Sick with Fear: Clergy, Safeguarding, and the Weight of Discipline

After I left diocesan safeguarding work, a priest said to me:

“I used to feel sick whenever you rang me in your role as DSA. Not because I had done anything wrong — but because I knew one call could change everything.”

Hearing his words was painful — the very opposite of why I ever pursued a career in safeguarding. My calling has always been about care and the pursuit of safer spaces, never about creating dread at the sound of a phone call.

His testimony illustrates a recurring theme around clergy wellbeing: safeguarding and discipline processes are frequently experienced as threatening rather than reassuring.

For many, church safeguarding and the Clergy Discipline Measure (CDM) no longer represent safety or accountability. They represent dread. A call from diocesan safeguarding is not heard as a supportive check-in, but as the start of a nightmare. Some clergy have spoken of sleepless nights, chest pains, and a lingering sense that they are walking on eggshells.

The fear is rarely about guilt. It is about vulnerability: the knowledge that a complaint — vexatious or genuine — can trigger a process that feels dehumanising. Institutions may prioritise reputational management over pastoral care; leaving clergy damaged and alone.

Clergy under investigation often feel — and, in my experience of diocesan safeguarding, too often are — presumed guilty. Cut off from support, they can be left in limbo for months. Even when cleared, the stigma lingers. Whispers persist, careers stall, reputations are bruised. The wounds seep on, staining trust and sapping the confidence of both clergy and their communities.

The weaponisation of safeguarding makes this worse. Safeguarding and the CDM can be exploited as tools of control — silencing whistleblowers, discrediting inconvenient clergy, or removing those who challenge the status quo. Survivors of abuse can still be dismissed, while those who raise concerns are labelled “unsafe.” In this twisted dynamic, safeguarding loses its heart.

The cost is human. Clergy withdraw from pastoral

closeness, terrified of being misunderstood. They avoid risk, retreat into caution, and carry silent burdens. Ministry becomes shaped not by love, but by fear.

Reform is now in progress. The new Clergy Conduct Measure (CCM), welcomed by General Synod in 2025, promises proportionate responses and clearer outcomes. But without cultural transformation, reforms will fail, clergy need real pastoral care during investigations, transparent and timely processes, and a safeguarding culture that protects them as much as it scrutinises.

No one should feel physically ill when the phone rings. Safeguarding should give life, not take it away.

-Guarding the Flock