Last week, the Oregon Supreme Court ordered for the release of the Boy Scouts of America's "Perversion Files" covering from 1965 to 1985. What these files contain are reports on 1,247 incidents with leaders and volunteers being banned after being accused of sexual or inappropriate behavior. The release is one of the outcomes of a 2010 case where a Scoutmaster had been convicted of sexually abusing a scout.
The Boy Scouts have opposed the release of the files, claiming that even though the identities of victims had been removed, there's still a possibility of harm that could come to them from the release. They've also expressed a fear that others may be discouraged from reporting, knowing that the report would eventually become public, having only recently enacted a policy requiring mandatory reporting to police in 2011.
These claims are actually the opposite of what is most likely to happen. In truth, the secrecy of a reporting process often fuels mistrust and isolation, leading victims to believe nothing is actually being done. You see it even with bullying. Transparency encourages reporting. It builds a trust in the system when victims can see something is actually being done. It gives them confidence that reporting isn't for nothing when they can see a punishment enforced. No matter how strong an investigation nor how severe a punishment, if it happens in the shadows then victims and future victims will feel abandoned.
Often the argument is made that a low-key investigation protects the innocence of the accused, but that must be weighed against the potential of future harm. Should rape victims be left to feel alone, unaware if justice has been served? That's exactly how Keith Early, a scout who had been abused by his Scoutmaster felt. Victims are already isolated because of how uncomfortable people are with sexual abuse. At least let them see there are others trying to help.