USCJ Review - Spring 2004

Should I Close the Door? Confronting Issues of Harassment and Abuse in Synagogue Life

by Richard Helfand

Consider some of the headlines we have seen recently in the press. On December 15, 2000, an article appeared in the Jewish Bulletin News of Northern California entitled “New Cases Refocus Attention on Misconduct of Jewish Clergy.” In The Jewish Week of Greater New York on May 9, 2003, appeared the headline “Sex Abuse on the Radar,” and New York Newsday reported on May 26, 2003, “Rabbis and Sex Abuse Accusations, Jewish Leaders Begin the Struggle to Combat the Problem.” These headlines give us reason to pause and to consider just what is happening in the Jewish community.

While, for the most part, media coverage has focused on clergy abuse in the Catholic Church, the Jewish community has not been immune from such reports. In addition, while most of the allegations on clergy abuse in the Jewish press have come from outside our movement, the Conservative Jewish community has not been left unscathed.

Asked for his reaction to the growing number of reported cases of clergy misconduct and how The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism will address these issues, Rabbi Jerome Epstein stated, “I would rather this not become an epidemic and I think what we need to do is take affirmative steps to guide people before they make mistakes.” He subsequently urged the creation of a “best practices document to address and direct appropriate conduct.” Charged with this mission by International President Judy Yudof, the USCJ Committee on Congregational Standards, chaired by Eugene Zinbarg and directed by Rabbi Moshe Edelman, appointed a special subcommittee to study these issues and develop a comprehensive approach for congregations to use to address allegations of abuse in their synagogues.

The subcommittee did not limit itself to issues of alleged abuse by clergy. Rather, since the congregation is a place where clergy and lay professionals engage both congregants and other employees, the subcommittee looked at the entire range of potential harassment and abuse issues in a synagogue and employment setting. It took a proactive approach to identify issues of this kind, both legal and Jewish, that a synagogue might confront in its day-to-day operations. Further, it sought to create a process that can be used by the congregation to address, investigate and resolve these issues in a caring manner, placing equal emphasis on the concerns of the victim, the accused affirand the interests of the synagogue. The results are the Model Guidelines for Congregational Policy against Harassment, unveiled at the 2003 USCJ Biennial Convention.

The guiding principle behind Model Guidelines is that each Jewish professional and lay leader of a Conservative synagogue serves as a dugma, “role model,” whose behavior is expected to exemplify the highest standards of ethical and moral conduct in relationships with one another and with members of the congregations they serve. Their conduct should always be worthy of emulation and they should avoid ma’arit ayin, even the “appearance of impropriety,” in all that they do.

The Guidelines alert professional and other staff to acceptable and unacceptable conduct and provide them with guidance so they can avoid allegations of abuse and harassment in the performance of their duties. While the goal of the congregation is to effectively respond to the needs of its congregants, we are ever mindful that the manner in which this support is conveyed can at times be misunderstood by the synagogue member. Therefore, the section of the Guidelines entitled “Guiding Principles in Professional Relationships” tries to create a balance between providing care and demonstrating concern for our congregants during their time of need and avoiding any conduct that, however well intended, can be misinterpreted.

“The work of the professional in the congregation, in particular the rabbi and cantor, often of necessity involves conveying empathy, connection and warmth. This can sometimes create a dilemma in forming appropriate relationships with congregants. It is the primary responsibility of the professional to establish and preserve appropriate boundaries in these relationships. Professionals and lay leaders alike who attempt to be supportive of a congregant must recognize that the way in which their support is conveyed can be misinterpreted. They must be especially sensitive to this danger and must avoid any behavior that a congregant could reasonably misconstrue. Just the appearance of impropriety can cause a problem for the professional and the congregation. Therefore, it is best to err on the side of caution. While care and concern for the congregant should not be sacrificed, a balance, though often difficult to achieve, should be maintained. In doing so, the professional and lay leader should be sensitive to appropriate locations, hours and nature of their interactions and physical contact with a congregant.

Therefore, when relating to a child, when interacting with a teenager, when counseling an adult, or when working with a volunteer, the professional, as well as the employee and the lay leader, should avoid being in a situation where there is no other person in the vicinity. A door should always be open. A third party should always be in plain view. A third party should always be within ‘earshot.’

The following steps should be followed when interacting with a child or teen:

Have another adult in the room during private lessons.
If that is not possible, an effort should be made to teach with at least two students in the room.
If one has no choice but to work with the person individually, it should be done in an open area where there is a flow of traffic.
Avoid physical contact with the individual, especially when alone in the room.
Do not sit side by side or otherwise in extremely close proximity. Keep reasonable distance between yourself and your student.
Do not give a child or teen a ride home after a session/lesson. If it is unavoidable, have the person sit in the back seat of the vehicle.
Private lessons should not be given in your home or the home of the student unless another adult is also present.”

The Guidelines recognize that the realities of synagogue life have changed, and they recommend a commonsense approach to avoid compromising situations. No longer can a hazzan drive a teenager home after a bar mitzvah lesson. No longer can a USY advisor ride in an elevator alone with a USYer of the opposite sex. No longer can a rabbi sit next to a congregant during counseling in order to demonstrate compassion and understanding. No longer can the educator give a student an encouraging hug. By utilizing these guidelines, congregations can lessen the likelihood that allegations of misconduct will occur and can avoid the pitfalls caused by a lack of independent witnesses to the alleged conduct when they do.

The sections of the Model Guidelines entitled “Investigative Process” and “Procedure for Investigating a Complaint” set forth a process that congregations can use to address allegations of harassment or abuse, should they arise. The Guidelines establish a mechanism to examine complaints in a forthright manner with due consideration to the dignity of the parties involved so that the allegations can be resolved as expeditiously as possible. While simple to employ, the process provides a balance between the accuser, the accused and the congregation, allowing for a relatively swift evaluation of the complaint. This procedure is designed to promote fairness to all of the parties as well as the congregation. It is structured to maintain the confidentiality of all parties involved and emphasizes the need to remain objective until the investigation is complete.

“All allegations will be taken seriously. Every effort will be made to maintain confidentiality throughout the investigation process to the extent practical and appropriate under the circumstances. Information will be shared only on a need-to-know basis for the purpose of conducting an investigation or as required by law. Every effort will also be made to preserve the anonymity of the complainant. However, neither anonymity nor absolute confidentiality can be guaranteed. All of those involved in the process of investigating a complaint will be instructed to respect and maintain the confidentiality of information received during the process.

Those conducting any investigation of an alleged violation of this policy should withhold judgment about what occurred until the congregation has completed its investigation. Statements or actions that impugn the integrity or motives of the complainant should be avoided. Similarly, judgments about the guilt or innocence of the respondent should be avoided until the investigation has been completed.

Both the complainant and the respondent should be informed of the process and procedure that the congregation will be using to investigate the complaint, as well as the identity of a person to whom questions about this process may be directed.”

The Guidelines further state that the process is designed to promote a fair and prompt response to a congregant’s concerns and should not be adversarial in nature.

“The investigation will not be governed by any formal rules of legal procedure or evidence. This procedure is purposely informal in nature in order to promote direct communication between the congregation and the parties to the complaint, without the involvement of counsel, and requests by either the complainant or the respondent to be represented by counsel during the investigation shall not be honored.”

Lastly, and most importantly, once the investigation is done, the Guidelines call for the congregation to take reasonable steps to address and remedy the current complaint. If the conduct of an employee or lay leader is determined to have been improper, appropriate corrective action needs to be taken immediately. Furthermore, the congregation must take whatever steps are necessary to insure that similar misconduct will not happen in the future.

The Model Guidelines for Congregational Policy against Harassment will enable the affiliated congregations of the United Synagogue to address abuse and harassment in a compassionate yet forthright manner. By implementing these Guidelines, USCJ congregations can move closer to creating an environment for their congregants and employees that is free from harassment and grounded in the teachings of Torah to ensure fairness and dignity in resolving conflicts among them.

Richard Helfand, an attorney specializing in labor and employment relations and president-elect of the USCJ Mid-Continent Region, authored the Model Guidelines and presented them at the 2003USCJ Convention.