President George W. Bush has highlighted tort reform as one of his second-term goals.

Such reform is supposed to bring down the high cost of medical malpractice insurance and protect small businesses from “frivolous lawsuits.”

Tort reform is not motivated by the sexual-abuse lawsuits against Catholic dioceses — they are about as far from “frivolous” as one could imagine. Yet recent settlements illustrate the flaws in a system that badly needs fixing.

In early January, the bishop of the Diocese of Orange — which serves the sprawling, prosperous cities south of Los Angeles — held a prayer service to mark the settlement of priestly sexual-abuse cases. At $100 million, it was the largest such settlement.

It was exactly three years ago that the sexual-abuse scandal broke. Since then, the Catholic bishops of the United States have adopted a severe zero-tolerance policy — one accusation, no matter how old, means the end of priestly service. They have adopted reporting mechanisms so accessible that it is now easier to find the sexual-abuse hotline on most diocesan websites than it is to find Mass times.

Extensive, independent reports have been commissioned and published, and screening programs are now being implemented for even lay volunteers. By all accounts, much progress has been made. But the issue of settlements remains a mess with no end in sight.

Sexual abuse of minors is a crime. Yet very little sexual abuse is ever prosecuted, usually because the victim does not wish to press charges against someone in the family circle: the father, mother’s boyfriend, uncle, etc.

Often, the statute of limitations has long expired by the time a victim has recovered from the trauma sufficiently to be able to press charges. And it is frequently the case that there is simply not enough evidence to ensure a beyond-a-reasonable-doubt conviction.

As a result, many victims of sexual abuse turn to civil suits to recover some damages. Most say that it is the recognition that a legal proceeding provides, not the money, that motivates them. Nevertheless, it is the prospect of significant damages that makes the cases attractive to lawyers, whose share of the Orange settlement was estimated at up to $40 million. (In Canada, where contingency fees for lawyers are forbidden in all but one province, sexual-abuse lawsuits are less frequent and less costly.)

That puts Catholic dioceses in a tough spot. Facing dozens of claims (there were 90 in Orange) stretching back over decades, the bishop can choose to litigate them. In that case, whoever is first in line and proves his case can expect a big judgment. The others will have to wait their turn for years and hope there is money left if they prove their claim.

In general, dioceses are reluctant to force victims to trial, which for many can be a renewed source of suffering as they revisit the abuse. Instead, most dioceses accept the abuse claim as true if not an obvious fabrication.

The Orange option is simply to figure out how much the diocese and its insurers can afford, call in all the victims, divvy it up and sign a global settlement. Orange, a rich diocese in the Los Angeles suburbs, had investment income on hand and insurers willing to pony up an estimated $50 million toward the settlement, which worked out to an average of $1.1 million per claimant. Still, it is a heavy blow to the diocese.

Most other dioceses are simply not able to accept the blow. In Boston, where there were six times as many claims (552), the diocese negotiated a global settlement of $85 million, financed by insurance and property sales. Why the discrepancy between Orange and Boston? The tort system provides the answer.

The damages a victim gets depends not so much on the injustice suffered but on the wealth of the one being sued.

The typical Catholic diocese, though, is not wealthy. While the Church may own properties, few, if any, are sellable without closing down the school, parish or hospital that sits on them. Larger dioceses are typically stretched thin as they attempt to operate a network of schools, hospitals and immigration and social services for those who cannot afford to pay for them.

There simply are not big piles of cash around.

The result is that three Catholic dioceses have already filed for bankruptcy in the face of claims totaling in the hundreds of millions. While it places temporary authority over Church assets in the hands of a trustee, the bankruptcy option essentially asks an independent observer to figure out how much a diocese can afford.

In almost all cases, that figure will be much lower than the early settlements in Boston and Orange.

Archbishop Sean O’Malley of Boston has called the settlement money the “rightful indemnification” of those who have been terribly hurt. Perhaps, but the emerging patchwork of settlements across the United States means that indemnification will depend not so much on what is “rightful” but simply how much money is available.

It will hardly be equitable. The tort system is indeed broken and needs fixing.

Father Raymond J. de Souza writes

from Kingston, Ontario.