A billion dollars! Really?
I have to admit that when I first saw the release fromĀ LaurensKids.org, I was a little skeptical. Despite the fact that I love the workĀ Lauren BookĀ is doing on behalf of kids and the very real fact that her work has earned national ink, the actual number itself ā (cue your best Dr. Evil) āONE BILLION DOLLARSā ā jumped off the page. Ā We all know how these kinds of reports can pile on the numbers and if one adds in some soft estimates or a few multipliers, the figures can climb rather quickly.
My skepticism, as tempered as it was, was misguided and to some degree after reading the actual report, the ābillionā might even be, dare I say, a little conservative.
For starters, the report was researched and compiled by Sachs Media Groupās big brain Dr.Ā Karen Cyphers (a former contributor to SaintPetersBlog). Second, it appears from a read of the report that only data taken from public and peer-reviewed reports (nearly two dozen in all) were used in compiling those figures.
A BILLION dollars a year!
How did they get there? At one level it seems pretty complex, yet at another, it was pretty simple:
- Lost wages/earnings +
- Added medical/mental health expenses +
- Added costs to the criminal justice system =
- A lot of money!
Hereās the ironic part … they could have thrown in lost taxes generated to the state. But they didnāt. They could have thrown in collateral costs, like the cost of having the state raise a child of someone who is incarcerated. But they didnāt. They could have even added things like costs to the schools for remedial education. They didnāt do that either.
The point is, they stuck to direct and immediate costs andĀ stillĀ they arrived at the cost for child sexual abuse in Florida coming to ONE BILLION DOLLARS a year. Thatās a chunk of change.
Of course, this does not include what the legal system dubs āpain and suffering.ā That is simply not something I could ever put a figure on.
Kudos to Team Lauren! They continue to impress even those of us in the media who, every now and then, can be skeptical.