MYTH: "The child abuse law is anti-Catholic."

FACT: All sexual abusers are included - not just religious pedophiles. The bill includes all institutions and individuals including the public schools and the state government agencies.

MYTH: "This bill singles out the Catholic Church."

FACT: This bill includes all sexual abusers. National statistics show that 85% of sexual abusers are interfamily (e.g., an uncle, father, stepfather or family friend, baby sitters, etc.) and only a small percentage of sexual abusers are priests and authority figures in all religions. However, the Catholic Church through transferring pedophile priests to other parishes and the cover-up of the crimes of these priests by its leaders has institutionalized enabling sexual predators.

MYTH: "This bill will hurt the good priests."

FACT: According to the most conservative statistics between 1950 and the present, 6,000 Catholic clergy abused 13,000 children in the U.S. Priest abusers only make up 4% of the total priests¹. The priests who have been faithful to the teachings of Christ are living under the cloud of suspicion of child abuse. This bill will actually help the majority of priests who are not sexually abusive.

MYTH: "Only people that hate the Catholic Church are for this bill."

FACT: The Rev. Thomas Gumbleton, an auxiliary bishop of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Detroit, urged lawmakers in Ohio last week to support a bill that would put his church at great risk of embarrassment, shame and financial hardship. The bill would relax the statute of limitations on sexual abuse, granting a one-year window for lawsuits by those whose right to a day in court lapsed long ago².

Retroactive Civil Window

MYTH: "Cases 20, 30 years old are difficult to defend."

FACT: Cases 20, 30 years old are very, very difficult to win. The rules of evidence and burden of proof are still in play. It remains the responsibility of the accuser to prove the accusations.

MYTH: "Lawyers tell me this window which is retroactive is unconstitutional."

FACT: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a retroactive criminal law is unconstitutional (Stogner v. California). However, in 2004, the state of California passed a one-year window for victims to seek redress in civil courts. It was challenged several times by the church in appellate courts and the courts rightly held that the law is constitutional. More importantly, Delaware has precedent of a retroactive civil window in the case of U.S. military veterans who discovered years later that they had suffered the effects of exposure to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War.

MYTH: "The California one year civil window was a disaster...over 600 claims by 1,000 victims."

FACT: The law was an unqualified success because the point of the law was to give victims their day in court and therefore flush out and expose sexual predators.

MYTH: "There is no precedent for the look-back provision."

FACT: California did this several years ago when they amended their statue of limitations to help child abuse victims. The Delaware General Assembly has previously done this as well for Vietnam Veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange. They realized the harm after the statute of limitations had already expired. A civil window was enacted in Delaware for Vietnam War Veterans to file lawsuits for exposure to Agent Orange.

MYTH: "The look-back provision violates the due process and equal protection rights contained in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution."

FACT: The U.S. Supreme Court has twice rejected this argument about statutes of limitations in civil courts. This is within the statute of limitations context because "the Fourteenth Amendment does not make an act of state legislation void merely because it has some retrospective operation" (holding that it is well within the legislature's prerogative to retroactively revive time-barred claims). The California state courts have upheld their retroactive child abuse statutes as well. In fact, due process for victims of childhood sexual abuse in Delaware is denied by not allowing a civil window.

MYTH: "If this bill passes – frivolous lawsuits may be filed."

FACT: The courts have processes in place to throw out these types of lawsuits. The discovery process will not allow lawsuits to go forward if there is no basis to do so. The bill contains a provision for defendants to recover attorneys' fees in the unlikely case of false claims.

MYTH: "Plaintiffs will be denied their constitutional right to due process. It will be one person's word against another person's word."

FACT: Schools, churches and institutions keep written records of child abuse complaints. They also keep records of their finding and actions of these serious charges. The records can be subpoenaed and brought into evidence. For example in the grand jury investigations of the clergy child abuse scandal in Philadelphia, over 10,000 pages of documents were entered into evidence. This can prove or disprove accusations and help settle "his word against my word" cases.

Repressed Memory

MYTH: