WAG Discussion of abuse in USAG - Nassar

[Deleted member 14190]

Alex Naddour, as in Olympian Alex Naddour?!

Yep, and a few more on there ....

 

[TumbleTimes4]

Too bad they are in alphabetical order instead of date order. The least they could do was have the date the suspension began.

Apparently Safe Sport has a twitter account and releases the names when they suspend someone. I guess you could look on their Twitter for the timeline.

 

[amiandjim]

I see they added about 24 people Friday, but I don’t recognize any of the names.

 

[Seeker]

Here is the twitter link...there are several more people listed in the comments. https://twitter.com/USAGymSafeSport

 

[gymbeam]

Here is the twitter link...there are several more people listed in the comments. https://twitter.com/USAGymSafeSport

Is there somewhere to see why they are on the list?

 

[Seeker]

Is there somewhere to see why they are on the list?

Yes, if you go to the USAG page linked in the post, they site the specific bylaw. 9.3 is the most common and is associated with "sexual misconduct". 10.5 means that the suspension is an interim measure while the allegation is being investigated.

https://usagym.org/pages/aboutus/pages/suspended_members.html

Link to bylaws: https://usagym.org/PDFs/About USA Gymnastics/Governance/usag-bylaws.pdf

 

[skschlag]

Is there somewhere to see why they are on the list?

all they really say right now is the Rule they are suspended under.

 

[coachmolly]

So, if it says "No Unsupervised Contact with Minors," can we assume the accusation is one involving inappropriate contact with a minor?
One of the names on the list is a former NCAA coach. A couple others were pretty prominent among the coaching clinic circles.

 

[raenndrops]

So, if it says "No Unsupervised Contact with Minors," can we assume the accusation is one involving inappropriate contact with a minor?
One of the names on the list is a former NCAA coach. A couple others were pretty prominent among the coaching clinic circles.

Or grooming behavior??

 

[wandrewsjr]

So, if it says "No Unsupervised Contact with Minors," can we assume the accusation is one involving inappropriate contact with a minor?
One of the names on the list is a former NCAA coach. A couple others were pretty prominent among the coaching clinic circles.

I would not assume that, because many of those who have been listed as "suspended from all contact" were eventually banned for inappropriate contact with minors. It seems like more of an intermediary step, not enough evidence to suspend from all contact and prevent them from coaching, but want to put them on notice. I really don't get it though, because according to safesport rules, shouldn't NONE of us have unsupervised contact with minors?!

 

[Jard.the.gymnast]

I would not assume that, because many of those who have been listed as "suspended from all contact" were eventually banned for inappropriate contact with minors. It seems like more of an intermediary step, not enough evidence to suspend from all contact and prevent them from coaching, but want to put them on notice. I really don't get it though, because according to safesport rules, shouldn't NONE of us have unsupervised contact with minors?!

Im guessing normal no unsupervised contact with a minor would be with either other adults or other kids around, whereas in those cases it would have to be an adult?

 

[skschlag]

Im guessing normal no unsupervised contact with a minor would be with either other adults or other kids around, whereas in those cases it would have to be an adult?

That might be true. Our gym does no allow unsupervised contact at all. Always has to be 2 adults, preferably 2 coaches or employees, but sometimes a parent can count.

 

[wandrewsjr]

Im guessing normal no unsupervised contact with a minor would be with either other adults or other kids around, whereas in those cases it would have to be an adult?

Yes, this official designation may mean another professional member must supervise? Not just any other person. Either way, it is definitely a much lesser form of suspension than "suspended from all contact", since they can still work. So I would assume it is for those under investigation for lesser offenses, ones that may or may not lead to banning even if true.

 

[gymdog]

So, if it says "No Unsupervised Contact with Minors," can we assume the accusation is one involving inappropriate contact with a minor?
One of the names on the list is a former NCAA coach. A couple others were pretty prominent among the coaching clinic circles.

No, I don't think so. I assume that is the case for most though but for example one person on the suspended list seems to have been placed there after a case where their gym (that they owned) hired someone who turned out to have lied on their background check and eventually was banned. The banned person was fired when the owner found out as far as I can tell but my understanding was she was suspended and her case will be reviewed for violating the rule that USA Gymnastics member clubs can't associate with anyone who isn't cleared. As far as I know this suspended person has not been directly accused in any inappropriate contact or violations. That is my best understanding of the case. And although I understand they need to enforce strongly that particular case confuses me a bit because it seems like other similar cases were handled differently. Not sure if I'm missing something. Maybe someone else knows more. I'm not specifically not using names, I am just writing that from memory and don't remember exact names. The suspended owner/operator is female.

 

[coachmolly]

No, I don't think so. I assume that is the case for most though but for example one person on the suspended list seems to have been placed there after a case where their gym (that they owned) hired someone who turned out to have lied on their background check and eventually was banned. The banned person was fired when the owner found out as far as I can tell but my understanding was she was suspended and her case will be reviewed for violating the rule that USA Gymnastics member clubs can't associate with anyone who isn't cleared. As far as I know this suspended person has not been directly accused in any inappropriate contact or violations. That is my best understanding of the case. And although I understand they need to enforce strongly that particular case confuses me a bit because it seems like other similar cases were handled differently. Not sure if I'm missing something. Maybe someone else knows more. I'm not specifically not using names, I am just writing that from memory and don't remember exact names. The suspended owner/operator is female.

Situations like that just suck. I get what they are trying to do, but I feel like there needs to be a way to more clearly differentiate these types of cases. Someone just checking the list could recognize this woman's name and (somewhat logically) jump to the conclusion that she did something really awful herself without knowing the back story. I feel like it's not entirely fair they are all grouped together. And even if she is cleared eventually and Safe Sport finds she did everything in her power to keep her athletes safe, this will still hang over her head.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

It's a little scarey that they suspend first. Then ask questions .... not to mention lumping all the names together ...

Situations like that just suck. I get what they are trying to do, but I feel like there needs to be a way to more clearly differentiate these types of cases. Someone just checking the list could recognize this woman's name and (somewhat logically) jump to the conclusion that she did something really awful herself without knowing the back story. I feel like it's not entirely fair they are all grouped together. And even if she is cleared eventually and Safe Sport finds she did everything in her power to keep her athletes safe, this will still hang over her head.

 

[gymdog]

Situations like that just suck. I get what they are trying to do, but I feel like there needs to be a way to more clearly differentiate these types of cases. Someone just checking the list could recognize this woman's name and (somewhat logically) jump to the conclusion that she did something really awful herself without knowing the back story. I feel like it's not entirely fair they are all grouped together. And even if she is cleared eventually and Safe Sport finds she did everything in her power to keep her athletes safe, this will still hang over her head.

I found an article that went into more detail than what I originally saw and it sounds like there are some questions about the timing of the firing. But still it doesn't sound like there are direct accusations against the suspended member: https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/lo...ed-for-child-pornography-in-england/769256921

I do understand why they have to investigate those things and enforce all of the reporting and background monitoring policies of safesport. I'm just bringing this case up in response to the question "can we assume that the accusation is one involving inappropriate contact with a minor".

 

[coachmolly]

I found an article that went into more detail than what I originally saw and it sounds like there are some questions about the timing of the firing. But still it doesn't sound like there are direct accusations against the suspended member: https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/lo...ed-for-child-pornography-in-england/769256921

I do understand why they have to investigate those things and enforce all of the reporting and background monitoring policies of safesport. I'm just bringing this case up in response to the question "can we assume that the accusation is one involving inappropriate contact with a minor".

I was just referring to the ones specifically marked "No unsupervised contact with minors" as I was confused as to why they were labeled differently. But it appears those are the cases that are still being investigated (only marked as 10.5) and that specification is made just as a precaution as they are being investigated.
I still feel like there needs to be some sort of differentiation in the lists, or at least a little more clarity.

 

[amiandjim]

Um...Debbie Van Horn has been added to the suspended list as well.

 

[amiandjim]

Ignore my post. I was thinking she was someone else. I mean, she is suspended but that’s not a surprise I suppose.