Washington bill ends clergy loophole: Confessions no longer shield child abusers
If the governor signs the bill, Catholic priests will have to report confessions of abuse
This newsletter is free, but it’s only able to sustain itself due to the support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. Would you please consider becoming one of those supporters? You can use the button below to subscribe to Substack or use my usual Patreon page!
The state of Washington is a signature away from adopting a law that would require clergy members to report child abuse to law enforcement authorities if they happen to learn about it through the act of Confession.
On Friday, the State House finally passed SB 5375 on a 64-31 vote, sending the bill to the governor’s desk. Given that similar attempts have failed in recent years, maybe the third time is finally the charm.
The bill adds “member of the clergy” to the list of mandated reporters in the state, which is not too different from what other states have attempted to do in the past. What makes this bill unique is that it specifically says clergy members would not be protected by the current law which allows certain private communications to remain private. In other words, even if you learn about abuse through confession, you can’t just hide behind that shield. You would still have to report the abuse to authorities.
(Washington law already says other forms of “privileged” communication—like doctor/patient confidentiality—do not apply when it comes to reporting the abuse of children. This bill would finally extend that rule to priests. Catholic lobbyists have argued this bill singles out priests, but that’s a lie; it merely creates a law that treats priests like other mandated reporters.)
In the past, when Democratic Sen. Noel Frame filed versions of this bill, she had to compromise and include a carveout for “penitential communication.” For example, a version she sponsored in 2023 said that if priests suspected abuse, only to have it confirmed through confession, they would still have to report it to authorities… but if they learned about the abuse “solely” through confession, they could just sit on the information and let the child suffer more.
That bill died, ironically, after the state’s attorney general announced that three separate dioceses were being investigated for sex abuse by clergy members. Several lawmakers from both parties said they no longer wanted any exemptions for priests, but they ran out of time to pass anything that had enough support.
That’s why Frame was now attempting to pass a no-compromise version of the bill.
She explained her thinking in an emotional hearing earlier this year:
… I will say that the bill fell apart last year after the Revelation that the Catholic— three separate Archdioceses [sic] of the Catholic—Church were being investigated, which was not able to be corroborated until after legislative session last year, but that became public.
And quite frankly, it made it hard for me at a personal level to stomach any argument about religious freedom being more important than preventing the abuse, including the sexual abuse, of children.
Because everybody that's been following this bill knows that this one is personal for me, as a survivor of sexual abuse myself— an abuse that only stopped when I told a mandated reporter, which was a teacher.
So I have tried really hard over the last couple of years to find a balance and to strike a careful compromise, and I'm just here to say, for those who I tried to work with, I'm really sorry that I don't feel like I can make a compromise for you anymore, and I stand by the bill with no exemption.
As I said back then, that’s the sort of courage we needed from lawmakers when dealing with predatory cover-ups by religious leaders. You can’t compromise with people who would eagerly throw abuse victims under the bus if their mythology demanded it. Furthermore, there’s no way to exempt confession from mandated reporting when confession itself is the problem here. It gives sexual predators a way to shed some of their guilt without interfering with their actions. They don’t deserve that kind of safe space to spill their guts without penalty, but right now, religion gives it to them.
Sharon Huling with the Clergy Accountability Coalition also testified at that hearing, pointing out the irony of how the Church will “excommunicate a good priest if he reports child sexual abuse learned of in confession” even though they rarely take action against priests who are predators themselves. She also reiterated that confession would still be protected for everyone else: “The only people who have to worry about the privacy of their confession are child rapists and abusers.”
One of the only voices arguing against the no-compromise bill was Bishop Frank Schuster of the Archdiocese of Seattle, who said, predictably, that it would be “impossible for a priest to comply with this bill” because “the penalty for breaking that seal [of confession] is excommunication.”
As I said at the time, that’s the sort of comment that deserves to be ridiculed and condemned. In no rational world is getting excommunicated more damning than letting a child continue to suffer sexual abuse. If you would rather protect priests than kids, then your organization should just admit the safety of children isn’t a top priority.
Schuster added in his comments that there was a clear way to fix this problem: When hearing this kind of confession, priests could just “tell offenders to turn themselves in.” (That suggestion was as comical as thinking Pete Hegseth would just stop drinking after his promotion.) Schuster then suggested working on a compromise—the same compromise that failed so many times before.
Since I first posted about this bill in January, the State Senate passed the bill 28-20 and moved it over to the State House. On Friday, the House passed it, but not before a raucous hearing with all kinds of awful arguments in defense of faith-based sexual abuse cover-ups.
Republicans attempted to inject poisonous amendments to the bill—including ones that would undo all the important parts—but all were thankfully rejected. One GOP lawmaker, Jeremie Dufault, claimed (at the 1:05:20 mark) that the Catholic Church should be let off the hook here because it’s helped a bunch of people who are not victims of sexual abuse. He then used his time to convert people to Christianity, telling them that believing in Jesus “has the ability to change and save the world.”
Every religion has made mistakes. The parishioners of every religion have made mistakes. That does not define the religion.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is an attack on the Catholic and other faiths. The Catholic faith has helped billions of people around the world do good for their neighbors, their states, their communities, their families.
Talking about negative instances that have happened—and need to be addressed and need to be fixed—do not define the Catholic faith. Do not define the billions of people who practice the Catholic faith today, around the world, and the hundreds of billions—perhaps even trillions—who have practiced it throughout history.
The belief in Jesus Christ has the ability to change and save the world. And the government does not have the ability, or the authority under the State Constitution or the U.S. Constitution, to undermine that or attack that in any way.
Vote no on this bill.
If Jesus is so damn powerful, then a bill protecting children from abuse shouldn’t be an issue for Him. It’s telling that Dufault thinks protecting kids would “undermine” and “attack” the Catholic faith.
Anyway, everyone promptly ignored him.
The Seattle Times notes that mandated reporters are required by law to “report suspicions of abuse within 48 hours.” If they don’t, the subsequent misdemeanor charge could land them a year-long prison sentence on top of a $5,000 fine.
Marino Hardin, a former Jehovah’s Witness who testified in support of this bill in part due to witnessing “multiple cases of child abuse being ignored” while growing up, celebrated the vote in an email to me:
Today, after three years of effort, I am incredibly grateful that Washington State lawmakers have finally passed common-sense mandatory reporting laws into law. Based on the church's policy in other states that have mandatory reporting with no exceptions, they would have reported the cases I knew about if the law had required it, and going forward, I believe many future cases will be reported.
I am grateful that there will be far fewer children going without help; and far fewer repeat abusers moving from Kingdom Hall to Kingdom Hall, venue to venue, leaving a trail of hurt individuals behind them. And I am especially grateful for the efforts of the Clergy Accountability Coalition, the other brave people who testified, and lawmakers like Senators Noel Frame and Claire Wilson, who have done so much to make this possible.
If Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson (who is Catholic) signs the bill, and there’s no reason to think he’ll veto it, Washington will join New Hampshire, West Virginia, and Guam as the only places where formal confessions of sexual abuse are not exempt from mandatory reporting rules.
(Portions of this article were published earlier. Thanks to Kristiana for the heads up.)
Pas trop tôt.
"Catholic lobbyists have argued this bill singles out priests"
If it does, ask yourself why !
An institution that protects child abuse does not deserve to be defended. The systematic abuse of children has been the Catholic Church's dirty little secret for centuries.