I think “Participants” could be key here. I think if they meant the entire USEF membership they would have used the word membership. I read “Participants” as “those participating in a USEF sanctioned event”. So, you won’t be invited to coach at the Mastership session in FL, but you’re otherwise not precluded from giving clinics. Or running a whole barn that shows unrated.
2 Likes
If that interpretation is held by USEF, it most definitely is not being enforced by USEF.
Although I’m not sure what they could do to enforce it? Ban the people running and attending the clinics? I doubt that would happen. So I disagree, if people want to hold clinics with people banned from USEF, either via SS or other USEF avenues, I suspect they can continue to hold clinics outside of any USEF venue.
5 Likes
Literally right outside, a la Paul Valliere, who trains and coaches students on his farm immediately adjacent to show grounds.
5 Likes
Is he banned by SS? I know he has a lifetime USEF ban, but did that carry into SS?
No, but he wasn’t banned due to a SS offense.
And whether or not he was banned by SS is kind of irrelevant to the point being made by DMK and ladyj79, I think.
Unless you’re trying to make a different point that I’ve missed.
2 Likes
@RugBug not to my knowledge, but my post allowed for both types of banning, because I think if you couldn’t enforce one, I’m not sure what you could do to enforce the other.
7 Likes
With regards to the discussion of USEF enforcement of bans outside of USEF events and membership, it seems apt to point out that USEF banned individuals have very successful careers catering to USEF members.
Will USEF police safesport bans outside of USEF events moreso than its own bans? That seems highly unlikely.
4 Likes
If someone invites you to join the group, their posts will pop up on your FB feed periodically. You can read them but not comment on them.
I would be curious as to what part of SafeSport people think shouldn’t apply to Equestrians? To me the rules seem pretty reasonable, and are what we agree to in the rest of our lives. I do understand that there is a steep learning curve in horse sports and trainers have enjoyed a huge amount of power (physically, emotionally and financially) to date, and I can see them bristling about giving some of that up. This power imbalance has made the industry ripe a wide range of abuse, and while inappropriate sexual contact is way more abhorrent, I think bullying is quite common (even from basically nice people) and I like that SS rules will help rein that in as well.
14 Likes
@khobstetter Hello Kathy - I would actually love to speak with you. I wholeheartedly believe that SafeSport is in need of reform. However, the group appears to be incredibly biased. For starters, the social media postings of one of the group moderators makes me very uneasy.
Like @Midge so eloquently stated, the posts (and comments) that I have seen from the group include “a lot of people vastly ignorant about Safe Sport and how it works. And vastly ignorant about the constitution, due process and the criminal justice system.”
According to Dan Hill, the U.S. Center for SafeSport has received 3256 reports of misconduct. They have issued 552 sanctions and has ruled 285 people permanently ineligible (The Morning Call). The most common reasons for permanent ineligibility is “Criminal disposition - involving a minor” and “Criminal disposition - sexual misconduct” (I’m currently going through the SafeSport Centralized Disciplinary Database to find the breakdown of violations that resulted in a lifetime ban. I’ll make sure to share the numbers here when I’m done).
I bring this up because I am under the impression that several members of the group believe that SafeSport is just haphazardly banning people when, in my experience, that is definitely not the case.
My first question is this: How are you (and the other moderators) addressing the spread of misinformation about constitutional rights, SafeSport policy and individual cases (such as Rob Gage’s and John Coughlin’s) within the group?
@2bayboys Thank you so much for your kind comment regarding my word choice. This article sums up my personal philosophy about the terms “victim” and “survivor” very well: http://helloflo.com/survivor-vs-victim-why-choosing-your-words-carefully-is-important/.
@Mack123 I really should be thanking all of you for having such important conversations about a very difficult subject.
24 Likes
Appalling, frankly.
14 Likes
FISk123…would love to talk with you 714/797-1404. For people not reading through (yes its lengthy) group, it could be understandable to miss our project prupose. We believe that the original Congressional law, which extremely well intended, did not put forth a fair process for helping the issue and that needs to be adjusted. I will speak for me personally… IN MY OPINION. and with some of the new guidelines put out, what is actually happening is creating more danger for children. I AM NOT STANDING UP FOR ABUSE IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM…however…trainers, coaches, instructors hold a very important place in a child athletes life as they should. In order to protect the children FROM THE BAD ONES, I believe some of the new processes actually make them more ‘available’ to predators and people who could abuse them. ****At a recent show a child fell off her pony, she was not hurt but extremely upset and just wanted to be hugged. Her parents were in the stands and the first person she saw at the back gate was her trainer who she ran to…he held away her by her shoulders and tried to comfort her while she cried, finally a women trainer knelt down and hugged her. Back at the barn everyone and friends hugged her, she sat on someone lap and was sad. I had a conversation with the trainer and he said he was ‘afraid’ to hug her in case someone wanted to ‘get at him’ and falsely report to SS. He was not concerned about what happened - he was concerned he would be caught up in a mess that could cost him his career. We now have several documented situations where that happened, usually by false accusations. THAT concerns me!! I’m not going to debate all this on the COTH forum so if anyone wants to understand my points, my phone number is here on COTH twice this thread, my email is ijumpsports@aol.com or you are welcome to ask to join the group. THANK YOU COTH FOR ASKING…at least we are doing something, maybe not ‘your’ way but at least something, please excuse our stumbles as we run the road, but at least it is something. ALSO, over there we only deal with real names of everyone so you can tell exactly who is posting, we know who is in.
4 Likes
Welcome to the 21st century. This is a fact of life everywhere in any environment where adults interact with children and also in many work and educational environments where adults interact with other adults. “See something, say something.” Is it an unfortunate consequence of society’s recognition of the abuse problem - a recognition that has been way too long delayed. But the alternative - continuing to ignore it - is much worse.
If you can find me one single case where a person was sanctioned for simply hugging a crying child after a fall, I’d be shocked.
And I fail to see how that is an example of “the new processes actually making children more ‘available’ to predators and people who could abuse them.”
30 Likes
As someone who has coached youth for over a decade I do understand what you are saying. I absolutely believe in human touch and that it takes a village to raise children.
BUT I counter that it is actually the misinformation about Safesport that is leading to stories such as yours.
25 Likes
You can answer your own question: https://www.usef.org/compete/resources-forms/rules-regulations/safe-sport-sanctions
Unless you were trying to make a rhetorical point, in which case sorry for taking it literally!
2 Likes
I think as far as sanctions dealing with SS, I think the concern is that SS might have a higher authority since it is a governmental organization?
I’m not going to call you to speak on the telephone, although I think it is very brave that you are willing to put yourself out there like that.
But do you care you elaborate on your statement above that I bolded? How will SafeSport make children more available to predators? I’m failing to see that connection. Is your reasoning the hugging situation you detailed?
11 Likes
So a child has a fall, in front of (presumably) a large crowd of people, and he thinks that his hug to comfort her will be reported? And taken seriously enough to be placed on a temp ban while investigated? Well I find that hard to believe but the easy answer is: then don’t hug students, minor or adult.
My son and his teammates have had plenty of hard hits in academy soccer (not rec league) in which his coach had to come on the field to check on the child. Parents aren’t allowed. One was a hard enough hit the kid went to the ER for concussion protocol. Every time, his coach did the appropriate health check and then walked him off with a barely there “side hug” which is appropriate for that age (8/9 yrs old, often with tears).
I would think it very weird if my coach bent down and full on hugged my son, because he is a coach, not a member of our immediate family/friends.
Maybe it’s time for our professionals to act more like professionals and not be so close to students/clients? It would certainly make the bad mouthing (from another thread) less prevalent if everyone wasn’t so “buddy buddy”.
18 Likes
Agree… I brought it up because I am unsure if previous lifetime bans (pre-SS or those outside of SS parameters) included any verbiage around that ban excluding activities outside of USEF shows.
It matters to me for two reasons:
-
Is it really okay that an SS ban can so readily be skirted? I think that is what the aiding and abetting section is trying to curtail. I really hate hearing people say 'it’s only USEF shows. They can still teach, give clinics, go to non-USEF shows." That is a huge limitation of SS in my book. If someone deserves a ban, IMO, it should be from the entire industry. Abuse doesn’t stop because you can’t go to a USEF show. You want the ban to have teeth? Enforce ‘aiding and abetting’ rules. Fine people who train or clinic or show with permanently banned people.
-
If the outside activities were not expressly prohibited in situations like PV, well, he’s doing nothing wrong by having a business. Of course, there’s the whole ‘sending people to shows with other trainers’, etc issue that is totally skirting the ban, but just the act of doing business is not prohibited.
The number of posts that state the accused does not know who is accusing them is just amazing.
And the number of people who clearly do not understand that they are not going to prison, they are being kicked out of a club.
Oy.
23 Likes
I completely agree regarding the skirting. I don’t think that is OK. It’s also a problem in racing-- racing hands out suspensions frequently. For the big operations, a suspension is almost a joke. The assistant trainer pulls a trainer’s license and it’s business as usual as all the horses run under the assistant’s name while the trainer “disappears” for the duration. When the suspension is up, trainer steps back in and everything goes back to normal.
Every time I consider solutions, the horse factor becomes the biggest issue. In racing, stricter polices could negatively impact innocent living animals.
So I don’t know what the answer is for USEF. What I have learned from this thread is how little impact SS bans are having on some people and their businesses. I find that most concerning and alarming and I don’t know the best way to go about fixing it. I understand a lot of people think the solution is getting rid of SafeSport; I disagree there.
4 Likes
