Why Survivors Come Forward Decades Later

Waiting is the rule, not the exception

Children who are abused rarely tell anyone at the time. Shame, fear, confusion, loyalty to a trusted adult or institution, and the simple wish to not relive it can keep a person silent for a very long time. Many survivors do not connect what happened to its effect on their lives until well into adulthood.

Rhode Island’s own record reflects this. The Attorney General documented abuse spanning from 1950 onward, and noted how much time passed before survivors were able to come forward — by its count, at least 21 of the accused priests had died before any complaint was ever made against them (per RI AG Report, p.60). Citing national research, the report found that the majority of survivors who disclose wait decades to do so, and that more than 70% do not disclose within five years — delayed disclosure is the norm, not the exception (per RI AG Report, p.60). The lateness you may feel is, in fact, the ordinary shape of these cases.

What the numbers show

The Attorney General’s investigation put figures on what survivors already know. Based on documentation produced by the Diocese itself, the report found that “it took survivors an average of approximately 26 years to report their abuse” to the Diocese (per RI AG Report, p.59). Twenty-six years is not an outlier’s number — it is the average. Most of the abuse documented in the report occurred in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, and the report itself observes: “The established fact that survivors of child sexual abuse often delay reporting their abuse for many years may partly explain the relatively fewer instances of reported clergy abuse in more recent decades” (per RI AG Report, p.67).

National research cited in the report points the same way: approximately 1 in 5 people who experienced childhood sexual abuse never disclose it to anyone, most are only able to acknowledge and describe the abuse in adulthood, and an estimated 10–15% of child sexual abuse is ever reported to legal authorities (per RI AG Report, p.60). If you have carried this for 30, 40, or 50 years, you are not late by the measure of anyone who has studied this — you are the documented norm.

Grooming: how trust was built, then used

Part of why disclosure takes decades is how the abuse began. The report defines “grooming” as the process by which those who commit child sexual abuse develop a relationship with a child “to prepare a victim for sexual abuse by gaining their trust and gradually lowering their resistance to sexual engagement” (per RI AG Report, p.67, quoting the child-protection research organization CHILD USA). Diocesan records were, in the report’s words, “replete” with accounts of this pattern: spending large amounts of time with a child; showering the child with money, gifts, or focused attention; taking the child out to dinner, on outings, or on overnight trips (per RI AG Report, p.67).

None of that looks like danger while it is happening — to the child, or to the adults nearby. It is designed not to. A child who was made to feel chosen, special, or cared for may need many years to name what happened as abuse at all, and the confusion that delays that naming is an effect of the grooming itself, not a weakness in the person who lived through it.

When the trusted institution is part of the story

Clergy held a singular place in Rhode Island parish life, and the report found that this standing deepened both access and silence. Parish children who served as altar servers often spent time alone with their priests, and the report found that priests who committed abuse “took advantage of the trust victims’ families placed in them” (per RI AG Report, p.59). Some children stayed silent out of fear that they “would not be believed or even chastised for saying anything negative about a priest and the institution they had been taught to revere, obey, and love” (per RI AG Report, p.61).

A Rhode Island survivor put it plainly in a 1995 op-ed quoted in the report: “Since a priest represented God on Earth, these children would innocently believe anything they were told, having no prior warning of danger” (per RI AG Report, p.61). Survivors described guilt, embarrassment, shame, anger, confusion, and fear of not being believed — feelings the report notes were compounded because the person involved was a trusted authority figure (per RI AG Report, p.60). When the institution behind that figure was also the center of your family’s world, telling the truth about it can feel like breaking something your family built. That weight is real — and it was placed there by someone else.

Why the law now makes room for it

For a long time, the law did not account for how abuse actually surfaces. By the time many survivors were ready, the deadline to bring a claim had already passed. Rhode Island’s revival window exists to correct that — a temporary period, from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028, during which certain previously time-barred claims may be brought. It is the law catching up to the reality of delayed disclosure.

How delayed disclosure shaped the revival window

The connection between waiting and the law is direct — Rhode Island’s Attorney General drew it in the report’s final chapter. Until 2019, Rhode Island’s civil statute of limitations for child sexual abuse claims was just seven years; before that, it was three (per RI AG Report, p.269). Set those deadlines against an average disclosure delay of roughly 26 years and the arithmetic explains itself: the law’s clock ran out long before most survivors could speak. In 2019, the General Assembly extended the period to 35 years after a survivor turns 18 — until age 53 — or seven years from discovery of the injury. That legislation is known as “Annie’s Law,” named for Rhode Island clergy abuse survivor and advocate Dr. Ann Hagan Webb (per RI AG Report, p.269).

But a gap remained. The Rhode Island Supreme Court held that the 2019 law did not revive already-expired claims against “non-perpetrator” institutional defendants — and as the report put it, the limitations period for claims against the Diocese and its leaders had “expired decades before the average victim told anyone they were abused” (per RI AG Report, p.270). The Attorney General therefore recommended that the General Assembly amend Annie’s Law “to clarify that it revives previously expired claims against institutional defendants, in addition to reviving those claims against individuals” (per RI AG Report, p.271).

The revival window that opened July 1, 2026 is the legislature’s response to precisely the reality described on this page: disclosure that arrives decades late, measured against deadlines written for a different understanding of abuse. The window exists because waiting decades is normal. If you waited, it was written with you in mind — and it closes June 30, 2028.

There is no pressure here

Coming forward is a deeply personal decision, and only you can make it. Learning your options is not the same as committing to anything. If and when you are ready, you can find out who can file and how the deadlines work — on your own timeline, with no cost to simply ask.

If you are seeking support

If you are a survivor seeking support, the Rhode Island Attorney General’s office maintains a resources page for survivors of clergy abuse, at riag.ri.gov/diocese-report/resources.

If you are reading this on behalf of someone you love, our guide for family members supporting a survivor covers how to help without pressure.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why do abuse survivors often wait so long to come forward? Delayed disclosure is the norm, not a weakness in a claim. Shame, fear, and the difficulty of revisiting trauma keep many survivors silent for years or decades, and many do not connect the abuse to its effects until adulthood. Rhode Island’s revival window was created with this reality in mind.

Is it too late if the abuse happened decades ago? Not necessarily. Rhode Island’s revival window temporarily reopens certain previously time-barred childhood sexual abuse claims between July 1, 2026 and June 30, 2028. Whether it applies to your situation is fact-specific and worth asking a Rhode Island attorney.

How long do most survivors wait before telling anyone? Often decades. The Rhode Island Attorney General’s report found it took survivors an average of approximately 26 years to report their abuse to the Diocese, and national research cited in the report indicates most people are only able to acknowledge and describe childhood sexual abuse in adulthood. Roughly 1 in 5 never disclose it at all.

Does it hurt my claim that I never reported the abuse to the police or the Diocese? Not by itself. Research cited in the Attorney General’s report estimates that only 10–15% of child sexual abuse is ever reported to legal authorities, and Rhode Island’s revival window exists precisely because most claims surface late. Diocesan files and assignment histories often corroborate more than survivors expect.

Was it my fault for trusting the person, or for keeping the secret? No. Grooming is designed to create trust, confusion, and silence, and the Attorney General’s report documents how those tactics worked on children and families across Rhode Island. The silence that followed is a recognized effect of the abuse — not a failing of the person who lived through it.

Related on this site: suing when the priest has died, whether you have a case, whether a lawsuit is confidential, and the filing deadline.

About This Information

About this information: This page is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Whether any individual has a claim depends on the specific facts and must be evaluated by a licensed Rhode Island attorney.

About the Attorney General’s report: The findings of the Rhode Island Attorney General’s 2026 report are the results of an investigation, not determinations of civil or criminal liability by a court. “Credibly accused” is the Attorney General’s investigative standard; it is not a criminal conviction. Individuals who have been charged are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

About the law’s status: Rhode Island’s revival-window law (effective July 1, 2026) is new. As of the date of publication, no court has ruled on whether the revival of previously time-barred claims against institutions is constitutional. We make no representation about how any court will rule.

Updated July 2026.