What is meant by "Culture of grooming and abuse"? And why is it applied here?
Culture implies that it is everywhere all the time. It does not seem like the right descriptor.
Term. I assume the vast majority of skater interactions are fine.
SafeSport said there is “a culture in figure skating that allowed grooming and abuse to go unchecked for too long."
This area really interests me and I hope we can discuss it further without all the extraneous material we've had to wade through in previous pages. This is not something new that has just started because of Larry Nasser, as some have suggested while they downplay the history. There is plenty of information available to document longstanding and serious problems. It shows a lot of the breakdowns in the policies and systems that have contributed to an environment allowing abuse to occur at the frontline level. There are many areas to discuss, like general business practices.
I agree the majority of skater interactions are fine. Most coaches have good intentions and rink personnel want satisfied customers, but this doesn't prevent bad things from happening as well. Thirty years ago the coaching profession was like a walk through the wild wild west. Anyone could buy liability insurance for a few dollars a year, print some cheap business cards, become a coach and do whatever they wanted, often with complete control over their career destiny. Since coaches are rainmakers, things were overly focused on what they wanted rather than what skaters needed. Nepotism, "skating schools" run like pyramid schemes, and other normally discouraged practices became business as usual at a lot of rinks. People who want to pursue bad acts flourish in places with little oversight and limited expectations, and this type of business model would fit as part of the culture described by SafeSport.
As skaters and parents became more open about some of the issues now covered by SafeSport, I give credit to the municipal rinks because in my experience they were much more likely than USFSA to address them in a forward thinking manner. Perhaps it's because they operate with open planning commissions at the local city or county level and have to answer to taxpayers and not just their own closed membership. Over the years, it seems like it was the municipal rinks (not all but a lot of them) that started initiating new procedures for coaches like requiring reference checks and law enforcement reports, restrictions on fees based on credentials, etc. They had reporting requirements for rink personnel, kept incident logs and implemented additional leadership training. Complaints were still falling through the cracks at USFSA and private rinks during this time, so it is another example of the cultural disparity.
Now with the way things have evolved, the expectations of professionalism for coaches have been redefined with more focus on the needs of skaters. Coaches, just like other skating representatives, now need to actively participate in the processes needed to maintain a safe environment for all skaters. A lot of the old school coaches may not like it because they were used to free rein and entitlements. But I don't see why any coaches should be exempt from taking steps and cooperating to prevent liability issues for an organization when they are being given consideration in the form of teaching privileges. It's really not too much to ask coaches (some who bill $120 hour for lessons) to at least be held to the same standards expected of club volunteers or USFS officials who work for free.
The new guidelines mean all professionals, volunteers, rink personnel, etc. have to make a conscious effort to modify work practices and behavior to help prevent the abuse of athletes, even when they are not the ones causing the problems and it might cause them some discomfort. Is it worth all the modifications to prevent the abuse of two skaters at this rink and five at that one, even if many rinks don't experience incidents that cause problems for skaters? I think so, because using a standardized process takes a community wide approach that covers migration between rinks, or to competitions and other events. Protection and prevention are always going to be better goals than a threshold of acceptability.
