Cults & Society
 Department: Group Report
__________________________________________________
Featured Group Report

Hare Krishna: child abuse
  
 
   
 
     

18/22

Child Abuse in the Hare Krishna Movement:1971-1986

E. Burke Rochford, Jr. with Jennifer Heinlein

[continued]

In still other instances the administration of the school in Vrindavan apparently sought to hide the abuse taking place there during the early 1980s.  

He [Headmaster] knowingly covered-up . . . There are two or three incidents that I can think of where I was beaten or something happened to me.  He would take me into his room and he'd lock me in there for like a day with him and he was like constantly preaching to me and so finally I just went ‘Okay! I won't say anything to anybody. It didn't happen!’ And he would let me out of the room. (Interview 1993)28         

On final analysis it seems clear that the gurukula became an institution unto itself, in Goffman's (1961) terms, a ‘total institution.’  Within the gurukula children remained largely separate from the day-to-day lives of their parents, and, very often, from ISKCON community life more generally.  From an institution meant to train and educate, the gurukula instead became the functional equivalent of an orphanage.  As one teacher from this period remarked. 

The whole scenario set up an orphanage . . . Even though you have kids with parents. Because we didn't allow the parents to become part of their children's lives. (Interview 1997) 

Avoiding Child Abuse: Resources and Victimisation  

Although my focus thus far has sought to understand a number of factors and processes that contributed to child abuse within ISKCON's schools, I now want to consider why some young people did not experience abuse and neglect. As I have already suggested, a proportion of the students who attended the gurukula during the 1970s and 1980s escaped being victims of child abuse.  This happened despite the fact that in some cases their classmates were targeted for abuse, while they were spared.        

Perhaps the most obvious factor in whether a child was abused or not, related to the school environment itself.  It seems that some gurukulas experienced far less child abuse, while others were defined by neglect and abuse.  To a significant degree, where a student was sent to gurukula had a profound influence on whether he or she became targets of abuse.  Perhaps the most vivid example is provided by the schools in India, where abuse and neglect were, by all reports, commonplace.  Since only adolescent boys were sent to the schools in India they faced far more abuse than their female counterparts.  In the United States several of ISKCON's schools also experienced relatively high levels of child abuse (for example, Dallas, Seattle, New Vrindaban), whereas others experienced considerably less (for example, Bhaktivedanta Village, California; New Talavan, Mississippi).  It appears also that child abuse was far less prevalent in Europe and Australia than in either India or North America. 

But what explains these differences?  I think several things.  First some schools had a more stable gurukula staff both academic and ashram teachers, as well as the school's administration.   While teachers in these schools may have been more devoted to working in the gurukula, they also were able to establish enduring and caring relationships with the children they worked with.  Two former gurukula students suggest why a particular school proved especially positive for them in ways that highlight the role of the teacher. 

It was M[other] Kutila who changed our lives and who let us know that someone could love us; that devotees did love one another.  I swear for the first week I thought I was a princess.  We were never hit any more, we had all new clothes, our own bags, filled with our own soap, brushes and hot water showers.  It was then that I knew I had a mother and father, they were Kutila and Kuladri (her husband). (Author's emphasis; Devi Dasi, K. 1990:1).

 

One of the high points of my life in gurukula was because the teacher, (name), took us in as his sons (original Vedic standard) and treated us like adults.  We had incredible camaraderie as well as growth including fitness, mental strength, creativity and Krishna Consciousness. (Second Generation Survey 1992 93)   

1/22 < > 22/22

______________________________________________ ^
 

Cults & Society
 Department: Group Report
__________________________________________________
Featured Group Report

Hare Krishna: child abuse
  
 
   
 
     

18/22

Child Abuse in the Hare Krishna Movement:1971-1986

E. Burke Rochford, Jr. with Jennifer Heinlein

[continued]

In still other instances the administration of the school in Vrindavan apparently sought to hide the abuse taking place there during the early 1980s.  

He [Headmaster] knowingly covered-up . . . There are two or three incidents that I can think of where I was beaten or something happened to me.  He would take me into his room and he'd lock me in there for like a day with him and he was like constantly preaching to me and so finally I just went ‘Okay! I won't say anything to anybody. It didn't happen!’ And he would let me out of the room. (Interview 1993)28         

On final analysis it seems clear that the gurukula became an institution unto itself, in Goffman's (1961) terms, a ‘total institution.’  Within the gurukula children remained largely separate from the day-to-day lives of their parents, and, very often, from ISKCON community life more generally.  From an institution meant to train and educate, the gurukula instead became the functional equivalent of an orphanage.  As one teacher from this period remarked. 

The whole scenario set up an orphanage . . . Even though you have kids with parents. Because we didn't allow the parents to become part of their children's lives. (Interview 1997) 

Avoiding Child Abuse: Resources and Victimisation  

Although my focus thus far has sought to understand a number of factors and processes that contributed to child abuse within ISKCON's schools, I now want to consider why some young people did not experience abuse and neglect. As I have already suggested, a proportion of the students who attended the gurukula during the 1970s and 1980s escaped being victims of child abuse.  This happened despite the fact that in some cases their classmates were targeted for abuse, while they were spared.        

Perhaps the most obvious factor in whether a child was abused or not, related to the school environment itself.  It seems that some gurukulas experienced far less child abuse, while others were defined by neglect and abuse.  To a significant degree, where a student was sent to gurukula had a profound influence on whether he or she became targets of abuse.  Perhaps the most vivid example is provided by the schools in India, where abuse and neglect were, by all reports, commonplace.  Since only adolescent boys were sent to the schools in India they faced far more abuse than their female counterparts.  In the United States several of ISKCON's schools also experienced relatively high levels of child abuse (for example, Dallas, Seattle, New Vrindaban), whereas others experienced considerably less (for example, Bhaktivedanta Village, California; New Talavan, Mississippi).  It appears also that child abuse was far less prevalent in Europe and Australia than in either India or North America. 

But what explains these differences?  I think several things.  First some schools had a more stable gurukula staff both academic and ashram teachers, as well as the school's administration.   While teachers in these schools may have been more devoted to working in the gurukula, they also were able to establish enduring and caring relationships with the children they worked with.  Two former gurukula students suggest why a particular school proved especially positive for them in ways that highlight the role of the teacher. 

It was M[other] Kutila who changed our lives and who let us know that someone could love us; that devotees did love one another.  I swear for the first week I thought I was a princess.  We were never hit any more, we had all new clothes, our own bags, filled with our own soap, brushes and hot water showers.  It was then that I knew I had a mother and father, they were Kutila and Kuladri (her husband). (Author's emphasis; Devi Dasi, K. 1990:1).

 

One of the high points of my life in gurukula was because the teacher, (name), took us in as his sons (original Vedic standard) and treated us like adults.  We had incredible camaraderie as well as growth including fitness, mental strength, creativity and Krishna Consciousness. (Second Generation Survey 1992 93)   

1/22 < > 22/22

______________________________________________ ^
 

Cults & Society
 Department: Group Report
__________________________________________________
Featured Group Report

Hare Krishna: child abuse
  
 
   
 
     

18/22

Child Abuse in the Hare Krishna Movement:1971-1986

E. Burke Rochford, Jr. with Jennifer Heinlein

[continued]

In still other instances the administration of the school in Vrindavan apparently sought to hide the abuse taking place there during the early 1980s.  

He [Headmaster] knowingly covered-up . . . There are two or three incidents that I can think of where I was beaten or something happened to me.  He would take me into his room and he'd lock me in there for like a day with him and he was like constantly preaching to me and so finally I just went ‘Okay! I won't say anything to anybody. It didn't happen!’ And he would let me out of the room. (Interview 1993)28         

On final analysis it seems clear that the gurukula became an institution unto itself, in Goffman's (1961) terms, a ‘total institution.’  Within the gurukula children remained largely separate from the day-to-day lives of their parents, and, very often, from ISKCON community life more generally.  From an institution meant to train and educate, the gurukula instead became the functional equivalent of an orphanage.  As one teacher from this period remarked. 

The whole scenario set up an orphanage . . . Even though you have kids with parents. Because we didn't allow the parents to become part of their children's lives. (Interview 1997) 

Avoiding Child Abuse: Resources and Victimisation  

Although my focus thus far has sought to understand a number of factors and processes that contributed to child abuse within ISKCON's schools, I now want to consider why some young people did not experience abuse and neglect. As I have already suggested, a proportion of the students who attended the gurukula during the 1970s and 1980s escaped being victims of child abuse.  This happened despite the fact that in some cases their classmates were targeted for abuse, while they were spared.        

Perhaps the most obvious factor in whether a child was abused or not, related to the school environment itself.  It seems that some gurukulas experienced far less child abuse, while others were defined by neglect and abuse.  To a significant degree, where a student was sent to gurukula had a profound influence on whether he or she became targets of abuse.  Perhaps the most vivid example is provided by the schools in India, where abuse and neglect were, by all reports, commonplace.  Since only adolescent boys were sent to the schools in India they faced far more abuse than their female counterparts.  In the United States several of ISKCON's schools also experienced relatively high levels of child abuse (for example, Dallas, Seattle, New Vrindaban), whereas others experienced considerably less (for example, Bhaktivedanta Village, California; New Talavan, Mississippi).  It appears also that child abuse was far less prevalent in Europe and Australia than in either India or North America. 

But what explains these differences?  I think several things.  First some schools had a more stable gurukula staff both academic and ashram teachers, as well as the school's administration.   While teachers in these schools may have been more devoted to working in the gurukula, they also were able to establish enduring and caring relationships with the children they worked with.  Two former gurukula students suggest why a particular school proved especially positive for them in ways that highlight the role of the teacher. 

It was M[other] Kutila who changed our lives and who let us know that someone could love us; that devotees did love one another.  I swear for the first week I thought I was a princess.  We were never hit any more, we had all new clothes, our own bags, filled with our own soap, brushes and hot water showers.  It was then that I knew I had a mother and father, they were Kutila and Kuladri (her husband). (Author's emphasis; Devi Dasi, K. 1990:1).

 

One of the high points of my life in gurukula was because the teacher, (name), took us in as his sons (original Vedic standard) and treated us like adults.  We had incredible camaraderie as well as growth including fitness, mental strength, creativity and Krishna Consciousness. (Second Generation Survey 1992 93)   

1/22 < > 22/22

______________________________________________ ^
 

Cults & Society
 Department: Group Report
__________________________________________________
Featured Group Report

Hare Krishna: child abuse
  
 
   
 
     

18/22

Child Abuse in the Hare Krishna Movement:1971-1986

E. Burke Rochford, Jr. with Jennifer Heinlein

[continued]

In still other instances the administration of the school in Vrindavan apparently sought to hide the abuse taking place there during the early 1980s.  

He [Headmaster] knowingly covered-up . . . There are two or three incidents that I can think of where I was beaten or something happened to me.  He would take me into his room and he'd lock me in there for like a day with him and he was like constantly preaching to me and so finally I just went ‘Okay! I won't say anything to anybody. It didn't happen!’ And he would let me out of the room. (Interview 1993)28         

On final analysis it seems clear that the gurukula became an institution unto itself, in Goffman's (1961) terms, a ‘total institution.’  Within the gurukula children remained largely separate from the day-to-day lives of their parents, and, very often, from ISKCON community life more generally.  From an institution meant to train and educate, the gurukula instead became the functional equivalent of an orphanage.  As one teacher from this period remarked. 

The whole scenario set up an orphanage . . . Even though you have kids with parents. Because we didn't allow the parents to become part of their children's lives. (Interview 1997) 

Avoiding Child Abuse: Resources and Victimisation  

Although my focus thus far has sought to understand a number of factors and processes that contributed to child abuse within ISKCON's schools, I now want to consider why some young people did not experience abuse and neglect. As I have already suggested, a proportion of the students who attended the gurukula during the 1970s and 1980s escaped being victims of child abuse.  This happened despite the fact that in some cases their classmates were targeted for abuse, while they were spared.        

Perhaps the most obvious factor in whether a child was abused or not, related to the school environment itself.  It seems that some gurukulas experienced far less child abuse, while others were defined by neglect and abuse.  To a significant degree, where a student was sent to gurukula had a profound influence on whether he or she became targets of abuse.  Perhaps the most vivid example is provided by the schools in India, where abuse and neglect were, by all reports, commonplace.  Since only adolescent boys were sent to the schools in India they faced far more abuse than their female counterparts.  In the United States several of ISKCON's schools also experienced relatively high levels of child abuse (for example, Dallas, Seattle, New Vrindaban), whereas others experienced considerably less (for example, Bhaktivedanta Village, California; New Talavan, Mississippi).  It appears also that child abuse was far less prevalent in Europe and Australia than in either India or North America. 

But what explains these differences?  I think several things.  First some schools had a more stable gurukula staff both academic and ashram teachers, as well as the school's administration.   While teachers in these schools may have been more devoted to working in the gurukula, they also were able to establish enduring and caring relationships with the children they worked with.  Two former gurukula students suggest why a particular school proved especially positive for them in ways that highlight the role of the teacher. 

It was M[other] Kutila who changed our lives and who let us know that someone could love us; that devotees did love one another.  I swear for the first week I thought I was a princess.  We were never hit any more, we had all new clothes, our own bags, filled with our own soap, brushes and hot water showers.  It was then that I knew I had a mother and father, they were Kutila and Kuladri (her husband). (Author's emphasis; Devi Dasi, K. 1990:1).

 

One of the high points of my life in gurukula was because the teacher, (name), took us in as his sons (original Vedic standard) and treated us like adults.  We had incredible camaraderie as well as growth including fitness, mental strength, creativity and Krishna Consciousness. (Second Generation Survey 1992 93)   

1/22 < > 22/22

______________________________________________ ^