This is so wrong on so many levels.
1) It is terrible that this girl blames herself and feels that SHE is one who "sinned" when it was HER UNNAMED DAD who raped her.
2) It is despicable that a rapist daddy was granted weekend visitation or any access so that he could commit these crimes.
3) It is horrifying that this girl privileges her brother's access to a father over her own safety and well-being. This is classic male supremacist ideology/brainwashing at it's finest: that a boy's "needs" are greater than a girl's, and that fathers are some kind of god that every kid requires. Even rapist daddies.
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/09/16/girl-kept-rapes-secret-to-protect-brother
Girl kept rapes secret to protect brother 13
KEVIN MARTIN, QMI Agency
First posted: Friday, September 16, 2011 01:11 AM EDT
CALGARY - Repeatedly raping his daughter - a crime kept secret because the girl didn't want her little brother to lose his dad - has landed a Calgary man a six-year prison term.
Justice Peter Clark accepted a joint Crown and defence submission Thursday which spared the victim having to testify against her father.
Prosecutor Martha O'Connor said had the offender forced the girl to give evidence she would have sought an even harsher sentence.
The father, 35, pleaded guilty last Oct. 25 to incest for sexually abusing his daughter from the time she was seven or eight, until she disclosed it when she was 11.
O'Connor said the child only told her mother and stepfather what was happening during her weekend visits to her dad's Calgary home when confronted.
The girl was asked to write a note to her grandfather explaining her increasingly bad behaviour, O'Connor said.
In it the victim said "I no longer respect myself, or my body," and "I have sinned over and over again," the prosecutor said.
When asked what she meant, she disclosed the abuse and said she had kept it secret to prevent punishing her brother.
"She did not want to deprive her little brother ... of his father," O'Connor said.
Defence lawyer Richard Haynes agreed a six-year prison term was appropriate, but argued the dad should be given more than the now legislated one-for-one credit for remand time.
Haynes said since the offences occurred before changes in the Criminal Code his client was entitled to the usual two-for-one credit commonplace at the time.
But Clark said because of the effect of the crime on the victim -- including fears of pregnancy and the risk of sexually transmitted diseases -- he only reduced the offender's punishment by the amount of time he's been behind bars since his guilty plea.
Before sentencing, the dad, whom O'Connor said minimized his responsibility in psychiatric reports, apologized for his conduct.
"I'm looking forward to going to Bowden (Institution) and getting some help," he said.