SafeSport alleges "culture of grooming and abuse" in U.S. figure skating

[Prancer]

Just because there isn’t enough evidence to prove coughlin is a Nassar doesn’t mean coughlin wasn’t being compared to nassar!

And? People are compared to other people in social media all the time. Are you going to defend them all? You can't even bring yourself to say that the allegations against Richard Callghan shouldn't be publicized because you don't really care about the principle here.

I keep trying to move this conversation away from John Coughlin because we don't know enough about the details of the Coughlin investigation to come to any conclusion about it. Is it possible to have a discussion about SafeSport and how it handles investigations without people making statements! about the Coughlin! investigation! Especially when some! of those statements! are patently false?!?!?!

Do you really want to claim that all accusations are true?

When a person cites statistics showing that some accusations are false, that person is by definition not claiming that all accusations are true. Is that really going to be your defense against the statistic--here some anecdotal examples and a false claim about what a poster said? You do realize that your anecdotal examples would be part of the very statistics misskarne cited?

 

[Spun Silver]

Really? I don't think anyone sees John Coughlin as Nasser and have no idea why you would come to such a conclusion. No one has enough information to make a judgment like that. And to say that people are unmoved by his suicide? Suicide is a tragic thing. That doesn't mean everyone is convinced that his suicide means that the system needs to change.

Again, please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say people were comparing John to Nasser (three accusations vs hundreds), I said they were viewing his case in the light of Nasser's -- an immensely dangerous threat that colors an entire sport (as SafeSport has alleged) with thousands of children and young people at risk of disgusting abuse or already victims who are as yet unknown. That can be seen throughout all these Coughlin threads and it's hardly surprising -- the Nasser crimes have been an earthquake, occasioning huge levels of publicity and discussion, and in their light creating better safeguards for possible or potential victims in the world of sports, a la SafeSports, has rightly been made a priority. That said, there are few people in sports with Nasser's decades of closed-door (I think?) access to children and young women, and I think to see John in Nasser's shadow is a mistake of both category and degree.

As for people being unmoved by John's suicide, maybe I've just read one too many comment saying, "it's nobody's fault but John's own...." The sense of tragedy, or even basic human compassion, isnt exactly overwhelming.

Well, we could, but unless the fight was over statistical collection and calculation methods, there wouldn't be much point in it.

Exactly. Methodological questions are key when judging statistics or other studies. However, unless both sides of a dispute are interested in finding the truth, there is indeed not much point which is why such debates usually happen in moderated journals or other forums with some aim at neutrality. But maybe that is an antiquated idea. I don't see many neutral forums these days.

And how do you know how much evidence there is?

Fair point. I should have said a mountain of evidence has not been provided to the public. I don't know how much exists. Do you know there *is* a mountain of evidence?

*

I'm not going to go on here. My point is made, and life is too short to argue with a large group of people who vehemently disagree with me.

 

[believed]

I hope there are no survivors in this thread who have to read about how “yeah, but people make false accusations too!”

 

[Vagabond]

The word admissible is interesting - admissible by whom?

The only evidence helpful to Coughlin in the articles to which links have been posted here on FSU is Coughlin's own self-serving statements. They aren't anything that can be considered in a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding.

As for people being unmoved by John's suicide, maybe I've just read one too many comment saying, "it's nobody's fault but John's own...." The sense of tragedy, or even basic human compassion, isnt exactly overwhelming.

The compassion expressed in this thread for the apparent victims certainly has not been overwhelming. And as for Coughlin, not every person who commits suicide deserves compassion.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3629679/
https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/01/30/glee-star-mark-salling-suicide/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_West

I don't feel any compassion for him just because he killed himself.

 

[flyushka]

How is it any different from when someone gets charged of a crime and it's published in local newspapers before they get their trial date? If someone was accused of murder, was sent to prison without pre-trial release (which is common and thus disrupting their lives), but then was able to argue for pre-trial release after an appeal and was at home, and then killed themself before the trial date where at trial all the evidence and witnesses finally get revealed to the public, is the criminal justice system responsible for that person's death?

It'd be unrealistic to expect the system to avoid every instance of this, but at least in the criminal justice system there ostensibly *is* consideration of the safety of defendants and some sort of system in place with accountability to the people/taxpayers, not great though it may be. I've seen judges delay pre-trial release when there is a question of suicidal ideation. I've seen them stop proceedings during a trial, especially at sensitive moments that could increase risk of suicide, until the defendant has received treatment and is less precarious. I'm probably just lucky enough to have come across judges who are conscious of mental health and work closely with psychiatrists, though. YMMV. But yes, IMO the system does have a general responsibility to prevent suicide because this population is vulnerable to it, and there are policymakers working to improve it. No, they can't prevent all of them, especially when they occur without warning.

In this case though, it sounds like there were warning signs, and SafeSport is new and operating without even that level of experience/oversight/policymaking found in the justice system, such as it is. Some lit out there suggests that defendants of sexual misconduct (particularly involving minors) have even higher rates of suicide than other detainees due to shame, isolation, stigma. Loss of career and status also increases risk. Because of the timing of SafeSport's elevation of Coughlin's investigation and his suicide, it's hard not to guess it served as a trigger. I'm absolutely not trying to blame SafeSport; nobody deserves blame here. I support the mission of making sports safer for kids; I grew up in skating and know all the issues first-hand and then some. I support the victims in this case. I just think it's best to examine what went wrong in cases like this to improve for the future. It's not useful to just say they're not responsible and move on. Nobody wants an outcome like this and it is a real risk, which can be mitigated.

 

[VGThuy]

I've seen it happen too but those who get granted that sort of watch either have it while they are in state custody so the state has a special interest and legal responsibility for the well-being of those they incarcerate (which we know falls through the cracks at times) (which is why once prisoners are incarcerated it becomes constitutional rights fights when they are denied medical care because now that the State has them in custody the state has a duty to them to provide medical care they may not be responsible for if they were not in custody) or they have family who notice the warning signs and have good counsel who can make those arguments for them in front of a judge. Outside of that, defendants are on their own and we know money is involved with that. Every day there are criminal cases going on, and unless a defendant who is out of state custody REALLY fights to get hearings adjourned due to medical reasons, they are just as susceptible as Coughlin was to commit self-harm. As you said, when suicide does happen there might be calls to act but overall nobody blames the criminal justice system or make comments about how it should be upended because people tend to like the system for how it is. Maybe it's due to lack of sympathy for criminal defendants, which we know is an issue, but my point is that it happens there and I doubt people who are advocating for Coughlin are advocating for changes there. It seems they are taking an exception to Coughlin due to personal feelings. IMO, what he went through is what people go through every day.

SafeSport did not have Coughlin in their custody nor could they watch him 24/7 or force him to go into custody for fear of his own safety. This more akin to somebody being suspended from work or being put forth before their ethics board for a hearing. Those committees do not have those individuals in custody either nor are they to blame if someone who goes before them end up tragically taking their life. I think it should be reevaluated too but some of the things other posters are saying make it seem like Coughlin was especially treated unfairly, which is what I take issue with. He was not compared to the norm.

ETA: Believe it or not, I'm actually for criminal justice reform and think a lot of it needs to change, and am usually sympathetic to defendants, so it's not like I disagree with you. It's just I find people who are especially sympathetic to Coughlin and are on attack mode against SafeSport seem to be acting as if what he went through was incredibly unfair to him when IMO, they did what is pretty standard and like you said, SS isn't to blame for his death. I also think a lot of people are blaming SS for the investigation not being more public with their findings and for the lack of closure, but honestly, his act is primarily to blame for that, not SS. Now that he isn't here to defend himself, I don't know if it would be the "correct" course of action for SS to just make everything public since it was still an on-going investigation and since it's dealing with the accusers being sexual assault victims who were already attacked by the skating community with Delilah and a lot of fans here, etc.

 

[PRlady]

Yes, code of ethics in an organization covers many elements, which are listed and described in details, and yes elements of morals are included. But, in the end, such code is there to protect (or to provide a positive outcome, which is also a form of "protection" as it is opposite to "negative outcome" or "less positive outcome").


The right answer is.... report. My whole argument is "behavior that is legal by law" should not be made "illegal" in the code of conduct of any organization, if it causes no harm to others.


It's not about "my laws". If something is officially legal, and causes no harm, there can not be an "investigation" because there should be no such report.

There are many things that are legal that are prohibited by various organizations in their own interest.

Every organization I ran Communications for had rules about talking to the media and, later on, posting on social media. And I know because I made the rules and I enforced them. Tell a newspaper that you personally disagree with our policy on X and you will be disciplined or fired, even though it certainly is your First Amendment right to say whatever you want. But it’s my job to make sure that the organization speaks in one voice on its issues, and if you don’t agree, go work elsewhere.

Same thing for coaches. The rules are that they don’t get involved with students. You want to break the rule, don’t coach and then you can ask that lovely person out.

How much clearer can it be??

 

[Prancer]

Again, please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say people were comparing John to Nasser (three accusations vs hundreds), I said they were viewing his case in the light of Nasser's -- an immensely dangerous threat that colors an entire sport (as SafeSport has alleged) with thousands of children and young people at risk of disgusting abuse or already victims who are as yet unknown. That can be seen throughout all these Coughlin threads and it's hardly surprising -- the Nasser crimes have been an earthquake, occasioning huge levels of publicity and discussion, and in their light creating better safeguards for possible or potential victims in the world of sports, a la SafeSports, has rightly been made a priority. That said, there are few people in sports with Nasser's decades of closed-door (I think?) access to children and young women, and I think to see John in Nasser's shadow is a mistake of both category and degree.

I don't think that's true. Statistically, 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys is a victim of child sexual abuse.

If you are going to argue that false accusations are "not uncommon," then you should agree that sexual abuse in sports is also not uncommon, given that the statistics are about the same.

Do you really think that this all boils down to Nasser?

Exactly. Methodological questions are key when judging statistics or other studies. However, unless both sides of a dispute are interested in finding the truth, there is indeed not much point which is why such debates usually happen in moderated journals or other forums with some aim at neutrality. But maybe that is an antiquated idea. I don't see many neutral forums these days.

Well, I'm up for it and we have some actual statisticians and math professors on board who could moderate, so go for it and let's see what truth we find about false reports.

Fair point. I should have said a mountain of evidence has not been provided to the public. I don't know how much exists. Do you know there *is* a mountain of evidence?

In every one of these threads, including this one, I have repeatedly asked people to focus on the issues involved and not on John Coughlin because we don't know enough to make any judgments about his case.

So if you need it spelled out, no, I don't know if there is a mountain of evidence. I do hope, however, that SafeSport did not suspend him without substantial evidence because if that's what happened, it would be a travesty.

I'm not going to go on here. My point is made

Oh.

 

[Japanfan]

I don't feel any compassion for him just because he killed himself.

I tend to feel compassion for the agony he must have gone through that led him to choose suicide.

However, I don't know that I would feel the same had the allegations been proven to be true. In that case, I'd thinking of the suffering the victims had endured.

 

[VGThuy]

@flyushka , do you actually have more literature about ways jurisdictions are taking it upon themselves to watch for Defendants? I know I could google it, but if you have some you can provide, I'd appreciate it. I'm seriously interested in reading more about it and how they have been implemented. I know in a jurisdiction near mine, they recently got rid of bail so defendants are either incarcerated before trial or they are let go and some may have to check in once every two weeks or once a month, but from what I hear it's like a very rushed through process where they don't really do any real evaluating on the mental/emotional state of the Defendant and they care more about the defendant not running out on them (unless it's something highly obvious). If they fail to check in, a bench warrant is given but I'm unsure how well law enforcement goes after the Defendant.

In New York, from what I hear, there are standards for evaluation but due to sheer volume, it's more about ensuring defendant attendance to court appearances and it seems more geared towards ensuring the safety of witnesses and victims more than anything.

However, since SafeSport doesn't have the same sort of State law enforcement nor the same sort of control over those who are accused since the State has a constitutional right to take criminal defendants into custody, I wonder what we can come up with for SafeSport to be able to follow through on the health and well-being of the accused since they won't have the power to take an accused into custody or to force them to go to therapy. I'm not sure if they can even force the accused to check in with them or even cooperate with the investigation. I think most tend to do so because they want to defend themselves and not permanently lose their ability to work in the sport. I guess once the accused chooses to cooperate, SS can make it a condition to check in, and so long as the accused still wants to clear his/her/their name, then they will cooperate with that. If that happens, then maybe SS can train their investigators who are in charge of check-ins to look out for warning signs and to call local law enforcement if they suspect the accused will inflict self-harm.

 

[wickedwitch]

One can have compassion for those who are driven to suicide without condoning their actions. And this also doesn't prevent someone from also having compassion for the victims.

 

[flyushka]

@flyushka , do you actually have more literature about ways jurisdictions are taking it upon themselves to watch for Defendants? I know I could google it, but if you have some you can provide, I'd appreciate it. I'm seriously interested in reading more about it and how they have been implemented.

Hmm, I don't really, besides some stuff about mental health courts in psych journals? I don't know if that's quite what you were referring to but I'll PM you some sources on it. In jails where I've worked we've usually had an arrangement with a behavioral health clinic that can follow defendants outpatient, but it doesn't work great and we have a lot of bounce backs for whom their only real access to psych care is jail. If there's any hint of suicide they just stay incarcerated on suicide watch :-/. I really appreciate hearing your perspective; coming from the legal side I know it's much broader than mine.

However, since SafeSport doesn't have the same sort of State law enforcement nor the same sort of control over those who are accused since the State has a constitutional right to take criminal defendants into custody, I wonder what we can come up with for SafeSport to be able to follow through on the health and well-being of the accused since they won't have the power to take an accused into custody or to force them to go to therapy. I'm not sure if they can even force the accused to check in with them or even cooperate with the investigation. I think most tend to do so because they want to defend themselves and not permanently lose their ability to work in the sport. I guess once the accused chooses to cooperate, SS can make it a condition to check in, and so long as the accused still wants to clear his/her/their name, then they will cooperate with that. If that happens, then maybe SS can train their investigators who are in charge of check-ins to look out for warning signs and to call local law enforcement if they suspect the accused will inflict self-harm.

Yeah I think that's a good thought - it's a tough question for sure. I guess that was really my worry, they're dealing with such a fraught subject with limited resources and options if things go south. I'd be on board with training the investigators. One issue to work through would be the likelihood that the accused might stop cooperating if their depression worsens bc of the apathy and distortion of rational thinking that can set in, leaving SS without options again at a dangerous time. I can't really think of a better solution though. Hopefully the accused has their own attorney looking out for them as well.

 

[misskarne]

Are you familiar with the Tawana Brawley case? The Duke lacrosse team case? The Rolling Stone magazine rape story? The women who recanted after making false accusations about Neil Kavanagh?

No, because funnily enough, the world doesn't revolve around the US, and I have no clue who any of those people or teams are.

I could talk to you about Brett Stewart, but I could also talk to you about Luke Lazarus.

Do you really want to claim that all accusations are true? That's patently ridiculous.

Do you really want to claim that all accusations are false? Because that's fcuking dangerous. People like you are why many victims struggle to come forward.

Do you want to reject the core principle of "innocent until proven guilty?" I would question the justice there.

Do you want to reject the core principle of being able to report something terrible that's happened to you? Because again, that's fcuking dangerous.

 

[Vagabond]

One can have compassion for those who are driven to suicide without condoning their actions.

Of course one can. But one can also have compassion for someone without invalidating the feelings of others who do not.

 

[DimaToe]

So here is my question, The Coughlin case was a it’s own thing, this is blaming USFS as a whole. So why are certain posters still being poisonous? Grow up people this goes beyond skating.

 

[Vagabond]

It goes beyond sports. It goes to human nature.

 

[aftershocks]

Of course one can. But one can also have compassion for someone without invalidating the feelings of others who do not.

And vice versa. Seriously, nothing is going to be solved in this thread. Everyone brings to the conversation what they are bringing to the conversation. And conversations of this nature are going on everywhere these days, hopefully for the most part not involving a situation where someone committed suicide. There are a lot of emotions going on here. The skating culture needs to change and the larger culture needs to change, and both have needed to for a very long time.

One of the best things to do is to stop and examine our own emotions, our own experiences, and our own understanding instead of grandstanding. Fingerpointing, bandwagoning, and aggressively targeting posters who are expressing views that differ from the majority who are posting here doesn't change anything and won't solve anything.

I'm with @Spun Silver and I appreciate her honesty in sharing the fact that she sincerely wishes John Coughlin did not do anything horribly egregious, but that above all, she wants the truth to come out regardless of what the truth reveals. I feel the same way. I recognize and acknowledge that SafeSport is set up to try and do everything they can to protect victims of abuse. I also realize that they are not in a position themselves to continue the investigation. Still, a thorough and complete investigation needs to happen. Nothing should be swept under the rug simply because Coughlin is no longer alive. There is still evidence and others who are alive to provide testimony. As well, people do have some knowledge of what John Coughlin said about the allegations, even though he's not here to offer anything further. I sincerely hope (however long it may take) that investigative reporters working with a skilled and enterprising filmmaker might be able to impartially research and document what happened (while protecting the identity of the accusers). Whatever the truth is, it needs to be fully revealed. SafeSport should provide their findings to whoever is interested in carrying forward a full and thorough investigation.

I also believe that SafeSport does need to learn (as do we all) from what happened, and to make improvements. ISU and US fed also need to examine and address myriad problems that exist in skating, but I'm not holding my breath for that to happen. Institutions, organizations, and investigative bodies alike can always improve and do better. Human beings can always look for ways to improve and be better tomorrow than they were yesterday. As well, examine our own lives and how we treat each other in intimate relationships, professional relationships, and on social media. Whoever is perfect, cast the first stone.

 

[Vagabond]

Seriously, nothing is going to be solved in this thread.

Hence, the brevity of your posts.

 

[caseyedwards]

I hope there are no survivors in this thread who have to read about how “yeah, but people make false accusations too!”

But survivors do know people make false accusations

 

[aftershocks]

Hence, the brevity of your posts.

Right, it figures @Vagabond. Score with your brownie points and the inane 'brevity' of your posts. What else is new(s)? I guess you must be perfect and hence are casting the first stone.

Oh wait, I was just talking about examining how we treat each other. Maybe we should stop with the verbal abuse and fingerpointing and oneupmanship because feelings are hurt and nothing left to say, except lash out!

For the umpteenth time, we do not know exactly what happened in the John Coughlin case. No human being is perfect and I cannot say what happened. It's awful if he intentionally hurt someone, and yes, I find it hard to believe that he did, even though I realize it is possible. Still, gathering from what's been going on in this thread, I'm going to take a wild, unpopular guess and say that I think at his best, John Coughlin was a better person than a lot of people posting in this thread. His actions, his words and his generosity toward others testified to by many prove that. And that is still the case, no matter whatever else bad he may have done unintentionally or intentionally.

Leaving you all with some food for thought from John Coughlin himself:
https://twitter.com/JohnCoughlinUSA/status/1013352479201914880

 

[VGThuy]

Still, gathering from what's been going on in this thread, I'm going to take a wild, unpopular guess and say that I think at his best, John Coughlin was a better person than a lot of people posting in this thread. His actions, his words and his generosity toward others testified to by many prove that. And that is still the case, no matter whatever else bad he may have done unintentionally or intentionally.

Tell us how you really feel about the rest of us.

 

[aftershocks]

Tell us how you really feel about the rest of us.

Hmmm, I didn't call you out. I'm referencing the way a lot of people are acting in this thread, which I don't think necessarily includes you, so I'm not certain why you seem to be placing yourself in that category. In any case, I do include myself as someone who does not live up to the generous and caring person John Coughlin was known to be by practically everyone who knew him well.

Does anyone ever get tired of lashing out on here and take some time to self-reflect? And better yet, actually read John Coughlin's poignant words posted last July? It's just a thought of course, and won't solve problems being fought over here. But good thoughts do matter and sometimes can make a difference.

 

[MsZem]

Hmmm, I didn't call you out. I'm referencing the way a lot of people are acting in this thread, which I don't think necessarily includes you, so I'm not certain why you seem to be placing yourself in that category. In any case, I do include myself as someone who does not live up to the generous and caring person John Coughlin was known to be by practically everyone who knew him well.

FSU has many posters who are generous with their time, their knowledge, their advice and their money. This can be seen in how people help out one another within the community and outside it.

Even if you assume that John Coughlin did nothing wrong - and that is a big assumption to make at this point - I don't buy that he was a better person than the majority of posters here. You have no way of knowing that.

What all this has to do with the latest news about SafeSport, I have no idea. I'm surprised the admins haven't shut down all SafeSport-related discussions for good.

 

[aftershocks]

FSU has many posters who are generous with their time, their knowledge, their advice and their money. This can be seen in how people help out one another within the community and outside it.

Even if you assume that John Coughlin did nothing wrong - and that is a big assumption to make at this point - I don't buy that he was a better person than the majority of posters here. You have no way of knowing that.

What all this has to do with the latest news about SafeSport, I have no idea. I'm surprised the admins haven't shut down all SafeSport-related discussions for good.

What a good idea @Zemgirl. Again, I was referencing 'a lot of people posting in this thread' by the way they are acting. I was not referring to every person who posts on FSU, as I'm certain there are many kind, outstanding people who are members here. I know a few. In fact, many people are choosing not to post in this thread for a reason.

 

[Vagabond]

This is a thread about the culture of grooming and abuse in figure skating and, more broadly, in society as a whole. Why criticism of those who groom and abuse or who are suspected by the pertinent authorities of grooming and abusing should considered inappropriate here is mystifying.

 

[Prancer]

The Coughlin case was a it’s own thing, this is blaming USFS as a whole.

Yes.

Seriously, nothing is going to be solved in this thread.

Nothing is ever solved in any thread here. That's not what happens here.

What all this has to do with the latest news about SafeSport, I have no idea. I'm surprised the admins haven't shut down all SafeSport-related discussions for good.

It does seem like it's going to have to be that way, which is going to be a problem as I think there will be more SafeSport articles in the future and thus more SafeSport threads.

This is a thread about the culture of grooming and abuse in figure skating

It could have been, anyway.

 

[AxelAnnie]

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.

 

[clairecloutier]

Just wanted to say that I started this thread because there was new information. Namely: SafeSport was alleging that there are general, widespread problems with abuse/grooming in U.S. figure skating (not just individual cases, like Coughlin).

It seems valid to start new threads when there is new information or news related to the case. But, if the discussion in this thread seems to have reached a dead end, I surely understand if moderators want to close it.

I agree with @Prancer that it's likely we'll see further developments with SafeSport, USFSA, and/or the original case, so it would be nice if we could still post new information when it arises. I know we don't want to have the same discussion on repeat each time, but it's good to know if something new or significant happens.

 

[Prancer]

What is meant by "Culture of grooming and abuse"? And why is it applied here?

SafeSport said there is “a culture in figure skating that allowed grooming and abuse to go unchecked for too long."

I would expect it is applied here because during their investigation, SafeSport found that little if anything is done to prevent grooming and abuse in skating and little or no action taken when grooming and abuse occurs.

I would also assume that most (maybe not the vast majority) skater interactions are fine, but I think the question is what happens when skater interactions aren't fine? How does the USFS as an organization respond to this? Does the organization enforce ethical standards or turn a blind eye? Do people intervene or do they simply pretend not to see?

It seems kind of obvious to me that the USFS as an organization is not inclined to address such issues, but that might just be bias on my part, as I think the USFS has proven in multiple ways on multiple issues that problems are best addressed by pretending they don't exist.

 

[Vagabond]

Does the organization enforce ethical standards or turn a blind eye? Do people intervene or do they simply pretend not to see?

Or even, perhaps, condemn those who come forward with grievances?