Bergstresser in the News: - Archives

Psychiatrist ruled guilty of sexual abuse
The Boston Globe; May 15, 1992

Law limits church liability to $ 20,000; Victims of abuse criticize statute
The Boston Globe; May 13, 1992

Bill would block access to records for patients of psychotherapists
The Boston Globe; May 13, 1992

Disciplining drops in sexual misconduct cases
The Boston Globe; September 30, 1991

Court gives patients longer time to sue; REPLATE EITION
The Boston Globe; January 29, 1991

School settles in sexual-abuse negligence case
The Boston Globe; August 8. 1990

Family of woman killed by truck; after fleeing hospital wins lawsuit
The Boston Globe; May 17, 1990

Lip service on patient abuse
The Boston Globe; May 16, 1990

Brockton preschool withdraws state appeal; License revocation stands in sexual abuse case
The Boston Globe; September 29, 1989

Brockton preschool closing is upheld
The Boston Globe; September 7, 1989

Pain lingers after sexual abuse ends; Therapist's victim remembers; PSYCHOLOGY
The Boston Globe; August 7, 1989

Brockton teacher denies abuse allegations
The Boston Globe; March 16, 1989

Latest News
1993 - current

The Boston Globe, May 15, 1992
Copyright 1992 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
May 15, 1992, Friday, City Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 1

LENGTH: 974 words

HEADLINE: Psychiatrist ruled guilty of sexual abuse

BYLINE: By Alison Bass, Globe Staff

BODY: A state hearing officer has concluded that Dr. Edward M. Daniels, one of the most influential psychiatrists in the Boston area, is guilty of having sexually abused four female patients over the last three decades.

The Board of Registration in Medicine is expected to decide by the end of next month what disciplinary action to take against Daniels, a consulting psychoanalyst who initially evaluated and referred 24,000 patients to other psychiatrists during his long career as well as maintaining his own practice.

In most of the recent cases where a hearing officer has found physicians guilty of sexual misconduct, the board has either revoked the doctor's license to practice medicine or the physician has resigned.

"Given the actions of the board in removing the license of other psychiatrists who were found to engage in sexual misconduct with only one patient, it would be hard to understand how the board could do anything other than remove Daniels' license," said Clyde Bergstresser, a Boston lawyer who represents three patients who have accused Daniels. "The findings of intentional and even predatory misconduct in this case raise some very serious questions about whether he should be allowed to remain in practice." William Rowerdink, Daniels' attorney, said his client maintains he is innocent and will appeal the hearing officer's findings before the board. If the board decides to discipline Daniels, 71, Rowerdink said, he will appeal to the courts.

The hearing officer's recommendation is the latest chapter in a legal process that began more than two years ago when two of Daniels' former patients went to the state board and the Boston Psychoanalytic Society and Institute, accusing Daniels of sexually abusing them while they were in therapy during the 1960s and '70s. Daniels is a former society president and trained many analysts now practicing in the Boston area.

One of the women who made the original complaints was a sophomore at Brandeis University when the alleged sexual abuse began. The other is a psychotherapist practicing in the Boston area. Both women said Daniels regularly had intercourse and oral sex with them while they were in therapy.

After conducting an investigation, the Psychoanalytic Society expelled Daniels in April 1990 and pressed the medical board to take action against him. Shortly afterward, McLean Hospital suspended Daniels' admitting privileges at the private psychiatric hospital; Harvard Medical School, where he holds a faculty appointment, placed him on a leave of absence pending the state board's investigation.

The board began its investigation after the first two women came forward, but before the probe was concluded, two other women accused Daniels of sexual misconduct. In September 1990, the board filed formal charges against Daniels involving all four women and referred the case to a hearing officer at Division of Administrative Law Appeals, a separate agency that conducts hearings on misconduct charges brought by the medical board.

The third woman to file a complaint had sought Daniels' help for marital problems and depression while she was a doctoral student at Harvard University. She is a psychiatrist practicing in California.

According to the hearing officer's findings, Daniels asked this patient to describe her sexual fantasies from the beginning of her analysis. She said they spent 80 percent of her time in therapy discussing either Daniels' problems or their sexual fantasies. The woman also said Daniels had intercourse and oral sex with her from 1974 to 1980, and during that time her marriage failed.

The fourth patient, now a psychologist and the mother of three children, went to Daniels for help in 1978. Beginning in 1980, according to the examiner's findings, Daniels would regularly lie down on the couch with this woman and masturbate her. The sessions took place during a time period of about a year and half.

In his 22-page decision on the case, hearing officer Chris F. Connolly found all four women to be "believable, credible and truthful."

Connolly found "no reliable evidence to corroborate" Daniels' assertion that he had been impotent because of medical problems and incapable of having sex with the women.

"There is no question Daniels suffered numerous physical problems including angina, gout, arteriosclerosis, diabetes and hypercholesterolemia," Connolly wrote. "However, these factors do not establish that the Respondent was impotent prior to August 1975 and thus unable to have sexual intercourse with three of the patients, or that he was unable to masturbate the fourth patient in 1980 and 1981."

Some professionals criticized the state's regulatory agencies for taking more than 20 months to hear and make recommendations in the case.

"I'm delighted the board is getting around to doing something about a situation that to us was pretty clear two years ago," said Dr. Elizabeth Reid, past president of the Psychoanalytic Society. "What this shows is that the board needs better funding, so it can deal with these important situations in a timely manner."

Connolly said the case took longer than usual because he has a host of other responsibilities as the head administrator for the agency and because of Daniels' health.

Daniels "was restricted according to his treating physician to no more than one hour of testimony a day," Connolly said in a telephone interview. "And in fairness to his condition, we held hearings" involving Daniels' testimony in his home in Chestnut Hill.

Two of the women who pressed charges against Daniels have also filed malpractice suits against him; their cases are scheduled to go to trial in September. The California psychiatrist sued Daniels in 1982; that suit was settled out of court for a "sum in excess of six figures," according to the woman's attorney.

- top of page

The Boston Globe, May 13, 1992
Copyright 1992 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
May 13, 1992, Wednesday, City Edition

SECTION: NATIONAL/FOREIGN; Pg. 8

LENGTH: 958 words

HEADLINE: Law limits church liability to $ 20,000; Victims of abuse criticize statute

BYLINE: By Alison Bass, Globe Staff

BODY: Because of a little-known and unusual state law, the victims of sexual misconduct by clergy in Massachusetts cannot win more than $ 20,000 in legal damages from the offender's church.

Specialists on sexual abuse, attorneys who represent abuse victims and alleged victims are highly critical of the law, saying it does not allow victims to be fully compensated for the harm done to them. They say that as a result of the law, religious denominations in Massachusetts may not have acted as aggressively as churches in other states to investigate complaints and remove clergy who sexually abuse their parishioners.

"The Catholic Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis has certainly had to become very proactive on this issue because of the onslaught of lawsuits against them involving sexual misconduct by their priests," said Jeffrey Anderson, a St. Paul lawyer who has handled many such cases. "But I can't accomplish anything for clients in Massachusetts because of this charitable immunity law." The law, which is found in few other states, applies to all nonprofit institutions, including hospitals and colleges, and limits their legal liability for any kind of negligence, including sexual abuse.

Several of the 45 people who allege they were sexually abused almost 30 years ago by a Catholic priest in the Fall River Diocese say the immunity law should be changed, if only because of the deterrent effect high jury verdicts might have.

"I don't really care about the money," said Dennis Gaboury, 40, one of the men who says he was sexually abused by Rev. James R. Porter while an altar boy in North Attleborough in the 1960s. "But of course, I haven't spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for therapy and medical expenses - as some of the other victims have. I think the law is wrong because we all know that huge corporations - and that includes the Catholic church - often don't change their behavior until they get hurt financially."

However, church officials say that the spate of sexual misconduct lawsuits in recent years against the Catholic Church has nothing to do with the policies some archdioceses have recently adopted to prevent misconduct by priests. Observers say the Catholic Church has paid out damages in excess of $ 350 million in sexual misconduct cases since 1985.

"The church began to respond with very firm policies about the removal of priests when it began to realize, along with all of society, the breadth of the problem and the tragic harm that it inflicted," said Rev. Kenneth Doyle, a spokesman with the US Catholic Conference. "In the past, the church, along with the rest of society, tended to view the problem as society viewed alcoholism 30 or 40 years ago - as a moral fault from which, if a person were repentent, he could recover."

Gaboury and several other alleged victims of Porter, who has since left the priesthood, claim top officials in the Fall River Diocese knew about Porter's misconduct in the 1960s and yet chose to transfer him to a parish in New Bedford, where he allegedly raped other children.

"You're dealing with a lot of angry people here," said Stephen Johnson, 43, another former altar boy who says he was raped repeatedly by Porter. "But I don't want their money. Even if there were damages, I understand that what goes along with a payment from a Catholic diocese is a gag order and we are not signing any gag orders until the Vatican changes its regulations and attitudes toward pedophiles in the church."

Johnson and a number of other alleged victims were interviewed yesterday by the Bristol County district attorney, who is conducting a formal investigation. A phone number has been set up (800-462-3218) for other alleged victims of Porter to call to obtain support and information about the case. So far, at least 45 people have alleged they were abused by Porter while he was a priest in the Fall River Diocese from 1960 to 1967.

In the meantime, Roderick MacLeish Jr., the Boston attorney representing many of the victims, acknowledges that it will be difficult to collect extensive damages from the church or from Porter, if the victims decide to sue, because of the charitable immunity law in Massachusetts.

The law dates back to 1971, when lobbying groups for nonprofit hospitals and other organizations convinced the Legislature to continue protecting nonprofit institutions from legal damages in excess of $ 20,000. Case law dating back to the 1800s had offered such protection, but that was overturned by the Supreme Judicial Court in 1969, according to Clyde Bergstresser, a Boston attorney who handles malpractice and sexual misconduct cases. The new law was upheld by the Supreme Judicial Court in 1989.

Massachusetts is one of only a few states that still place strict limits on liability of nonprofit organizations, according to Charles Tremper, executive director of the Nonprofits' Risk Management and Insurance Institute in Washington, D.C. South Carolina, Maryland and Texas impose similiar limits and Arkansas gives nonprofit institutions complete immunity from all legal damages.

Attorneys in this state can sue the individual physicians or medical professionals involved in malpractice claims and collect substantial damages from those individuals - if a jury finds them liable and they have malpractice insurance.

Most clergy, however, do not carry malpractice insurance and do not have appreciable assets that can be seized in misconduct cases.

"This man Porter was a human wrecking ball and these people have really suffered as a result of what he did to them as children," said MacLeish. "Yet because of some antiquated notion that nonprofit organizations don't hurt people, they won't be compensated for their suffering."

- top of page

The Boston Globe, May 13, 1992
Copyright 1992 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
May 13, 1992, Wednesday, City Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 21

LENGTH: 711 words

HEADLINE: Bill would block access to records for patients of psychotherapists

BYLINE: By Frank Phillips, Globe Staff

BODY: Patients who believe they have been abused by their psychotherapists would face major new roadblocks in trying to obtain their treatment records if a bill making its way through the Legislature eventually passes.

Earlier this week, the House, without debate or roll call vote, approved a measure that would allow therapists to withhold records if they think it would "adversely affect the patient's well-being." The bill is now before the Senate.

The action comes in the wake of the highly publicized case of Dr. Margaret Bean-Bayog, a psychiatrist who faces allegations that she had sexual relations with a patient who later committed suicide. Bean-Bayog has strongly denied having sexual relations with the patient, but the details of the case, largely culled from the notes she made on her therapy, have rocked the psychotherapy community.

The bill, which amends 1990 legislation that guarantees patients easy access to all their records, allows for an appeal process through the Board of Registration in Medicine. But lawyers who represent patients say such a system could hold up any release of records for years.

Psychotherapists, led by the Massachusetts Psychiatric Society, say they want the legislation to protect patients from information therapists gather during treatment, according to Dr. James Beck, head of the society's psychiatry and law program.

"The reason one doesn't just give the patients records is that it could be very damaging to the patients," Beck said. "There are issues that are not in a patient's interest necessarily to discover by his or her reading the records. Say an older sibling told a therapist the patient is an incest survivor and the patient had not yet rediscovered those memories. It could be traumatic. Patients need some protection."

He added: "Therapists want to have the option of making a professional judgment to protect the patients from those possible adverse consequences."

Beck also maintained that "the patients want it to protect themselves."

The bill would allow therapists to withhold records if they determined that their release:

- Would present a threat to a patient's safety or create physical harm or mental distress.
- Would impair the patient's relationship to a third party because of information in the records.
- Would "likely disrupt the therapeutic relationship."

Some lawyers who deal in malpractice cases say that therapists are trying to protect themselves by making it very difficult for clients to obtain their records. They say the guidelines under which therapists can withhold records could easily be abused.

"This would be a major imposition," said Paul Merry, a Boston attorney who serves on the House Committee on Sexual Misconduct by Physicians, Therapists and other Health Professionals. "They're just throwing up another roadblock for therapists to protect themselves."

"Any psychotherapist who feels they have done the slightest thing wrong could throw barrels in the path of any patient who would want to learn more about his treatment and condition," Merry said.

Merry and other lawyers argue that some compromise should be crafted to protect patients who could be potentially harmed by reviewing their records.

"I think the patient community would be content with some limitation on their access," said Clyde Bergstresser, an attorney who is on the House committee. He said one compromise would be creation of a system where records would not be turned over to patients, but could be turned over to subsequent treating psychotherapists and an attorney.

Bergstresser said he and others who have followed development of the legislation are concerned about the bill's progress.

"It snuck up on us and now it appears almost to be a law," Bergstresser said. "We hope to get some attention on it so we can get it changed or defeated."

But Bergstresser said he sees no link between the furor surrounding the Bean-Bayog case and the bill.

"That case certainly puts the issue in relief, but I don't seen any link," he said, noting that the bill had been in the making before the Bean-Bayog case emerged.

The House chairman of the Committee on Judiciary, Rep. Salvatore F. DiMasi (D-Boston) who sponsored the bill, was not available for comment last night.

- top of page

The Boston Globe, September 30, 1991
Copyright 1991 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
September 30, 1991, Monday, City Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 15

LENGTH: 1239 words

HEADLINE: Disciplining drops in sexual misconduct cases

BYLINE: By Alison Bass, GLOBE STAFF

BODY: At a time when more and more patients are coming forward with stories of sexual victimization, the state board of medicine has regressed in its efforts to discipline psychiatrists and physicians for sexual misconduct.

To make matters worse, legislation that was filed last year to deter psychotherapists and doctors from having sex with their patients is sitting moribund, if not dead, on Beacon Hill.

"It's been incredibly frustrating," says Diane Aronson, an advocate for women who have been sexually abused by their therapists, and herself a victim. "We've made some great strides in terms of professionals understanding the devastating consequences of this kind of abuse, but we also feel like there's been some backsliding. People in this state are still too quick to blame the victim." While victims of therapist abuse are now more willing to report the misconduct to other therapists and trusted friends, Aronson says many have become more cautious about going to the state Board of Medicine in Registration with their complaints. They fear that the board is slackening its efforts to discipline physicians and psychiatrists for this kind of behavior, she says.

Statistics back up that belief. Since the beginning of 1990, the board has disciplined one psychiatrist for sexual misconduct, but its file contains 12 unresolved misconduct cases; in 1989, 10 psychiatrists and physicians were disciplined for having sex with their patients; in 1988, nine were.

One of the unresolved cases, dating to 1989, is against Sheldon Zigelbaum, a high-profile Boston psychiatrist charged with sexually abusing four patients. Another case involves Edward Daniels, a Harvard Medical School psychiatrist who at one time was one of the most influential psychoanalysts in the Boston area. He also is charged with sexually abusing four female patients.

Zigelbaum and Daniels, both of whom have denied the charges of sexual misconduct, are still practicing.

Sexual misconduct is not the only area where the board has slipped, observers say. The state agency ranks 49th in the nation in total disciplinary actions taken against doctors; it was ranked 20th in 1987. While the board has made some progress in whittling down its backlog of unprocessed complaints - in the past three weeks, it has processed 350 complaints out of 1,000 - 98 percent of those complaints were dismissed, leading some observers to wonder whether consumer concerns are receiving a fair hearing.

Board members and staff say the agency has been badly hurt by state budget cuts, and that the delay in resolving disciplinary cases is primarily due to a lack of resources. Alexander Fleming, the board's executive director, says that for more than a year - ever since the board's authority to hear cases was transferred to another agency - the board has had only one attorney on staff to write up unfinished cases and submit recommendations for disciplinary action to board members. And until July, that hearing officer also functioned as the board's sole counsel on other legal matters.

"These decisions have not been written because of our lack of staff," Fleming said. "I think the logjam has been broken a little bit by having a new general counsel, and I hope most of these decisions will be resolved by the first of next year."

Public concern over the board's poor performance has led to the formation of a special administrative task force to examine the agency's record and its overall mandate. The task force, which was convened in June and includes several state legislators, is expected to report its findings at the beginning of next year.

"This administration is moving quickly to address the backlog of cases," said Stephen Wallace, assistant secretary of consumer affairs, which oversees the board. "By the time the task force issues its findings, we anticipate the backlog will have been completely disposed of."

But even when action is taken on these cases, some legal observers are concerned that these protracted delays will weaken board disciplinary decisions, allowing them to be more easily overturned by the Supreme Judicial Court. For example, if the board takes an entire year to revoke the license of a psychiatrist charged with multiple cases of sexual abuse, the higher court might question whether that particular psychiatrist was really a threat to the public and overturn his license revocation, one attorney familiar with the process noted.

In the absence of much regulatory activity, advocates say there is an even greater need for legislation that would provide a strong deterrent to sexual misconduct. The proposed legislative package includes a bill that would make it a crime for psychotherapists to have sex with their patients at any time and a crime for any doctor to have sex with a patient during office visits.

A second bill would make it easier for victims to seek damages from therapists and physicians who have sex with them; a third bill would require professionals to report cases of sexual misconduct; and a fourth would allow the state attorney general's office to bar from practice any unlicensed psychotherapist who has been found guilty of sexual misconduct.

The only bill that has been reported favorably out of committee is the mandatory reporting act. The others have been stalled in their respective committees for almost two years, despite the support of all the medical and mental health societies whose practitioners would be directly affected by the new laws.

The sticking point appears to be the issue of consent - whether physicians and psychotherapists charged with sexual misconduct should be allowed to use as a defense the idea that their patients consented to the sexual act. The proposed legislation would eliminate consent as a defense, on the grounds that the therapist/patient relationship is so obviously lopsided, that patients in such a relationship are not capable of giving consent - much as a child is not considered capable of consenting to sex with an adult.

Sen. Paul Harold (D-Quincy), who is holding up the criminal bill in his criminal justice committee, says removing consent as a defense would be a major departure from criminal law.

"I just don't believe that someone can have that much control over someone else," Harold says. "Are we going to put patients in the same boat with children and insane people?"

Rep. Salvatore DiMasi (D-Boston) has similar reservations about the civil bill now stalled in his judiciary committee. He has proposed a change that would allow defense attorneys to go before a judge and argue that consent should be allowed as a defense in some circumstances.

However, some attorneys say his suggestion would make the law even more hostile to victims of sexual abuse than it is now. They say they would rather withdraw the legislation than allow DiMasi's changes to stand.

"What DiMasi's proposal would do is provide a defense that presently doesn't exist in the law; so rather than be a victim's bill, it would become a perpetrator's bill," says Clyde Bergstresser, a Boston attorney who represents victims of sexual abuse.

"We are trying to codify in the law something that professional societies already recognize in their ethical codes - that under no circumstances should this kind of conduct be condoned. So let's not muck it up with something that says this behavior is OK under some circumstances. It's never OK."

- top of page

The Boston Globe, January 29, 1991
Copyright 1991 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
January 29, 1991, Tuesday, Replate Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 41 p

LENGTH: 328 words

HEADLINE: Court gives patients longer time to sue; REPLATE EITION

BYLINE: By Doris Sue Wong and Alison Bass, GLOBE STAFF

BODY: The state's highest court ruled yesterday that the statute of limitations may be extended for patients who claim they are abused by psychotherapists but who, for psychological reasons, were unable to recognize the harm until years later.

"An injury to the mind could interfere with the discovery of the cause of action," said Justice Joseph R. Nolan, author of the Supreme Judicial Court's majority opinion.

The 4-1 SJC opinion allows a suit brought by Robert Scott Riley against Dr. Walter M. Presnell to be tried in Essex Superior Court. Riley claims that he did not realize, until five years after he last saw Presnell, that the doctor's use of sex, drugs and alcohol to treat him caused him to develop severe psychological problems and become a substance abuser.

State law requires that suits claiming personal injury be brought within three years from the time the injury was caused.

But in the past, ruling on other types of medical malpractice, real estate fraud and legal malpractice cases, the SJC has decided the clock does not begin ticking until a person reasonably should have known there was a link between his injuries and a defendant's conduct.

"We see no reason not to apply the same rule to cases involving alleged psychotherapeutic malpractice," said Nolan.

"It's terrific," said Linda Jorgensen, a Cambridge attorney who represents the patient.

Rather than leaving it up to trial judges, the SJC "now requires juries to assess whether psychological mechanisms, such as denial, repression or association have made it impossible for the victim to understand what has happened to them," said Clyde Bergstresser, a Boston attorney who specializes in sexual abuse cases.

"That's the Catch-22 for victims of sexual abuse. Part of the damage is their inability to allow themselves to face what's happened to them. It's so painful that their mind doesn't permit them to face what's happened for many, many years," said Bergstresser.

- top of page

The Boston Globe, August 8, 1990
Copyright 1990 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
August 8, 1990, Wednesday, City Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 1 p

LENGTH: 821 words

HEADLINE: School settles in sexual-abuse negligence case

BYLINE: By Alison Bass, Globe Staff

BODY: In the first case of its kind in Massachusetts, Cambridge's Buckingham, Browne & Nichols School and a former school psychologist have settled for more than $ 70,000 a civil suit charging them with negligence and failing to report allegations of sexual abuse by a former teacher.

The settlement should send clear signals to other schools and institutions that they could pay a heavy price for not reporting incidents of child abuse to authorities as required by state law, law enforcement officials said.

"If we are to succeed in combating child abuse, professionals in contact with children must comply with the mandatory reporting statute," said Middlesex District Attorney Scott Harshbarger, who prosecuted criminal charges arising from the same episode against BB&N and its headmaster in 1988. "This civil action further emphasizes the message that there will be a price to pay if instances of child abuse are not reported." Clyde Bergstresser, the attorney representing the parent who won the settlement, called it "precedent-setting" because it is the first time damages have been paid as a result of failing to report child abuse.

Officials at the school, however, said they do not believe the settlement sets any important precedents. Assistant headmaster Marjo Talbott said the school considered it a nuisance suit and settled to avoid drawn-out litigation.

The settlement, reached July 25 but disclosed by the family this week, is the latest twist in a scandal that began in February 1987 when BB&N fired Edward H. Washburn, a teacher at the school, after learning of allegations that Washburn had sexually abused three boys - two of them BB&N students - and propositioned a fourth.

Washburn, 47, the son of Bradford Washburn, explorer and director emeritus of the Boston Museum of Science, later pled guilty to raping one student - who was also his nephew - and to a lesser charge of sexual abuse of another boy. He received a suspended sentence in December 1988.

During the criminal case against the school, BB&N headmaster Peter Gunness acknowledged that he had violated state law by not immediately reporting the abuse to the state Department of Social Services. The school was fined $ 1,000, the maximum penalty.

The more recent civil suit was brought by Edward Washburn's sister, who is the mother of one of the abused boys. She asked The Boston Globe not to identify her in order to protect her son and other children.

In addition to charging BB&N with the reporting violation, the suit also charged Michael Thompson of Arlington, a former BB&N school psychologist, with negligence and conflict of interest in counseling Washburn's sister at the same time he was counseling Washburn and acting as school psychologist.

Neither Thompson nor his attorney could be reached for comment. Sources close to the case said the cost of the settlement was shared by Thompson and BB&N.

Washburn's sister, who lives in Newton, said she filed the suit because she believes many schools and other institutions continue to cover up instances of child abuse by staff or faculty members.

She noted that if the Middlesex district attorney's office had not been tipped off about Washburn's offenses, no one would have known why he was fired.

"By quietly discharging him and not telling anyone why, they left a lot of other children holding a shameful secret," said Bonnie Foz, an advocate for abuse victims and a friend of Washburn's sister who has followed the case for years. "It might also have left other kids at risk - particularly if Washburn had gotten another job teaching."

The school did not tell parents the reasons for Washburn's discharge until three days before prosecutors indicted him for rape in October 1987. While Middlesex prosecutors said at the time that as many as 10 or 12 boys were sexually abused, only two were willing to be cited in the indictment.

"Until schools understand that when parents and children come forward they must be respected, supported and listened to, many children won't come forward," Washburn's sister said. "And as long as it stays a secret, this kind of abuse is still going to go on."

Child abuse experts say that when parents or institutions do not deal openly with child abuse, the young victims often blame themselves for what happened. Research has shown that such abuse is shockingly common - afflicting, according to many experts' estimates, one in every five girls and one in every seven boys.

Since the Washburn episode, BB&N has held a number of seminars for students and families on child abuse and developed model guidelines for dealing with such situations, said Talbott.

"We feel our school has gone through a difficult situation and we have learned a great deal from this," Talbott said. "We feel very sympathetic to the distress this family has endured, and we have done a great deal to put forth a clear policy about sexual abuse."

- top of page

The Boston Globe, May 17, 1990
Copyright 1990 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
May 17, 1990, Thursday, City Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 96 p

LENGTH: 397 words

HEADLINE: Family of woman killed by truck; after fleeing hospital wins lawsuit

BYLINE: By Andrew Dabilis, Globe Staff

BODY: A Middlesex Superior Court yesterday awarded nearly $ 500,000 to the family of a woman who was killed by a truck when she ran onto Route 128 from a mental health unit at Newton-Wellesley Hospital 4 years ago.

A judgment of $ 268,000 for negligence was handed down against the hospital, Dr. Allan Bezan, director of the psychiatric unit day hospital, and two counselors. In addition, Bezan was found grossly negligent in the death of Christine Walls, 23, of Westwood, and the jury awarded an additional $ 200,000 in punitive damages, said Clyde Bergstresser, attorney for the victim's family. Bergstresser said that the total would be near $ 500,000 with interest included, and that punitive damages against Bezan were believed to be the first in the state against a physician for gross negligence. The counselors in Walls' case were Robert Haggerty and Gail Gordon, Bergstresser said.

In a statement, hospital official Bobbie Christensen said the staff was concerned for the Walls family, but said "We do not believe that either the hospital or its professional staff was negligent." She said a review by the state Department of Public Health in 1987 "found no violations of federal and state regulations, nor was there any evidence that the hospital failed to adhere to acceptable standards of care."

Walls, who Bergstresser said had been treated previously at the hospital, was about to be readmitted to a locked unit for mental health patients on March 21, 1986, when she was left alone. He said she left the hospital and walked down an exit ramp off nearby Route 16 onto Route 128 and bolted in front of a car-carrier truck.

At the time, a hospital official said that there was nothing unusual in a patient leaving the hospital grounds and that they were free to come and go in the ward to which Walls would have been admitted.

A Newton police official said the hospital had requested help in finding her because she was "an emotionally disturbed person." A Newton police officer spotted Walls walking down the exit ramp from the westbound side of Route 16 onto the northbound side of Route 128, a State Police spokesman said.

When the woman saw the officer, she ran down the shoulder of the highway, swerving suddenly into traffic, police reported. She was struck and thrown approximately 130 feet by the impact. The operator of the vehicle was not charged.

- top of page

The Boston Globe, May 16, 1990
Copyright 1990 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
May 16, 1990, Wednesday, City Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 29 p

LENGTH: 752 words

HEADLINE: Lip service on patient abuse

BYLINE: By Bella English, Globe Staff

BODY: Have you heard? The Massachusetts Medical Society, the most powerful union in the state, has a new theme song.

It's from "Casablanca" and its opening line is: "You must remember this. A kiss is still a kiss ..."

You see, the medical society is the sole opponent of part of a bill that would allow patients who are sexually abused by their therapists and physicians to sue more easily.

It has to do with prolonged kissing and fondling, which is not exactly what you pay your shrink or surgeon for. Specifically, the doctors are objecting to a paragraph of the proposed bill that defines sexual contact as "sustained kissing of the mouth and intentional touching of the patient's genital area, breast" and other private parts, "outside of a legitimate medical procedure."

Seems the docs are afraid the language of the bill is "too Subjective" and could be "readily misconstrued" by patients.

I've racked my brain but I can't for the life of me figure out how "sustained kissing of the mouth" and "intentional touching . . . outside of a legitimate medical procedure" can be taken for anything but what it is: sexual in nature.

But then, I'm not a doctor. I didn't major in God 101 in college, so what do I know?

"Absent a snake bite on your tongue, I find it hard to imagine where sustained kissing could occur during a medical procedure," said Clyde Bergstresser, an attorney who is a member ofthe legislative committee drafting the bill.

To paraphrase one famous analyst, what do doctors want? "We have gone on record as favoring the bill and spoken very strongly in support of a bill for egregious sexual behavior," says Dr. Barry Manuel, president-elect of the medical society. "But we think some of those terms are Subjective and need some further fine tuning before we can sign off on the bill."

Manuel is afraid doctors will be "traumatized" by some language in the bill, whereas I'm concerned about the patients who are traumatized by "sustained kissing," etc.

Other professional organizations - the Massachusetts Psychiatric Society, the Massachusetts Psychological Association, the local chapter of the National Association of Social Workers and the Massachusetts Nurses Association - support the entire bill, as they should.

Mindful of the enormous clout health professionals wield, the House Committee on Sexual Misconduct has made various concessions to them during the painstaking bill-drafting process. The committee - which consists of doctors, lawyers, victims and legislators - eliminated a provision allowing clients to sue doctors for making verbal requests for sex. A provision on punitive damages was deleted. The doctors won on the statute of limitations language.

Most critically, the doctors insisted that the assault and battery be specifically delineated to avoid misinterpretation. But when the committee came up with a very specific definition - the "sustained kissing" and "intentional touching" of certain areas - the medical society screamed.

As soon as the doctors got one concession, they asked for another, slowing the process - and damaging their credibility with an increasingly jaded public.

These bills weren't born in a vacuum. The committee was formed a year ago after the Globe reported on several cases of alleged sexual abuse by area doctors. Since then, the state Board of Registration in Medicine has charged nine psychiatrists with sexual misconduct.

It is true that most doctors are committed to the well-being of their patients. It is also true that sexual abuse between doctor and patient is vastly underreported; studies show that only 8 percent of victims step forward.

Besides suffering shame, guilt and fear, victims have had no recourse because there have been no laws here criminalizing such sexual misconduct, nor any ready civil remedies, which is what the committee is now addressing.

Ethical doctors needn't fear the legislation, for conduct "in accordance with practices generally recognized by legitimate health professionals" and "casual social contact not intended to be sexual in nature" are okay, as is "inadvertent touching."

Fortunately, the committee will not budge on the "sustained kissing" and "intentional touching" paragraph, no matter how much clout the 14,000-member medical society carries.

"Physician, heal thyself," goes the biblical passage. For those who can't or won't, the legislative committee has come up with a concrete incentive: criminal and civil remedies. Good doctors should get on board.

- top of page

The Boston Globe, September 29, 1989
Copyright 1989 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
September 29, 1989, Friday, City Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 17

LENGTH: 670 words

HEADLINE: Brockton preschool withdraws state appeal; License revocation stands in sexual abuse case

BYLINE: By Tom Coakley, Globe Staff

BODY: The operators of a Brockton preschool, which is facing allegations of child sexual abuse and neglect, are closing the business by abandoning their appeal of the state Office for Children's revocation of the school's license, their lawyer said yesterday.

Donald McNamee, attorney for Gingerbread Playschool, said the owners were withdrawing the appeal for "purely economic reasons" and would surrender their license.

Office for Children spokeswoman Janet Hookailo said the operators cannot apply for another license for at least five years and must show significant changes in circumstamces to get one at that time.

The school is run by a corporation whose principals include Betty Klimas of Avon; Robert Doran of North Weymouth and Kathryn Doran of Brockton. An unrelated company - VIP Group Inc. of Boston and Brockton - is purchasing the Gingerbread property at 33 Bark Circle and applying for a license to operate a day care center there, VIP spokeswoman Ann O'Brien said yesterday.

McNamee said the decision to discontinue the appeal does not represent an admission by the school's operators to any of 12 charges of abuse or neglect of 10 former students that have been supported by state Department of Social Services investigations. The allegations cover a period from 1983 to early this year.

Because of the charges - made against at least four persons who were connected to Gingerbread - the school was prohibited from opening this year. Its license was suspended by the agency in August after school officials decided to appeal an earlier license revocation.

"Economically they have been wiped out," said McNamee. "Since the school isn't able to operate . . . it's inappropriate to maintain an appeal for a license which you can't use."

The Plymouth district attorney's office is investigating the allegations, making use of a grand jury to gather evidence. No criminal charges have been filed.

In 1985, a teacher at the school - who was working there this past school year - was the Subject of an Office for Children abuse investigation that was inconclusive.

Current allegations of abuse and neglect surfaced publicly in late February. At that time the school was permitted to continue operating after an independent monitor was installed and a teacher and the husband of a bus driver were barred.

But more allegations followed, including a reexamination of the 1985 complaint and the presentation of charges by students who attended the school in past years. The additional charges led the agency to revoke the school's license in July.

McNamee and James D. McLaughlin, a lawyer for the barred teacher, denied any abuse or neglect took place involving the school or its personnel.

In a defense of the school, they attacked the credibility of certain children making allegations. They suggested that at least four children were prompted to make charges by parents who are related or very friendly. They alleged that three other children told sordid stories after being caught up in fear that gripped the school following disclosures of alleged abuse.

"There was one child who was abused," McNamee said at his downtown office, "and there has been an attempt to shift the burden from where the abuse occurred to the Gingerbread School.

"As a result there has been a hysteria. Other children have been involved and events from the last three or four years recycled."

Hookailo dismissed the defenses.

"The office feels that our investigation has developed significant and credible evidence," she said. "Children involved in this investigation relate common themes . . . despite the fact that they attended different class sessions and in some cases attended the school in completely different school years."

And Clyde Bergstresser, an attorney representing three families of children who were allegedly abused, called the suggestion that families prompted charges to cover up abuse outside Gingerbread "a clear attempt by those who are facing some responsibility to shift the burden."

- top of page

The Boston Globe, September 7, 1989
Copyright 1989 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
September 7, 1989, Thursday, City Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 33

LENGTH: 700 words

HEADLINE: Brockton preschool closing is upheld

BYLINE: By Tom Coakley, Globe Staff

BODY: A state magistrate yesterday affirmed the state Office for Children's suspension of the license of a Brockton preschool, following allegations of sexual abuse of youngsters at the school.

The decision by administrative magistrate Joan Freiman Fink prevents the Gingerbread Playschool from opening today for the 1989-90 school year.

The suspension will remain until Freiman Fink rules on the Office for Children's July 10 permanent revocation of the preschool's license. A hearing on the revocation - a more extensive airing of the allegations - begins Sept. 18. State Department of Social Services workers have determined that in 12 cases, reasonable cause exists to believe that a total of 10 former Gingerbread students were abused or neglected while in the care of the preschool.

The allegations are under investigation by the Plymouth district attorney's office, assistant District Attorney Geline Williams said yesterday. She said the office is still wrestling with the problems of the "legal competency and emotional stability" of 4-year-olds who would be key witnesses in any prosecution.

Coming from the former students and their parents, the abuse and neglect allegations involve four persons, two of whom - a teacher and the husband of a bus driver - were ordered to stay away from the school in an Office for Children order issued in February.

A third person, linked by subsequent investigation to abuse and neglect allegations that led to the license revocation, is still connected to the school.

School officials and workers have denied that any abuse occurred.

Freiman Fink listened to testimony from both sides during a three-day hearing last month before concluding the abuse allegations "are of such a serious nature and are so pervasive as to warrant the school's remaining closed pending a full and fair hearing" on the license revocation.

"We're disappointed," said Donald McNamee, the school's attorney. "What we look forward to is having an opportunity to having a full hearing. This was a very limited hearing and the standard for the finding is somewhat limited."

McNamee said school owners yesterday were in the process of notifying parents who had planned to send their youngsters to the school that Gingerbread will not open on time. He said he did not know how many children were expected for the fall semester.

Previously, McNamee had said that a decision prohibiting the opening of the school would be "catastrophic." When allegations of abuse at the school first surfaced publicly in March, McNamee had said that 30 of the school's 150 students had been withdrawn by their parents.

Clyde Bergstresser, an attorney for three families whose children are alleged victims of abuse at the school, said its closing is "long overdue."

After banning the two alleged abusers last winter, Office for Children officials permitted the school to remain open under the supervision of an independent monitor.

But, according to Janet Hookailo, spokeswoman for the Office for Children, subsequent investigation substantiated existing allegations and led to additional abuse and neglect accusations.

In 1985, a teacher at the school was suspended for several months by the Office for Children, following the filing of an abuse allegation. But the results of an agency investigation at that time were inconclusive, according to officials.

After the school appealed the July revocation, Office for Children officials issued the emergency suspension order to prevent a reopening of the school.

The magistrate's decision details allegations of abuse against two young girls, including one alleged victim who showed evidence of physical abuse and another who said the teacher, suspended last February, "held a gun and threatened to kill her parents if she told anyone what happened."

Also, according to Freiman Fink's decision, a young boy, who has made allegations against the school, began having nightmares, occasionally wetting the bed and constantly washing out his mouth shortly after beginning at the school last fall.

He eventually told his mother that he had been forced to perform oral sex on a man at the school, who punched him several times.

- top of page

The Boston Globe, August 7, 1989
Copyright 1989 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
August 7, 1989, Monday, City Edition

SECTION: SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY; Pg. 25

LENGTH: 2145 words

HEADLINE: Pain lingers after sexual abuse ends; Therapist's victim remembers; PSYCHOLOGY

BYLINE: By Dolores Kong, Contributing Reporter

BODY: As she watched her husband dying a slow and terrible death from a gunshot wound to his head, Janet Wohlberg felt like a part of her was dying along with him.

"I was so totally emotionally drained," she said recently in an interview in at her home in a Boston suburb, recalling what happened more than 15 years ago.

Her husband, Gerald, a psychiatrist, had been shot by a patient who was holding a psychiatric resident hostage at Boston State Hospital. He had been trying to rescue the resident. For 3 1/2 weeks he lay in a coma, only once coming out of it, for a brief moment. "Here I was, 31 years old, with two young children. My husband was dying a horrible death . . . to watch him with this collapsed skull . . . hooked up to every possible machine you could think of . . .," said Wohlberg, a lecturer at a Boston-area university and a published author.

She was in such great need, she turned for help to a psychotherapist, a man she had been seeing earlier off and on for marital counseling. It was within weeks, Wohlberg said, that the sexual abuse began.

"He just got me at the absolute lowest point," said Wohlberg, who ended the relationship about a year later. "I just didn't have the emotional strength really."

Wohlberg is one of several victims who recently filed complaints of sexual abuse by therapists with the state medical licensing board. Such abuse is one of the most serious ethical violations a therapist can commit and one of the most psychologically damaging to patients, say victims and the therapists who treat them afterward.

While the circumstances in each case are different, Wohlberg's story illustrates some of the common themes that run through them. She speaks of how a sexual relationship can develop, of the guilt and self-blame victims often feel about the relationship and of the resolve it takes to take action against an unethical therapist.

About a year ago, Wohlberg filed a complaint against Dr. Lionel A. Schwartz, a psychiatrist then affiliated with Harvard Medical School, after she discovered that the licensing board was investigating him for allegations that he had sexually abused two women when they were Wellesley College students in the 1970s.

In April, Schwartz surrendered his license to practice medicine in Massachusetts, the night before a hearing on the sexual abuse charges. Just before he gave up his license, Schwartz said in an interview, "You're talking about something that happened over 15 years ago. Things change in 15 years; people change. I've had a whole course of rehabilitation since then. Don't you believe in redemption?"

Over the last few months, as Wohlberg has spoken out about sexually abusive therapists and become involved in legislative efforts to stem such abuse in the state, she said she has come across more than two dozen victims with similar stories to tell.

"I mostly listen. I tell them that it's wrong," she said. "I feel somebody needs to take care of these women."

She said she has also come across disbelieving therapists and members of the public.

"The most pressing question that most people have is, 'How do you let this happen?' That's a really complex question because those of us who are victims have become victims partly because we self-blame. We're pretty safe targets because there is this sense we're not going to turn around and blame the therapist," she said.

"You don't go to a therapist because you're a whole, happy human being. You go to a therapist because something is missing, and you don't really feel good about yourself. You go because a piece is missing, and you bare that missing piece to the therapist."

Despite her understanding of how a sexual relationship could happen, Wohlberg said she still worries about the part she played. "I know intellectually I was abused, a victim of somebody's self-indulgence and power trip."

But in her heart, she said, she can't help asking herself, "What did I do? What piece of it did I own?"

Most sexual abuse involves a male therapist and a female patient, but rare cases have been reported involving female therapists and male patients - and there have been occasional cases involving therapists and patients of the same sex. Children have also been abused by their therapists. As many as 10 percent of psychiatrists or psychologists become sexually involved with patients, according to various studies of the problem by both psychiatrists and psychologists.

Attorneys who represent abused patients and therapists who treat them after the abuse has occurred say that the patients often suffer the same kinds of psychological damage that victims of rape and incest do. The ambivalence, fear, shame and sense of isolation are what often keep victims from taking action against therapists who abuse them, specialists say. By some researchers' estimates, only 1 to 4 percent of the cases are ever reported.

"The fact that they have been betrayed by someone in whom they put their trust is absolutely devastating to people," said Dr. James C. Beck, an associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Beck has evaluated or treated more than half a dozen victims of sexual abuse by their previous therapists.

"And then you call your judgment into question," he said. " 'What's the matter with me?' You start to blame yourself. 'What kind of terrible person am I that I let something like this happen to me?' Then you get depressed."

Boston lawyer Clyde Bergstresser, who has represented at least 20 patients who said they have been abused by therapists, noted that some clients waited as long as 10 to 15 years before taking legal action. "Things that disable them from coming to see lawyers include guilt, the feeling that they were somehow responsible, that this person really cared for them and that they don't want to see anything harmful happen to this person."

Victims of other abusive therapists, who asked that their names not be used, told stories of painful long-term effects.

One woman, a New York State resident, became involved in the early 1980s in a sexual relationship with a psychiatrist whom she had consulted for marital problems. The relationship continued for nearly five years. She thought she loved him, she said, and he led her to believe they would marry. She subsequently divorced her husband of more than 20 years. She idealized the psychiatrist so much that she wanted to become a therapist herself. Today, she's a social worker.

"He encouraged my emotional dependence and took advantage of the fact that I was having marital problems," she said in a recent interview. "He exploited what is supposed to be a confidential and open discussion of your feelings. He took advantage of that. It was deplorable because it left me with a lack of trust."

Now that she knows the relationship was abusive, she is active in legislative efforts in New York and Massachusetts to stop such abuse and she has filed a malpractice suit against the psychiatrist. "It is because I feel so strongly about stopping these kinds of unethical therapists from harming other women, and from the particular therapist who abused me from harming other women, that I began to participate in the legislative process."

Another woman in her late 20s, who lives in the Boston area, said she had been sexually abused by a Framingham psychologist when she was between 3 and 5 years old, but she did not remember the incident until she was 23, when she began having flashbacks.

When she was 20, she said, she was abused by a female residential counselor at a halfway house. She had also been a victim of incest. She hasn't taken action against the psychologist because she said she feels it would be her word against his, and because it's been such a long time that her medical records are no longer available. She said she did blow the whistle on the counselor, who was fired soon after.

"I don't know, if I didn't have an incest history, that I would have been quite so vulnerable to sexual malpractice, at least as an adult. It made me a whole lot more vulnerable to that," she said in a recent interview.

As her husband lay dying in 1973, Wohlberg turned for help to Schwartz, whom she had been seeing on and off for two years to work on some marital problems. She and her husband had selected Schwartz based on his credentials and his Harvard and Wellesley affiliations.

She confided in the psychiatrist her feelings of loss, her horror at the manner of her husband's death. The sessions, Wohlberg said, evolved from subtle physical contact to sex.

"He would begin to walk to the door with me," Wohlberg said. "He would stand there at the door so I would have to brush by him. He began to establish physical contact in sort of subtle ways. He became seductive towards me. He would ask, 'What are you going to do about sex?' "

"It's such a fuzzy period in my life, I can't tell you when the sexual relationship began - just before my husband died or just after my husband died?"

Finally, feeling it was wrong, Wohlberg said she told Schwartz she wanted to end the sexual relations. The therapist said she had to return for termination, a gradual process to end therapy, or else she would suffer adverse effects, Wohlberg recalled.

"Why I kept going back, to this day I'll never understand, except that he must have had such an incredible hold on me."

About two years passed before Wohlberg said she could take action.

"I called him from home, in the front hall. I was very nervous about calling, but was very determined. I wanted him to somehow know that what he did was very damaging, that it was wrong and that he not do it to anyone else. I consider myself a very strong person. What happens to the person who is not as strong a person?" "He said to me, I'll never forget, 'Oh no, it was therapy. You got a great deal out of it'. I said, 'I can't accept that. I want my money back. . . . If I don't get a check in two weeks, I'm going to take it further,' " Wohlberg recalled.

When nothing came in the mail, she filed a complaint with the Boston Psychoanalytic Society, a professional association that trains psychoanalysts. After an investigation, the society requested that Schwartz reimburse the $ 1,760 Wohlberg paid him for therapy and that he undergo therapy and have his practice supervised by another psychoanalyst for three years. Schwartz complied, and the society did nothing further with the findings.

"I agreed not to sue him. I largely put the thing to rest," Wohlberg said. That was more than 10 years ago.

Then about a year ago, she received a letter from the Board of Registration in Medicine. Just by looking at the return address, Wohlberg said, her first thought was, "He's done it again."

The board said it had reason to believe she was once a patient of Schwartz. Two women were considering filing complaints alleging that he abused them sexually when they were Wellesley College students in the 1970s, Wohlberg said the board told her.

"I didn't really get angry until I found out he was doing it to college-age students. I know how vulnerable college students can be. I have two daughters in college," Wohlberg said. She testified before the board and was also willing to speak publicly about her experience.

Although Wohlberg doesn't want to make speaking out against sexual abuse by therapists her life's work, she feels it is a critical issue. "It just ought to be stopped. It's something that can be stopped."

And to all the patients who have ever been sexually abused by therapists, Wohlberg said, "Nobody has the rce, but may also fear separation or alienation from the therapist.

- Guilt. Patients wrongly feel they are to blame; it is the therapist's professional responsibility to avoid sexual contact.
- Emptiness and isolation. Patients may feel worthless without the abusing therapist, whom they had placed their trust in, and isolated because they feel they can't tell anyone about the relationship.
- Sexual confusion. Some patients may suffer severe sexual trauma affecting how they feel about themselves, with some becoming involved in self-destructive sexual encounters.
- Inability to trust. Patients may particularly mistrust professionals, after their trust in a therapist is violated.
- Identity and role confusion. The abusing therapist's needs become the focus of therapy sessions, rather than the patient's, confusing the patient's sense of identity.
- Overwhelming emotion. Depression, anxiety, blind rage may appear during subsequent therapy to deal with the abuse, when patients believe they're on the road to recovery.
- Suppressed rage. The rage may be directed inward as a result of guilt.
- Suicidal feelings. Inward rage and guilt may become self-destructive.
- Cognitive dysfunction. Nightmares and flashbacks may occur, symptoms similar to those of post-traumatic stress disorder.

- top of page

The Boston Globe, March 16, 1989
Copyright 1989 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
March 16, 1989, Thursday, City Edition

SECTION: METRO/REGION; Pg. 29

LENGTH: 773 words

HEADLINE: Brockton teacher denies abuse allegations

BYLINE: By Tom Coakley, Globe Staff

DATELINE: BROCKTON

BODY: A teacher barred by the state from a local preschool while authorities investigate child-abuse allegations against her and the school said yesterday she has never abused a child and is willing to take a polygraph test to help prove it.

"I have nothing to hide," said the 41-year-old teacher, who spoke on the condition that her name not be used.

"It's been a very painful . . .," said the teacher, who has been suspended from the Gingerbread Playschool by the state Office of Children. "In fact, it's been a living hell. "I had a very bad Thanksgiving . . . a bad Christmas and it looks like we are going to have a bad Easter."

A Catholic religious education teacher and rectory cook at her Brockton parish, the woman said that although her name has not been released publicly, colleagues, relatives and friends know that she is the barred teacher.

Her teen-age daughter has suffered ridicule at her junior high school over the episode. "It's just my daughter knows this and feels terrible about it because she knows her mother wouldn't do anything like this," she said.

Law enforcement officials are investigating seven cases of alleged sexual abuse against six current and former students. The spouse of a school bus driver also has been ordered to stay away from the school.

The state Department of Social Services has determined that in all seven cases, reasonable cause exists to suspect that children were abused. Two children - one of whom contracted a venereal disease - have physical evidence of abuse, according to authorities. The cases have been referred to the Plymouth County district attorney's office.

Last week, Clyde Bergstresser, a Boston lawyer who said he represented at least two families of alleged abuse victims, offered a statement from the parents indicating their belief that their children were abused at the school.

Also, Donald McNamee, a lawyer for the preschool, said yesterday that a second teacher is under investigation by DSS following abuse allegations against the teacher by two children.

McNamee said he could provide no further information on the charges against the second teacher. Spokesmen for DSS and the Office of Children refused to discuss any of the cases.

In an interview yesterday at a downtown restaurant, the barred teacher, who also has been suspended from a job as a preschool teacher for the Brockton school system, said that in six years at the Gingerbread school she has never witnessed anyone abuse a child.

She said she does not know why a 4-year-old child has charged her with sexual abuse.

The mother of three said she has been a preschool teacher for nine years and is working toward a bachelor's degree in education. The teacher spoke as a Gingerbread parent and school supporter, Margaret Iverson, sat beside her.

The teacher said that - based on information she has gleaned from interviews with investigators - it seems the charges against her come from information supplied by the 4-year-old, who was in a class she taught in the afternoon on Tuesdays and Thursdays. She said she is not aware of any specific dates or times for the alleged abuse.

Four of the seven children in the class, which Iverson's son attended, are alleged to have been abused. Iverson has maintained that her 4-year-old was not a victim.

The first allegation surfaced in November, the teacher said, when the 4-year-old alleged that the father of another child in the class abused her while the teacher watched.

"He was supposed to be wearing a witch's dress with long black nails," said the teacher.

She said that she had been told by the school's management that DSS had cleared her on the allegation made in November. But authorities say they are still investigating that allegation in addition to the other cases.

The teacher said that she then learned in February that the child charged that she and the bus driver's spouse had stood naked in a storage room upstairs from the school and made obscene films of four naked children from the school.

The teacher said that she has been upstairs to the room twice in six years as a teacher, once to get supplies and once to help store rolls of paper for art classes.

She said she knew the bus driver's spouse but is not a friend.

The teacher said that the hardest thing for her so far was calling the families of some 30 students in her public school preschool class to tell them of the allegations that led to her suspension from the Brockton system.

"They were shocked," she said. "Some cried with me."

"I've built a beautiful reputation at the school," she added, "and it's terrible to have it be shattered .

- top of page