the Senate, who have said they fear it is unconstitutional.

Don’t look for that to change.

If nothing else, the Senate should move quickly to approve the changes in state law as it pertains to future cases. They are needed and long overdue.

As for the chance of justice for the victims of decades-old abuse?

That very likely remains the same: Not a prayer.