Our Gemara on Amud Aleph addresses the exemption of a minor from capital punishment, even when they are the offender in an adultery case. Tosafos pose the question of why there should even be a debate, since minors are generally exempt from punishments. Tosafos in Arakhin (3a, "Limutei") suggest another line of thought, contemplating whether even a minor should be executed due to "Kalon," which can be translated as "disgrace." What precedent do Tosafos reference? In a case where a person engages in sexual relations with an animal, the animal is put to death due to Kalon (see Sanhedrin 55b). Although this initial comparison might seem startling or offensive, a different perspective will shed light on it soon. For now, it's sufficient to mention that the law mandates destroying the animal to erase any lingering disgraceful memory of the act. Consequently, there's at least a notion that the Torah might also prescribe execution for a minor who commits adultery. In the end, however, the ruling does not align with this idea.

Yet, there's a lesson about human dignity that emerges from this Rabbinic contemplation and ethical analysis. The effort to prevent any further reminders of a disgraceful sexual act is so potent that just as an animal subjected to sexual perversion is put to death, so too, there might be an inclination to consider the same fate for a minor.

This notion brings to mind the intricate and challenging situations that families of survivors of sexual abuse often face. When the perpetrator is a close relative, the inclination to mend relationships can be strong. Indeed, there are cases where young, impulsive, or misguided perpetrators or other genuine mitigating circumstances emerge, making it possible to assert that the family member who committed the act no longer poses a threat. This is reasonable and could provide comfort by allowing family reunions, participation in weddings, and shared Yamim Tovim. However, utmost sensitivity must be exercised to genuinely respect the victim. Some victims might never regain comfort in the presence of the perpetrator, even if the latter has taken appropriate steps to make amends. Family members might pressure or manipulate the victim into "moving on." I've even come across situations where the victim was forced to leave their own home instead of the perpetrator. This is an unjust and unkind expectation, and we recognize a strong Torah ethic that comprehends how reminders of sexual transgressions can be tremendously disruptive. While there might be instances where the minor offender is innocent in certain respects due to their age, this does not absolve the family or the minor from showing due consideration or empathy toward the victim.