Justice for child sex abuse survivors.

• Author: Saunders, Joseph H.
• Position: Letters - Letter to the editor

The July/August article, "Applying Statutes of Limitation in Institutional Childhood Sex Abuse Cases," provides a well-crafted legal analysis for defense of institutions (usually churches) that have been accused of enabling and protecting child predators who have sexually assaulted and raped children entrusted to the institution many years prior to the filing of a lawsuit. The premise of the article is "how resolutely unfair it would be to award one who has willfully or carelessly slept on his rights."

On the other hand, is it justice that those who were sexually abused as children do not have a right to their day in court in some limited circumstances?

Many states (California, Hawaii, Delaware, Minnesota) have recognized the injustice of denying child sex abuse survivors their day in court and have passed "window legislation" to remedy this injustice. Further, Florida law is not as definitive on the statute of limitations question as the authors argue.

Children who have been raped or assaulted by authority figures from an institution are frequently intimidated or threatened with harm or loss of religious salvation (going to hell) if they ever disclose the abuse. They frequently suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder and are unable to come forward. It takes many years for them to come to terms with their sexual assault and many never come forward.

Is it justice that they be denied their day in court if an institution has been complicit in enabling the child predator, covering up the abuse, and intimidating the child to prevent public disclosure and scandal for the institution?

I believe Florida law does provide narrow avenues to trial under delayed discovery and equitable estoppel case law for providing this day in court. Child sex abuse cases are fundamentally different for purposes of equitable estoppel than other types of cases. Therefore, reliance on cases such as Monahan v...