Penn State Child Abuse Scandal

Penn State Child Abuse Scandal

            Led by their legendary coach Joe Paterno, Penn State was synonymous with great football traditional which brought pride to the institution. Among his many accomplishments, the storm that would unfortunately sink Paterno and leave a black mark on Penn State was when the child abuse scandal of Jerry Sandusky was brought to light in the fall of 2011 (CNN, 2013). The social injustice that occurred was whether or not administrators, in this case primarily Vice President Gary Schultz, did the right thing by stopping Sandusky’s abuse and was punishment enough to stop it?

Over the span of at least fifteen years, former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky sexually abused 10 boys while operating a youth organization (Center, Jackson, Smith, & Stansberry, 2014). In 1998, administrators such as Athletic Director Tim Curley and senior Vice President Gary Schultz, as well as head coach Joe Paterno were first aware of Sandusky’s mischievous behavior but was swept under the rug (Chappel, 2012). In 2000, a janitor witnessed Sandusky molesting a boy in the shower. The janitor, Jim Calhoun,  told his supervisors but the consensus among the staff was not to report the incident for fear of losing their jobs (Center et al., 2014). In 2002, graduate assistant Mike McQueary reports to Curley, Schultz, and Paterno that he witnessed Sandusky abusing a boy in the locker room showers. The administrators failed to report any incidents to law enforcement, which allowed Sandusky to continue his abuse of young boys (CNN, 2013; Chappel, 2012). Penn State missed several opportunities to stop Sandusky, yet silence was the answer in order to protect the coveted football program (Center et al., 2014). Sandusky was later found guilty for 45 counts of child sex abuse in 2012 (Center et al. 2014).

            Examining through the process sociological lens will further develop our understanding of the Penn State scandal. Through the process sociological theory, the main focus is how the present has emerged from the past by studying power relations between figurations (Maguire, 1994). According to Maguire (1994), humans are interdependent, but are connected through figurations marked by power relations.  

            The use of figurations is first considered and applied to the Penn State scandal since all of the administrators’ actions were intertwined. The figuration between Schultz and the other administrators allowed Sandusky to continue his abuse. The second consideration for under the process sociological lens is power relations. In relation to the Penn State scandal, the key players in power were coach Joe Paterno, Athletic Director Tim Curley, and Vice President Gary Schultz. Power is viewed as the constraining and enabling feature and is highly dynamic (Maguire, 1994). This is viewed with Paterno having control over both Curley and Schultz, forcing them to remain silent about allegations against Sandusky. This example of power relations occurred again with Curley and Schultz overpowering and squandering graduate assistant McQueary’s reports. Third, the enabling of figurations and power relations creates habitus, explaining a lifestyle of entitlement. For Sandusky’s case, this lead to an abuse of power and Schultz being in a position unable to challenge the football coaching staff. Finally, in order to further understand power relations, pronouns are used to identify separate groups (Maguire, 1994). Using the pronoun of ‘them’ referring to Schultz, Paterno, Curley, and Sandusky further reinforces the concept that power exists in a figuration and influences everyone with unintentional consequences.

            Through the eyes of Vice President Schultz, he was constrained to not report anything in order to maintain integrity of the football program (Center et al., 2014). A key power figure was Coach Paterno, whose legacy was being protected by the administration, Athletic Director Curley. Vice President Schultz, who was also oversaw the campus police, was in a key position to stop the abuse if he further continued investigation of Sandusky (Center et al., 2014). Yet with the football culture within the Penn State community, who not only idolized but also loved Joe Paterno, the pressure to conform and to remain silent in order to protect the famed coach was needed. This power of Joe Paterno leads to minimal power chances for Vice President Schultz. By understanding the power relations within the figuration at Penn State, maintaining the status quo was the concern for Schultz.

            In hindsight to how the actions of all the individuals in the scandal, key officials such as Vice President Schultz should have stopped the abuse when it first came about. By being in charge of campus police, the expectation to protect young boys must be done. Determining that Sandusky needed to be prosecuted all the way was strongly needed instead of being swept under the rug. Further questions arises such as did Joe Paterno want to know or even cared? Did his consumption in his football legacy led to him not caring about the child abuse scandal? 

This abuse of power from a highly popular official shows how unintentional consequences occur from intentional means. The Penn State scandal highlights how figurations can influence decision making and how strong power relations are in studying sociology.

           

References

Center, A., Jackson, P., Smith, S., & Stansberry, F. (2014). Public relations practices: Managerial case studies and problems. Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson. 

Chappel, B. (2012). Penn state abuse scandal: A guide and timeline. Available: http://wwww.npr.org/2011/11/08/142111804/penn-state-abuse-scandal-a-guide-and-timeline Retrieved 31st January, 2014.

CNN Wire. (2013). Penn State Scandal Fast Facts. CNN Newsource Sales, Inc.

Maguire, J. (1994). Figurations, power, civilizing processes. In Jarvie, G & Maguire, J (1994). Sport & Leisure in Social Thought. London: Routledge, Pp 130-137.