So then why are we suggesting the abandoning of monasticism entirely? We can just posit that entrance to monastic institutions should be in the later teen years. Why this knee-jerk reaction "get rid of the monks". Instead, the call should be to protect the children. This simply requires raising the age of entrance ,not making monasteries orphanages, and putting in place child protection structures that are used in schools etc.
I really try to be a good monk and I still see an important role for the sangha. Instead of speaking of disgarding a cherished institution that is still of spiritual benefit, why not speak of transforming it? As the monasteries come under the eye of the broader world, in this modern age, scrutiny will lead to increased security for the children as well.
Celibacy not not transform every healthy male into a lecherous pervert. For many, it is a really beneficial companion on the spiritual path. I resent the implication that I and all other monks "should not be around children". We are not all guilty because of the sins of some! Clearly the solution is that children should be safeguarded, as they are in modern daycares etc. And orphan children should be raised in home like environments rather than monastic ones.
Malcolm you speak of Tibetans talking about incidences of abuse at the monasteries, but I have heard a number of similar stories from former students at the TCVs, where the minders are not monks but laypeople. Clearly,the perverse are led to environments with a large number of children. Celibacy is not the central issue here.
If we talk of getting rid of the sangha because of this we should also get rid of boyscouts, Big Brother and stepfathers- all of which have many members who have committed terrible acts of a sexual nature on children.
A foolish man proclaims his qualifications,
A wise man keeps them secret within.
A straw floats on the surface of water,
But a precious gem placed upon it sinks to the depths