I was Sexually Abused by My Late Teens Brother/ Do I tell? His Children?

 

The magazine’s Ethicist columnist on disclosing a sibling’s past actions to other family members.

 Kwame Anthony Appiah

 New York Times

When I was a child, I was molested by my brother, who was then in his late teens. Now I am close to his adult children, though estranged from him. They know nothing about this, nor will I ever tell them while he is alive; I know it would tear the family apart.

I occasionally think, however, that this knowledge would be something I would like to have if I were his child. I imagine asking his children if they would like to know something troubling about their father once he and I are both gone. If they all said yes, I could put the information in a letter and leave it with my lawyer and my will. If they said no, I wouldn’t write a letter.

On the one hand, it seems to me a terrible thing to tell someone’s offspring about a parent, but on the other, once we’re both dead, the knowledge dies with us. And I wonder whether it’s something I would have wanted to know about my own parent. What if they have vague memories of something similar that happened to them? Maybe the knowledge would be beneficial to them in seeking help. My nieces and nephews are in their 40s and 50s. And they would have the choice of knowing. — Name Withheld

From the Ethicist:

I am in favor of living with a realistic picture of the people in our lives. But this ideal doesn’t tell us how to think about the course of action we’re contemplating. If you had any evidence that your brother had abused his own children, or anyone else’s, you no doubt would have tried to intervene to protect them. What you say motivates you is more conjectural: You think that your nieces and nephews might want to know about this deeply hurtful experience. 

Maybe they really would want to know; maybe they would be sorry they were ever told. What matters, at this point, is whether the revelation would advance their welfare. What happened to you most likely took place over half a century ago. Things our parents did before we were born are generally not central to our lives; they were different people then. What’s more, in the plan you lay out, your nieces and nephews would hear your story late in their own lives, after you and your brother were dead.

Your aim cannot be to prevent harm, then, and yet you could end up causing it. The revelation might well play a huge and perhaps distorting role in the way your brother’s children think about him. The information would certainly be hard for them to assimilate with neither of you around to answer questions. They could only guess what your brother thought about your report; he would have no opportunity to express remorse.

Your plan would hardly be improved by asking these middle-aged men and women whether they wanted to receive a posthumous bombshell. They would be left with diffuse suspicions. Relationships might be disrupted for no clear reason. True, they could go ask their father what you might be talking about. He would then be free to choose to discuss with them what he thinks happened between you two. Still, he might well feel that this would be to nobody’s benefit. (Or, of course, he might insist that you’re delusional.)

Although you’ve decided that you don’t want to tell people now, lest the information tear the family apart, the emotional repercussions may not change much when your brother isn’t around to apologize — or, for that matter, explain away or deny. You should ask yourself whether what motivates you is a yearning for justice beyond the grave, because what you’re contemplating would not deliver justice. 

One issue you don’t discuss is whether you and your brother have ever dealt with this episode of abuse together; it clearly remains an unhealed wound. What’s most important here, of course, isn’t his welfare but yours. And a therapist might be able to help you decide whether, despite your estrangement, you would profit from making your brother confront what he did to you. 

The previous column’s question was from a man wondering whether he needed to be polite to an acquaintance who made millions of dollars from defrauding others but has thus far escaped any legal penalty. He wrote: “It’s likely that I will run into him at a party someday. I’d like nothing more than to start a spat and make him feel uncomfortable — I don’t believe people who have done such horrible things should be able to enjoy a normal life. But is this a just thing to do? To what extent do I owe the party host and the other guests a good time, even if I strongly disagree with whom they choose to associate?”

In his response, the Ethicist noted: “It’s a basic Kantian thought that the wicked should not prosper, that the world would be better if they faced some penalty. Social censure would be such a penalty. … The question, then, is what you mean by a ‘spat.’ You recognize that you owe the hosts some measure of civility at a party; this rules out overturning the punch bowl on this malefactor’s head. But if you convey your disapproval to him without disturbing others, you would be spoiling things for the hosts only if he makes a scene, and that would be on him. … It’s a truth as old as humanity: One way we sustain the values of our community is by criticizing those who violate them.” (Reread the full question and answer here.)

⬥

While everyone needs to be held accountable for bad, terrible, or criminal behavior, it doesn’t seem to me that a party is a good place for the letter writer to confront this offender. Everyone present, particularly the hosts, would be made to feel unnecessarily uncomfortable. The writer needs to find more private times and ways to do so. — Marcia 

⬥

Since the acquaintance has not been charged with a crime, the letter writer needs to be willing to deal with the potential fallout if he is wrong about the acquaintance’s culpability. If he is culpable, that’s easy. If he is truly innocent, that’s a different situation entirely. — Bill

⬥

I agree that the wrongdoer deserves to pay a penalty, but he has not been tried in court and found guilty. The writer’s personal certainty that this acquaintance is guilty is not good enough. If he wants, he can confront the wrongdoer, but not at someone else’s party. That is supremely unfair to the host. — Deborah

⬥

The letter writer should quietly confront the wrongdoer directly by saying, “I have a hard time accepting anyone who profited greatly at the expense of others.” This gives the accused the opportunity to present his own point of view or to walk away. Also, if the writer shared his feelings with the hosts in advance and asked them whether this acquaintance would also be at the party, they would be put on notice. — Sallie

⬥

The question about how to treat someone who embezzled an enormous fortune and the Ethicist’s advice both overlook a very important detail: A person who helps bring down a company by looting it on an astounding scale has a pathological lack of a moral compass, immunizing them from shaming. Trying to do so may be the right action, but it’s futile. — Richard

This is Adam Gonzalez. 

I had this story Google translated to  Spanish to make sure a young man I know who is been discarded by his family because he is gay, He felt he would leave his country and come to the U.S. He was molested by his older brother when he was young and his brother was in his early twenties. I want to make sure he reads this. 

I had an experience when I was 14 and my brother was staying in my mom's because he had a fight with his wife. He had two children at the time  (the late twenties) and he was a brother who abused me with violence physically at least half a dozen times. He is the only brother who is still alive and I do not see him as a brother nor would I want to speak to him. It's a good thing he is in Texas far from me. Not because of his sexual attempt but because of the way he behaved with my mom. Not even her funeral moved him. I left my bedroom and bed to him at my mom's suggestion and I was sleeping on the couch. I woke up in the middle of the night and he had pulled down my PJ pants and his hand was inside my underwear. I Didn't know what was going on and would not imagine he would do such a thing. I thought he just enjoyed punching me in the mouth or face. It's amazing this is the brother I really loved because when he was home he spent time with me and would talk to me. I was so scared for him when he joined the Army and he was going to be sent to Vietnam. I don't know what happened but he was discharged.

Well, I sat up and of course, his hand came off and the shorts elastic moved back to the position they were but I knew. My PJ was down and he had been sitting by me on the couch. Had he talked to me and explained it I would have forgiven him but he just said he was checking to see what underwear I used and to see if it was like his. That offended me more but at least he said something instead of me having to ask and get into a fight with him in which I would be the loser. I was at an age in which I was tall and strong. There was nothing he could do that I will not wake up and let him do or stopped him. The way I sat up in shock scared him and he might it thought I was gay, I didn't know it yet but somehow he wanted to see if I would let him play with my genitals. When I was around 5, -7 yrs old I remember sleeping with him sometimes and there was never anything I can remember. I think this guy's thinking I was gay so I would let my brother do me because gays are like that? He learned gays are not like that!

Years later I told my mom and sister where he used to stay. This was many years BUT I WAS NOT BELIEVED. MY SISTER WAS SHOCK I was saying that and my mom said she did not want to hear about those things. She knew at this time I was gay and I was independent in a profession and my sister also knew I was gay. I got the feeling that if this happen to a gay kid particularly me who had such a quick mouth they should be able to deal with it. He also made a girl pregnant who was homeless because her parents were dunks and the neighbor used to take advantage of this her sister. In any case, I figure I'll add that. You are welcome to comment here or on Facebook or Twitter when it reaches there.

Adam

  En Español:                                                         ⬥

Cuando yo era niño, fui abusado sexualmente por mi hermano, que entonces estaba en su adolescencia. Ahora estoy cerca de sus hijos adultos, aunque alejado de él. Ellos nada saben de esto, ni les diré nunca mientras viva; Sé que destrozaría a la familia.

De vez en cuando pienso, sin embargo, que este conocimiento sería algo que me gustaría tener si fuera su hijo. Me imagino preguntando a sus hijos si les gustaría saber algo preocupante sobre su padre una vez que él y yo nos hayamos ido. Si todos dijeran que sí, podría poner la información en una carta y dejarla con mi abogado y mi testamento. Si dijeran que no, no escribiría una carta.

Por un lado, me parece una cosa terrible contarle a la descendencia de alguien sobre un padre, pero por otro lado, una vez que ambos estamos muertos, el conocimiento muere con nosotros. Y me pregunto si es algo que me hubiera gustado saber sobre mi propio padre. ¿Qué pasa si tienen vagos recuerdos de algo similar que les sucedió? Tal vez el conocimiento sería beneficioso para ellos en la búsqueda de ayuda. Mis sobrinas y sobrinos tienen entre 40 y 50 años. Y tendrían la opción de saber. — Nombre retenido

Del ético:

Estoy a favor de vivir con una imagen realista de las personas en nuestras vidas. Pero este ideal no nos dice cómo pensar sobre el curso de acción que estamos contemplando. Si tuviera alguna prueba de que su hermano había abusado de sus propios hijos o de los de otra persona, sin duda habría tratado de intervenir para protegerlos. Lo que dices que te motiva es más conjetural: crees que tus sobrinas y sobrinos podrían querer saber sobre esta experiencia profundamente dolorosa.

Tal vez realmente querrían saber; tal vez se arrepentirían de haberles dicho alguna vez. Lo que importa, en este punto, es si la revelación mejoraría su bienestar. Lo que te sucedió probablemente ocurrió hace más de medio siglo. Las cosas que nuestros padres hicieron antes de que naciéramos generalmente no son centrales en nuestras vidas; entonces eran personas diferentes. Además, en el plan que presentas, tus sobrinas y sobrinos escucharían tu historia tarde en sus propias vidas, después de que tú y tu hermano estuvieran muertos.

Entonces, tu objetivo no puede ser prevenir el daño y, sin embargo, podrías terminar causándolo. La revelación bien podría desempeñar un papel enorme y quizás distorsionador en la forma en que los hijos de su hermano piensan sobre él. La información ciertamente sería difícil para ellos de asimilar sin ninguno de ustedes cerca para responder preguntas. Solo podían adivinar lo que su hermano pensaba sobre su informe; no tendría oportunidad de expresar remordimiento.

Difícilmente mejoraría su plan preguntando a estos hombres y mujeres de mediana edad si querían recibir una bomba póstuma. Se quedarían con sospechas difusas. Las relaciones pueden verse interrumpidas sin una razón clara. Cierto, podrían ir a preguntarle a su padre de qué podrías estar hablando. Entonces sería libre de elegir discutir con ellos lo que cree que sucedió entre ustedes dos. Aún así, bien podría sentir que esto no beneficiaría a nadie. (O, por supuesto, podría insistir en que estás delirando).

Aunque ha decidido que no quiere decírselo a la gente ahora, no sea que la información destroce a la familia, es posible que las repercusiones emocionales no cambien mucho cuando su hermano no esté presente para disculparse, o, para el caso, dar explicaciones o denegar. Deberías preguntarte si lo que te motiva es un anhelo de justicia más allá de la tumba, porque lo que estás contemplando no haría justicia.

Un tema que no discute es si usted y su hermano alguna vez han lidiado con este episodio de abuso juntos; claramente sigue siendo una herida sin cicatrizar. Lo más importante aquí, por supuesto, no es su bienestar sino el tuyo. Y un terapeuta podría ayudarte a decidir si, a pesar de tu distanciamiento, te beneficiaría hacer que tu hermano confrontara lo que te hizo.

La pregunta de la columna anterior era de un hombre que se preguntaba si necesitaba ser cortés con un conocido que ganó millones de dólares estafando a otros pero que hasta ahora ha escapado de cualquier sanción legal. Escribió: “Es probable que algún día me lo encuentre en una fiesta. Nada me gustaría más que comenzar una pelea y hacerlo sentir incómodo. No creo que las personas que han hecho cosas tan horribles puedan disfrutar de una vida normal. Pero, ¿es esto algo justo? ¿Hasta qué punto le debo al anfitrión de la fiesta y a los demás invitados un buen momento, incluso si no estoy de acuerdo con quién eligen asociarse?

En su respuesta, el especialista en ética señaló: “Es un pensamiento kantiano básico que los malvados no deberían prosperar, que el mundo sería mejor si enfrentaran algún castigo. La censura social sería tal sanción. … La pregunta, entonces, es qué quieres decir con una “pelea”. Reconoces que les debes a los anfitriones cierta medida de cortesía en una fiesta; esto descarta volcar la ponchera sobre la cabeza de este malhechor. Pero si le transmites tu desaprobación sin molestar a los demás, estarías arruinando las cosas para los anfitriones solo si hace una escena.