Can I sue the LDS Church even if the abuse happened decades ago?

In many states, yes. Multiple states have passed laws eliminating or extending statutes of limitations for childhood sexual abuse, including "lookback window" provisions that allow previously time-barred claims. States including California, New York, New Jersey, Utah (limited), and others have enacted such legislation. An attorney can advise you on your state's current law.

I only remember the ward and the years — not the name. Is that enough to start?

Often, yes. The church keeps centralized, longitudinal records — callings, ward assignments, moves — and leaders were documented, known figures. A specific ward or stake, an approximate time period, the person’s role, and a detailed description are frequently enough to definitively identify someone decades later. Photographs, yearbooks, and ward directories help.

I was abused in a LDS Boy Scout troop. Do I go through the BSA settlement or the church?

They are separate paths. The BSA bankruptcy trust compensates Scouting abuse claims, but the bankruptcy judge rejected the church’s attempt to buy a release of non-Scouting claims (August 1, 2022), so a direct claim against the church may remain available. Which path — or both — fits your situation depends on timing and facts; a review can map it.

What types of abuse are covered in these lawsuits?

Lawsuits cover sexual abuse by bishops, branch presidents, youth leaders (Young Men/Young Women leaders, Scoutmasters), seminary and institute teachers, mission presidents, and other Church members in positions of trust. Cases also address the Church's failure to conduct background checks, its policy of one-on-one interviews with minors behind closed doors, and its suppression of abuse reports.

Will my family, my ward, or my bishop find out?

A case review is confidential, and courts generally allow survivors to file as Jane or John Doe so your name stays out of the public record. Whether to ever tell anyone in your life remains your choice; nothing about a review requires it.

How much is the LDS Church worth?

The LDS Church is estimated to have over $100 billion in assets, primarily through its investment arm, Ensign Peak Advisors. This substantial wealth means the Church has the financial capacity to provide meaningful compensation to abuse survivors. The Church has historically settled cases confidentially with non-disclosure agreements.

Will I have to face the person who abused me?

The overwhelming majority of these claims resolve without trial — confidential resolution is how the record shows they typically end. Civil claims are also separate from criminal cases: you do not need a police report, and you control whether one is ever made.

Reviews are free and carry no obligation. If a claim proceeds, attorneys in this area typically work on a contingency-fee basis; fee arrangements vary by attorney and are explained before you agree to anything.

What are the helpline documents, and why do they matter?

When bishops report abuse to the church’s helpline, legally risky cases are referred to the church’s law firm, Kirton McConkie, and the church asserts privilege over those records. If you or a parent told a bishop and nothing happened, that disclosure is evidence — what the church knew and when is exactly what current cover-up litigation tests.

How does “definitive identification” actually work?

It means connecting a person to the abuse with enough certainty to act: a name, or a combination of photographs, records, and a detailed description tied to a specific ward, stake, or mission and time period. You do not need to describe the abuse itself to begin — identification and timeframe are where every evaluation starts.

LDS Church Sexual Abuse Lawsuits | Survivors Deserve Justice

Q: What is the LDS Church abuse help line?

The help line is a phone number that LDS bishops and other leaders are instructed to call when they learn of abuse. While publicly described as a resource for protecting children, lawsuits and investigative reporting reveal it is staffed by attorneys at Kirton McConkie (the Church's law firm) whose primary concern is the Church's legal exposure. In multiple documented cases, leaders were advised not to report abuse to police.

Q: What if the deadline has already passed?

A statute of limitations is a defense against lawsuits — it does not prevent an institution from resolving a claim brought to it directly. LDS claims have been resolved confidentially even where suit would have been time-barred (the $32 million West Virginia settlement stayed sealed from 2018 until Floodlit revealed it from court records in 2025), particularly where the survivor clearly identifies the person responsible. A confidential review settles the deadline question for your specific facts; no outcome is ever guaranteed.

Q: Does the clergy-penitent privilege protect the Church?

The clergy-penitent privilege varies by state. Some states exempt clergy from mandatory reporting requirements when they learn of abuse through religious confession. However, many lawsuits argue that the privilege does not apply when: (1) the information came outside of formal confession, (2) the leader had independent knowledge of abuse, or (3) the privilege was used as a shield to conceal ongoing harm to children.

Time limits apply. Find out if you still qualify.

People's Justice Research TeamUpdated June 12, 20263 cited sourcesFact-checked15 min read

Verified against court and regulatory records · No upfront fees · Your information is never sold

Qualification

Do You Qualify?

Eligibility checklist

You experienced sexual abuse connected to an LDS (Mormon) setting — a ward, stake, youth program, seminary, mission, or an LDS-chartered Scout troop
You can identify the person responsible: by name, or definitively through photographs, records, or a detailed description tied to a ward/stake and time period
The abuser was a church leader, teacher, missionary, youth leader, or another member in a position of trust
It applies even if the abuse happened decades ago, and even if you never reported it
It applies even if you were told a deadline has passed — deadlines limit lawsuits, not always direct resolution

Free Case Review

Check your eligibility — free

Answer 2-3 quick questions to review your potential case.

Free · Confidential · About 2 minutes · A case specialist responds within 1 business day

Your answers are never sold or shared without your consent.

The Wire

Latest in this litigation

Updated JUL 2, 2026

February 2026Nevada Age-38 Institutional FilingA Nevada suit was filed under the state’s age-38 institutional statute over abuse in the 1990s allegedly reported to a bishop and not acted on — an example of corridor states with live institutional paths, per the court docket.
May 2025Sex-Offender Screening DirectiveChurch guidance directed leaders to check public sex-offender databases before placing adults in supervisory roles over children — a policy change plaintiffs cite as acknowledgment of known risk.
April 2025Church Loses Insurance Suit Over Abuse SettlementsA federal court rejected the church’s attempt to recover abuse-settlement costs from its insurers, per the court’s ruling reported by Floodlit and Bishop Accountability.
Full case timeline ↓

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) faces mounting lawsuits from survivors of sexual abuse by clergy, leaders, and members. At the center of the litigation is the Church's internal "help line" — a hotline staffed by attorneys that, according to lawsuits, was used to manage legal liability rather than protect children. Survivors allege the Church systematically failed to report abuse to authorities, moved known abusers to new congregations, and discouraged victims from going to police.

How it causes harm

How the LDS Church's Institutional Structure Enables and Conceals Abuse

In plain language

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints operates an institutional structure that, according to lawsuits and investigative reporting, systematically enables sexual abuse and then conceals it. From the lay clergy system that places untrained bishops in positions of authority over children, to the help line that routes abuse reports through Church attorneys rather than law enforcement, to the internal discipline process that handles abuse as a sin rather than a crime — each structural element creates opportunities for abuse and barriers to accountability.

The Bishop/Clergy Privilege System

LDS bishops are lay clergy — unpaid local leaders with no professional training in child protection, pastoral counseling, or abuse recognition. Yet they are vested with enormous authority over their congregations, including conducting private one-on-one interviews with children and youth behind closed doors where sexually explicit questions about "moral worthiness" are standard. When a child discloses abuse to their bishop, the bishop is instructed to call the Church's help line rather than law enforcement. In states with clergy-penitent privilege exemptions, this structure creates a legal shield that prevents the information from reaching authorities.

The Help Line System

The LDS Church maintains a toll-free help line that bishops are instructed to call when they learn of abuse allegations. While publicly described as a resource for "protecting children," the help line is staffed by attorneys at Kirton McConkie — the Church's outside law firm. In documented cases, the help line has advised bishops not to report abuse to police, even when state mandatory reporting laws required it, based on clergy-penitent privilege arguments. The AP's 2022 investigation found specific cases where the help line directed leaders to keep abuse reports confidential while the abuser continued to have access to children.

Internal Discipline Process

When abuse is reported within the Church, it enters an internal discipline process — a "disciplinary council" (now called a "membership council") that operates outside the legal system. These councils can excommunicate the abuser, restrict their membership, or take no action, but they have no power to arrest, prosecute, or protect future victims. In multiple documented cases, abusers who were disciplined internally were later reinstated to positions of trust — including callings that gave them access to children — without the congregation or law enforcement being informed of the prior abuse.

Reporting Failures and Mandatory Reporting Exemptions

The LDS Church has actively lobbied in state legislatures to maintain clergy-penitent privilege exemptions to mandatory child abuse reporting laws. In Utah, Arizona, and other states with large LDS populations, clergy who learn of abuse through a "religious confession" are exempt from mandatory reporting requirements. The Church has interpreted this exemption broadly, arguing that virtually any disclosure to a bishop constitutes a privileged communication. This interpretation has been challenged in multiple lawsuits alleging it is used as a blanket excuse to avoid reporting abuse to law enforcement.

Danger factors

Lay bishops with no training in child protection are given unsupervised access to children in private interviews
The help line routes abuse reports through attorneys whose primary duty is to the Church, not to the child
Internal discipline processes operate outside the legal system and cannot protect future victims
The Church actively lobbies to maintain mandatory reporting exemptions for clergy
Congregational trust in ecclesiastical authority discourages families from going to police
The hierarchical structure allows abuse to be concealed from ward (congregation) members indefinitely
Abusers who are disciplined internally can be reinstated to positions of trust without disclosure

Scientific consensus

The AP's 2022 investigation documented specific cases where the help line advised against reporting to police
Multiple state attorneys general have investigated the Church's handling of abuse reports
Child protection experts uniformly recommend mandatory reporting over clergy self-regulation
The internal discipline system has no evidentiary standards, no victim advocacy, and no transparency

Why this matters for your case

These structural mechanisms form the basis of institutional liability claims against the Church. Plaintiffs allege that the Church's structure was not merely negligent but constituted a deliberate system designed to protect the institution at the expense of children. The combination of untrained clergy, attorney-controlled help line, internal discipline, and mandatory reporting exemptions creates what attorneys describe as a "pipeline of concealment" that enabled serial abusers to operate for years or decades.

Injured? Get a free LDS Church Abuse case review.

Check your eligibilityFree · 2 minutes · No obligation

Policy changes track the litigation. On June 20, 2018, the First Presidency revised youth-interview guidelines after sustained pressure over one-on-one “worthiness interviews”: a parent or another adult must now be in an adjoining room, and youth may request a second adult present. Beginning May 2025, church leaders were directed to screen adults against public sex-offender databases before placing them in roles supervising children, per church guidance reported in litigation coverage. Plaintiffs cite both changes as institutional acknowledgments of known risk.

Mormon-corridor deadlines differ sharply: Utah bars revival of lapsed institutional claims (Mitchell v. Roberts, 2020 UT 34) but has no statute of limitations against perpetrators for abuse on or after January 1, 2024; Idaho generally requires suit by age 23 or within five years of discovery; Arizona’s permanent revival reaches to age 30; Nevada allows institutional claims to age 38 — the basis of a February 2026 filing over abuse reported to a bishop in the 1990s. Administrative steps and Doe-filing motions have their own timing, which is why an early confidential review matters even for old claims.

Exposure profiles

LDS Institutional Abuse Exposure Risk Profiles

The risk of sexual abuse within LDS Church contexts varies based on the institutional setting, the position of the abuser, and the vulnerability of the victim. These profiles describe the common exposure contexts in LDS abuse litigation.

Bishop/Branch President Interview Abuse (High Risk)

High risk

One-on-One Interview with Ecclesiastical Authority

Common tasks

Sexually explicit worthiness interviews behind closed doors with children as young as 8
Probing questions about sexual behavior, masturbation, and "moral purity"
Physical contact during blessings or counseling sessions
Grooming through position of spiritual authority and confidentiality expectations

Key statBishop interviews are the most common context for reported LDS abuse. The "Protect LDS Children" movement collected over 3,000 accounts of harmful interview experiences. Multiple lawsuits allege that the one-on-one interview setting creates inherent risk.

Youth Activity and Scouting Abuse (High Risk)

High risk

Youth Programs, Camps, and Scouting Activities

Common tasks

Overnight camping trips with adult male leaders and youth
Youth activities with inadequate adult supervision ratios
Private counseling or mentoring relationships between leaders and youth
BSA/LDS-sponsored Scout troops where leaders had unsupervised access

Key statThe LDS Church was the largest single charter organization for Boy Scout troops in the United States. The BSA bankruptcy revealed thousands of abuse claims connected to LDS-chartered troops. The Church contributed $250 million to the BSA settlement, which was rejected by a federal judge in 2024 as inadequate.

Mission Abuse (Moderate-High Risk)

Moderate risk

Full-Time Missionary Service

Common tasks

Abuse by mission presidents who have near-total authority over missionaries
Abuse by companions (paired missionaries) in isolated living arrangements
Exploitation of young adults (typically 18-21) who are far from family support systems
Cultural pressure to obey and not question Church authority

Key statMissionary abuse claims have increased significantly since 2020. The MTC (Missionary Training Center) in Provo, Utah has been the subject of multiple lawsuits alleging sexual abuse by instructors and other missionaries.

Seminary/Institute Abuse (Moderate Risk)

Moderate risk

Religious Education Settings

Common tasks

Daily seminary classes for high school students taught by adult Church members
Institute classes at college campuses with adult instructors
Private meetings between seminary teachers and students
Seminary travel activities and retreats

Key statSeminary and Institute abuse claims are less common than bishop or youth leader claims but represent a documented pattern of abuse in Church educational settings, particularly in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona where seminary is released-time during the school day.

Understanding exposure levels

High Vulnerability

Weekly one-on-one bishop interviews, overnight youth activities(Children in wards with bishops who conduct frequent private interviews and who participate in overnight youth activities face the highest institutional abuse risk.)

Moderate Vulnerability

Regular Church attendance, youth activity participation(Regular participation in Church youth programs creates sustained exposure to adult leaders in settings with limited oversight.)

Lower Vulnerability

Inactive or limited participation(Children with limited Church participation have lower institutional exposure but may still be at risk if they attend periodic activities or interviews.)

These risk profiles describe institutional patterns documented in litigation and investigative reporting. Every survivor's experience is unique. An attorney can evaluate your specific circumstances during a free, confidential consultation.

Settlement structure

LDS Church Abuse Lawsuit Settlement Tiers

LDS abuse settlement values depend on the type and duration of abuse, the age at which it occurred, the involvement of the help line in covering up the abuse, and the lasting harm to the survivor.

Tier I

Tier 1 — Single Incident, Limited Cover-Up Evidence

Significant

Settlement range

$200,000avg

$100,000 – $500,000

Criteria

Single incident or limited duration of abuse
Abuse by a leader or member in a Church context
Documented lasting harm (therapy records, mental health treatment)
Limited evidence of institutional knowledge or cover-up

Tier II

Tier 2 — Pattern Abuse or Documented Help Line Involvement

Severe

Settlement range

$800,000avg

$500,000 – $2,000,000

Criteria

Pattern of abuse over months or years
Evidence that help line was called and abuse was covered up
Multiple abuser contacts in Church context
Severe psychological harm (PTSD diagnosis, hospitalization)

Tier III

Tier 3 — Systemic Cover-Up with Catastrophic Harm

Catastrophic

Settlement range

$3,500,000avg

$2,000,000 – $10,000,000

Criteria

Clear documented evidence that Church knew about abuser and moved or protected him
Additional victims harmed after Church was informed
Abuse by a mission president or high-ranking leader
Catastrophic resulting harm (suicide attempts, complete life disruption)

LDS Church settlements are typically confidential. Ranges are estimates based on reported outcomes and comparable institutional abuse litigation. Actual values are case-specific.

Filing deadlines

LDS Church Abuse Lawsuit Filing Deadlines

States with significant LDS populations have widely varying statutes of limitations for childhood sexual abuse claims. Survivors should not assume it is too late to file — many states have enacted laws specifically to extend these deadlines.

Childhood Abuse SOL Extensions

Most states recognize that childhood sexual abuse survivors often do not come forward for years or decades. This has led to widespread SOL reform legislation. The psychological dynamics of abuse — shame, fear, religious community pressure, and the complex relationship between survivors and their Church community — further delay disclosure. Courts have recognized these realities in applying the discovery rule broadly to childhood abuse claims.

Real-World Examples

A 52-year-old California woman was sexually abused by her LDS bishop at age 12.

California AB 218 eliminated the SOL for childhood sexual abuse against private entities. She can file at any age. California is the most favorable jurisdiction for older claims.

A 35-year-old Utah man was abused by his Young Men leader at age 14.

Utah extends the SOL to age 35. He is at exactly the deadline and must consult an attorney immediately. Utah's SOL is significantly shorter than neighboring states.

A 42-year-old Idaho woman was abused during an LDS mission at age 20.

Idaho's SOL for adult sexual abuse may apply rather than the childhood abuse extensions. The analysis depends on whether she was legally an adult at the time and the specific circumstances. An attorney experienced in Idaho law is essential.

Bottom line

The Church has enormous resources to fight claims on procedural grounds. An experienced LDS abuse attorney will know which state's laws apply, whether lookback windows are available, and how to maximize your chances of a recovery.

Where you stand, by state

Civil Statute of Limitations Reform — All 50 States + DC

Deadlines limit lawsuits — not always direct resolution. Full analysis in our SOL reform tracker.

State-by-State Analysis

How Does Your State Protect Survivors?

Each state receives a grade based on its statute of limitations, discovery rules, revival windows, and institutional accountability provisions.

51 states & territories

Alabama

Age 21 (2 years after 19)

Can file: Unlikely

Weak

Alaska

No civil SOL for felony-level child sex abuse; lesser cla...

Yes

Can file: Likely

Strong

Arizona

Age 30

Closed

Limited

Can file: Unlikely

Average

Arkansas

No limit (prospective)

Closed Jan 31, 2026 (validity under Ark. Sup. Ct. review)

Yes

Can file: Possible

Average

California

No limit for abuse on/after 1/1/2024 (AB 452); otherwise age 40 or 5 yrs from discovery (CCP 340.1)

AB 218 childhood window closed 12/31/2022; AB 250 adult window open 1/1/2026-12/31/2027

Yes

Can file: Likely

Strong

Colorado

No limit for claims accruing 2022+

Closed

Yes

Can file: Likely

Strong

Connecticut

Until age 51 (30 years after majority at 21)

Yes

Can file: Likely

Strong

Delaware

No limit

Closed

Yes

Can file: Likely

Strong

District of Columbia

commonly referenced ≈ age 31 under recent reforms

Limited

Can file: Possible

Average

Iowa

Default 2-year PI limit tolled to majority → effectively ...

Can file: Unlikely

Weak

Kansas

Later of age 21 or 3 years from discovery

Yes

Can file: Possible

Weak

Generally 3 years after majority (age 21) → ~age 24

Limited

Can file: Unlikely

Weak

Missouri

31st birthday (18+13) vs perpetrator per statute; institu...

Limited

Can file: Possible

Weak

Montana

27th birthday (18+9) or 3 years from discovery (whichever...

Closed

Yes

Can file: Likely

Average

to age 28

35 years from abuse or 7 years from discovery (2026 law)

Open July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2028 (2-year revival; signed June 11, 2026)

Yes

Can file: Likely

Strong

South Carolina

Until age 27 or 3 years after discovery (later).

Yes

Can file: Likely

Average

South Dakota

3 years from act OR discovery against the perpetrator; VS...

Can file: Possible

Weak

Tennessee

30 years after majority (age 48) + 3 years from discovery...

Yes

Can file: Likely

Good

Texas

30 years after majority (age 48) for many claims accruing...

Limited

Can file: Likely

Good

Utah

CSA v. perpetrator: none (§78B-2-308); CSA v. non-perp indiv

Limited

Can file: Possible

Average

Vermont

None (no limit)

Open

Yes

Can file: Likely

Strong

Virginia

CSA (general): 20 years after accrual (minors’ accrual typic

Limited

Can file: Likely

Average

Washington

None for assaults on/after 6/6/2024; pre-2024: later of 3...

Yes

Can file: Likely

Strong

West Virginia

until age 36 (18+18) with 4-year discovery and an outer r...

Yes

Can file: Likely

Average

Wisconsin

Age 35 vs abuser and clergy/employer (§§ 893.587, 895.442...

Can file: Possible

Weak

Wyoming

Later of age 26 (18+8) or 3 years after discovery

Yes

Can file: Likely

Average

Injured? Get a free LDS Church Abuse case review.

Check your eligibilityFree · 2 minutes · No obligation

Internal documents

Internal Documents & Evidence

2022-08-04Associated Press investigative report

Associated Press Investigation: Help Line Records

From the record

AP investigation revealed specific cases where the Church's help line advised leaders not to report abuse to police, and abusers went on to harm additional children. Documents showed the help line's primary function was managing legal risk.

ImpactTriggered a wave of lawsuits and legislative action. Multiple states introduced bills to close clergy-penitent privilege loopholes.

2021-06-15Leaked documents (Truth & Transparency Foundation)

Leaked Internal Church Handbook Instructions

From the record

Internal Church handbook instructs leaders to call the help line "before contacting law enforcement" when they learn of abuse. The handbook prioritizes the legal process over immediate child protection.

ImpactDemonstrated that the help-line-first policy was institutional — not individual leaders acting independently.

2023-02-01Court filings

West Virginia Case — Adams Family

From the record

Court documents show a bishop called the help line after learning a Church member was sexually abusing his own daughters. The help line advised the bishop he was not required to report. The abuse continued for years.

ImpactBecame one of the most cited examples of the help line's failure to protect children and a centerpiece of the AP investigation.

Regulatory actions

State Attorney General Investigations and Legislative Actions Targeting Clergy Reporting Exemptions

Multiple state attorneys general have investigated the LDS Church's handling of sexual abuse reports, and state legislatures across the country are moving to eliminate or narrow the clergy-penitent privilege exemptions that have shielded the Church from mandatory reporting obligations.

Key takeaway

The combination of attorney general investigations, legislative reform efforts, and investigative journalism is eroding the legal and institutional protections that have shielded the LDS Church from accountability. While the Church continues to lobby for clergy privilege exemptions, the national trend is toward elimination of these loopholes, expanding both the legal exposure and the moral pressure on the institution.

Research & evidence

Scientific Evidence

cross-sectional

Institutional Betrayal and Clergy Sexual Abuse: Impact on Disclosure, Reporting, and Psychological Outcomes

Smith CP, Freyd JJ, Thomas MR (2023). Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Key findings

Survivors who experienced institutional betrayal (e.g., Church concealment of abuse, victim-blaming by leaders) had PTSD symptom severity scores 2.3x higher than survivors who did not experience institutional betrayal
Institutional betrayal was associated with a 67% reduction in likelihood of disclosing abuse to anyone outside the institution
Survivors of religious institutional abuse reported rates of complex PTSD nearly double those of survivors of non-institutional sexual abuse
The study identified "spiritual injury" as a distinct dimension of harm that predicted long-term psychological distress independent of PTSD symptoms
Institutional responses characterized by secrecy, victim-blaming, and protection of the abuser produced the worst survivor outcomes
These findings directly support the legal theory that institutional concealment of abuse constitutes a separate and additional harm to survivors beyond the abuse itself

cross-sectional

Religious Institutional Abuse: Long-Term Psychological Outcomes in Adult Survivors

Frawley-O'Dea MG, Goldner V (2022). Journal of Trauma and Dissociation

Key findings

Clergy abuse survivors showed elevated complex PTSD rates (78%) compared to other sexual abuse survivors (45%)
Spiritual abuse — the weaponization of religious authority — compounded psychological harm beyond the physical abuse itself
Survivors who received validation from religious community recovered significantly better than those who were silenced or disbelieved
Institutional cover-up added a distinct layer of betrayal trauma that required specialized treatment
Mean time from abuse to disclosure was 24 years — demonstrating why SOL extensions are necessary

cross-sectional

Mandated Reporter Compliance in Religious Institutions: A National Survey

Terry K, Smith ML, Schuth K (2018). Child Abuse & Neglect

Key findings

41% of surveyed religious leaders were unaware of their mandatory reporting obligations in their state
Religious leaders who received abuse reports through "internal channels" were 3x less likely to report to authorities
Leaders who consulted legal counsel before reporting were less likely to report than those who did not
The presence of an internal reporting hotline or helpline correlated with decreased external reporting rates
Authors recommended eliminating clergy-penitent privilege from mandatory reporting exemptions

From the docket

Litigation Timeline

12 ENTRIES

December 2019
Church Exits Boy Scouts of America
The church — the BSA’s largest chartering organization — ended its Scouting partnership effective December 31, 2019. Abuse claims tied to LDS-chartered troops later became a major component of the BSA bankruptcy, per bankruptcy court filings.
July 2020
Mitchell v. Roberts Closes Utah Revival
The Utah Supreme Court (2020 UT 34) held the legislature cannot retroactively revive lapsed civil abuse claims — defendants hold a vested right in an expired limitations defense. The ruling still defines Utah institutional claims today.
August 2022
BSA Judge Rejects $250M Non-Scouting Release
The bankruptcy court rejected the church’s proposed $250 million contribution because it sought to release non-Scouting abuse claims; survivors of abuse in LDS troops retained the right to pursue the church directly, per the court’s ruling.
August 2022
AP Publishes the Bisbee Helpline Investigation
The Associated Press documented how the church’s abuse helpline routed the Paul Adams case to attorneys rather than authorities, and abuse continued for years. The investigation made the Kirton McConkie helpline the center of cover-up litigation.
November 2023
Arizona Court Dismisses Adams Suit on Clergy Privilege
A Cochise County judge granted summary judgment to church officials, holding Arizona’s clergy-penitent privilege exempted bishops from mandatory reporting. Plaintiffs appealed.
January 2024
Utah Ends SOL Against Perpetrators (Prospective)
Utah Code § 78B-2-308 eliminated the civil statute of limitations against perpetrators for child sexual abuse occurring on or after January 1, 2024. Institutional revival remains barred by Mitchell.
March 2025
Floodlit Reveals Sealed $32M Jensen Settlement
The investigative database Floodlit revealed the church paid $32 million in 2018 to settle the Michael Jensen case in West Virginia — sealed for seven years. Court records later showed about $27 million more in defense fees.
April 2025
100+ Claim Mediated Settlement in Principle
A mediated settlement in principle covered 100 or more claims across six states — described in court filings as the largest coordinated settlement in church history. Terms remain confidential.
April 2025
Federal MDL Denied; California JCCP Consolidates 91 Cases
The U.S. Judicial Panel denied multidistrict consolidation; about 91 California cases across 26 counties proceed before the state Complex Litigation Panel in Los Angeles, per court orders.
April 2025
Church Loses Insurance Suit Over Abuse Settlements
A federal court rejected the church’s attempt to recover abuse-settlement costs from its insurers, per the court’s ruling reported by Floodlit and Bishop Accountability.
May 2025
Sex-Offender Screening Directive
Church guidance directed leaders to check public sex-offender databases before placing adults in supervisory roles over children — a policy change plaintiffs cite as acknowledgment of known risk.
February 2026
Nevada Age-38 Institutional Filing
A Nevada suit was filed under the state’s age-38 institutional statute over abuse in the 1990s allegedly reported to a bishop and not acted on — an example of corridor states with live institutional paths, per the court docket.

Injured? Get a free LDS Church Abuse case review.

Check your eligibilityFree · 2 minutes · No obligation

Medical condition

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Complex Trauma from Institutional Sexual Abuse

Medical definition

Serious comorbidity

Chronic or episodic suicidal thoughts. Self-harm behaviors including cutting, burning, or other self-injury. Suicide attempts. Studies show institutional abuse survivors have suicide attempt rates 3-5x higher than the general population.

Risk Factors

Abuse by a trusted religious authority figure (bishop, youth leader, mission president)
Abuse occurring during childhood or adolescence when brain development is ongoing
Prolonged or repeated abuse over months or years
Church culture of obedience and deference to authority that prevented the child from resisting or disclosing
Shaming or victim-blaming response from Church leaders when abuse was disclosed
Use of the help line to suppress reporting, extending the duration of abuse
Loss of religious community and family relationships when the survivor leaves the Church
Absence of professional trauma treatment (many LDS communities rely on Church-affiliated counseling rather than secular trauma therapy)

Diagnosis Process

01Clinical interview with trauma-specialized mental health professional
02Administration of validated trauma assessment instruments (PCL-5, CAPS-5, ITQ for C-PTSD)
03Assessment of spiritual injury and religious trauma using emerging measurement tools
04Evaluation of comorbid conditions (depression, substance use, suicidality)
05Review of functional impairment across life domains (work, relationships, daily functioning)
06Establishment of causal connection between the institutional abuse and current symptoms

Treatment Options

Prognosis

Complex PTSD from institutional sexual abuse is a chronic condition that can be managed but rarely fully resolves without sustained professional treatment. Evidence-based trauma therapies (EMDR, CPT, prolonged exposure) produce significant symptom reduction in 60-80% of patients. However, the spiritual injury component — destruction of faith, community, and meaning — may persist indefinitely and constitutes a distinct category of compensable harm in litigation. Early intervention dramatically improves outcomes, but many LDS abuse survivors do not seek treatment until decades after the abuse due to Church-related shame, secrecy, and suppression of the abuse.

Support Resources

FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

18 QUESTIONS

The help line is a phone number that LDS bishops and other leaders are instructed to call when they learn of abuse. While publicly described as a resource for protecting children, lawsuits and investigative reporting reveal it is staffed by attorneys at Kirton McConkie (the Church's law firm) whose primary concern is the Church's legal exposure. In multiple documented cases, leaders were advised not to report abuse to police.

A statute of limitations is a defense against lawsuits — it does not prevent an institution from resolving a claim brought to it directly. LDS claims have been resolved confidentially even where suit would have been time-barred (the $32 million West Virginia settlement stayed sealed from 2018 until Floodlit revealed it from court records in 2025), particularly where the survivor clearly identifies the person responsible. A confidential review settles the deadline question for your specific facts; no outcome is ever guaranteed.

The clergy-penitent privilege varies by state. Some states exempt clergy from mandatory reporting requirements when they learn of abuse through religious confession. However, many lawsuits argue that the privilege does not apply when: (1) the information came outside of formal confession, (2) the leader had independent knowledge of abuse, or (3) the privilege was used as a shield to conceal ongoing harm to children.

The LDS Church help line is a toll-free number that bishops and other Church leaders are instructed to call when they learn of abuse allegations. The help line is staffed by attorneys at Kirton McConkie, the Church's primary outside law firm. Publicly, the Church describes the help line as a resource for protecting children. However, the Associated Press's 2022 investigation and multiple lawsuits have documented cases where the help line advised bishops not to report abuse to police, even when state mandatory reporting laws required it. The help line's legal significance is enormous: it demonstrates that the Church had knowledge of specific abuse allegations, that it chose to filter those allegations through its legal department rather than law enforcement, and that the advice given prioritized the Church's legal exposure over children's safety. In litigation, help line call records (obtained through discovery) are among the most powerful evidence of institutional knowledge and concealment.

You can sue the Church institution directly. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints operates through legal entities including the Corporation of the President of the Church and the Corporation of the Presiding Bishopric, both incorporated in Utah. These entities can be named as defendants in civil lawsuits. The institutional claims against the Church are separate from and in addition to any claims against the individual abuser. Institutional claims include negligent supervision (the Church failed to adequately supervise leaders with access to children), negligent hiring/retention (the Church placed or retained an abuser in a position of trust despite knowledge of prior misconduct), failure to report (the Church failed to report known abuse to law enforcement), breach of fiduciary duty (the Church breached its duty of care to members who trusted it with their children), and fraudulent concealment (the Church actively concealed known abuse from families and law enforcement). The Church has over $100 billion in assets and the financial capacity to pay meaningful compensation.

Yes. The institutional claims against the Church are entirely separate from any claims against the individual abuser. The Church's liability is based on what the institution knew, what it failed to do, and how its policies and practices enabled or concealed the abuse. Even if the individual abuser has died, the Church remains a viable defendant for its own institutional failures — failure to screen leaders, failure to report abuse, failure to remove known abusers from positions of trust, operation of the help line as a concealment mechanism, and lobbying to maintain mandatory reporting exemptions. In fact, many of the strongest LDS abuse cases involve abusers who are deceased but whose pattern of abuse was known to Church leadership for years or decades before the abuser died.

Lookback windows are temporary periods during which state legislatures suspend the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse claims, allowing survivors who would otherwise be time-barred to file civil lawsuits regardless of when the abuse occurred. Several states have enacted lookback windows that are particularly significant for LDS abuse survivors: California eliminated the SOL entirely under AB 218. New York's Child Victims Act allows claims until age 55. Texas eliminated the SOL for childhood sexual abuse effective September 2025. Nevada eliminated the SOL in 2021. Multiple other states have extended or eliminated their limitations periods. For LDS abuse survivors, lookback windows are critical because the Church's culture of secrecy and the psychological dynamics of religious abuse often prevent survivors from coming forward for decades. The specific window dates and provisions vary by state, so consulting an attorney who can analyze your claim under your state's current law is essential.

Yes, in virtually all cases. Courts routinely allow survivors of sexual abuse to file lawsuits under pseudonyms — using "Jane Doe" or "John Doe" instead of their real names. This protection is nearly automatic in cases involving childhood sexual abuse. Your identity can remain confidential throughout the litigation, including in all court filings, depositions, and trial proceedings. Many LDS abuse cases settle with confidentiality provisions that further protect the survivor's identity. The only people who will know your identity are your attorney and, during the litigation, the opposing counsel and the court — all of whom are bound by protective orders. Your ward members, family, employer, and community need not know that you have filed a lawsuit. For many LDS abuse survivors, anonymity protection is essential because they fear social consequences within their LDS community or from Church-member family members.

Dive deeper

In-Depth Guides

10 GUIDES

Deadlines & venues

Deadlines & Venues by State

47 STATES

Keep reading

Explore This Litigation

LDS Church Abuse Lawsuit TrackerFollow the litigation timeline, recent verdicts, and case status as it develops.LIVE TRACKER

LDS Church Abuse lawsuits by state

Stay informed

Get free updates on the LDS Church Abuse litigation as it develops

No phone call required. We will email you when there is meaningful news — new filings, settlements, or important deadlines.

Sources & References

AP Investigation: The Church's Secret Abuse Help Line — Associated Press
MormonLeaks: Leaked Help Line Documents — MormonLeaks / Truth & Transparency Foundation
State Attorney General Investigations of Institutional Abuse — Various State AG Offices