Abuse Prevention Training Required to Work with Youth

[Anonymous]

Minyan Man wrote:

Old Timer wrote:

I am aware fully that this isn’t the end result I desire, but I also applaud what has been done – primarily for a couple of reasons:

1) The counsel clearly says members should report abuse to the proper non-church authorities. To me, that simple statement is huge – and needed badly. There used to be an “out” for members not to report abuse; there is no such excuse now.

I hope that this is communicated to the general membership. This is the first time I’ve heard it. I can imagine that there are some leaders

that would prefer that they were the first contact & they made the decision to contact non-church authorities (or not).

Thanks Curt for the clarification.

Almost every calling is on the list of people who need to take the training and who does complete the training is tracked (bishops/SPs are supposed to ensure everyone on the list gets it). It is very new (late last week) so I’m sure word hasn’t totally gotten out yet but the deadline for completing the training in Sept. 22 – so units shouldn’t be dragging their feet.

The list of people who need to take the training:

Stake presidencies

Bishoprics/branch presidencies

High councilors

Presidencies in stake and ward/branch Primary, YM, YW, SS, RS, EQ

All secretaries, teachers, advisors, camp leaders, activity day leaders, seminary teachers, music leaders, pianists and anyone else who serves in any capacity in Primary, YM, YW, and youth SS. Newly called people are to complete the training within a month.

I agree that there are likely some leaders who would prefer to not have members reporting abuse on their neighbors. Laws vary by state. In my state it is actually illegal for someone not to report child or elder abuse (sexual/physical) that they are aware of and all medical and education personnel are mandated reporters (meaning we lose our license if we fail to report). In my state even the suspicion of abuse is reportable (especially by mandated reporters).

[Anonymous]

Old Timer wrote:

The counsel clearly says members should report abuse to the proper non-church authorities. To me, that simple statement is huge – and needed badly. There used to be an “out” for members not to report abuse; there is no such excuse now.

I agree, this is huge and is a long needed clarification/instruction. I just wish they hammered it as much as they did two deep leadership (although I do think two deep leadership needed to be hammered based on observations in my own ward and stake). One slide said to report abuse to authorities. Several addressed two-deep leadership. In my state training reporting is hammered as well as not being in alone situations.

[Anonymous]

Hey everyone, this is my first post but I have been lurking for a few weeks now.

On Sunday before the sacrament the Bishop announced the new training over the pulpit. He said that he wants ever ward member to take the training even if they are not in a calling that works with the youth. I thought that was great that he did that and I think all members should take this training.

My wife was sexually abused when she was 7 and it was never properly reported to the authorities. This is one reason that she has left the Church and sent me into a FC.

I see this training as a step in the right direction but the Church is still lacking in some areas around abuse.

[Anonymous]

dkd22 wrote:

Hey everyone, this is my first post but I have been lurking for a few weeks now.

On Sunday before the sacrament the Bishop announced the new training over the pulpit. He said that he wants ever ward member to take the training even if they are not in a calling that works with the youth. I thought that was great that he did that and I think all members should take this training.

My wife was sexually abused when she was 7 and it was never properly reported to the authorities. This is one reason that she has left the Church and sent me into a FC.

I see this training as a step in the right direction but the Church is still lacking in some areas around abuse.

I think were I bishop I might do the same. I agree, there’s no reason everybody shouldn’t/couldn’t spend the 15-30 minutes. Almost everybody is on the list anyway, and if you aren’t you likely will be in the next 1-3 years (unless you’re inactive, refusing callings or are under church discipline).

That brings up a question that I didn’t think to ask in stake council last night. Not everyone has a church account. And not everyone in my ward even has access to the internet at home or in some cases are totally tech illiterate, technophobic, or choose to be disconnected. I wonder how they will be accommodated and how they will be tracked? (If you don’t know, when you click to begin training you have to sign in with your church account and that’s how compliance tracked.)

[Anonymous]

I suspect that will be handled in one of two ways:

1) I’d be surprised if this training isn’t given on a 5th Sunday. There’s one coming up in September. It’s low hanging fruit for a BP struggling with a topic to cover.

2) With the 2 hour block the people that aren’t teaching that Sunday can take the training during the 2nd hour.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

…Almost everybody is on the list anyway, and if you aren’t you likely will be in the next 1-3 years (unless you’re inactive, refusing callings or are under church discipline).

You forgot old.

[Anonymous]

Minyan Man wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

…Almost everybody is on the list anyway, and if you aren’t you likely will be in the next 1-3 years (unless you’re inactive, refusing callings or are under church discipline).

You forgot old.

I suppose old would fit, but some old people do have callings, especially where I live (and some refuse).

[Anonymous]

Curt –

You and I are often on the same page, today not. In a time when other churches do background checks as a regular practice, the “it’s too much on the church” is a lame excuse.

For every single community service project we have to engage in, short of picking up trash in the park, our members “burden” the community we volunteer with, by having to fill out fresh background checks again, and again. If we were already doing it. Even the simple, non-finger printed, baseline ones, it would curtail things a bunch.

The reason we created 2 deep leadership was intimidation. No one would harm, or touch, or anything inappropriate while another person (adult) was in the room. It’s a reputation issue. Saving personal face.

I also think the acceptance of Good-Better is letting existing problems off the hook. Kind of a look the other way stance. It’s like the Essays, “We wrote them. True most people haven’t seen them. But if we were pressed in a court of law, we could produce them as proof.”

We coerce our girls into keeping themselves covered when they go swimming at girls camp, so that adult, male men, won’t be attracted to them.

If the church can create soul shaming that way, they can do mega better on abuse prevention, especially at church.

The top leadership chose to address this. If they hadn’t, I would have let it go, but since they created it, I am allowed, as a sustaining member, to call it far short of better.

Every other church in the United States, runs background checks. It doesn’t require finger printing. It takes 5 minutes. We can spend hours counting tithing and tallying “Ministering”. We could easily run a check.

[Anonymous]

My opinion in regards to church background checks:

Almost all other churches do them for volunteers working with youth.

The LDS church does not but we have the membership records. This system can give us advance warning on some individuals with checkered pasts provided that the individual’s previous ward was aware of the history. This provides a similar effect to what other churches receive by requiring background checks.

The major drawback in regards to the LDS church membership records system is that something bad has to happen with some LDS church unit somewhere before they know to be wary. It is a system of, “Fool me once? Shame on you. Fool me twice? Shame on me.”

Routine background checks could add some extra insight for those not already aqaunted with the LDS church and I assume that this information would help prevent a certain number of incidents. I assume that if background checks were free then we would be using them right now. IOW the barrier to using them is cost. It would be easy enough to say that no amount of money would be too much if it prevented even one case of child abuse. However, organizations simply cannot work this way. Even those acting in good faith have to weigh the cost against the protection offered, the number of incidents that such a system might prvent, and what other systems might deliver similar results with reduced cost.

In my estimation the new Abuse Prevention Training is a step in the right direction and it is very nearly free. An easy Win-Win.

[Anonymous]

I want background checks. The new structure still isn’t my ideal. It isn’t best. I would like best. I am okay for now with better as the first step.

My only point about a comparison to other churches is that very few churches have nearly the entire congregation working with youth on a regular basis. Many and often most of those positions are staffed by long-term, paid positions, especially with regard to teenagers (youth ministries).

I would like more. I’m just saying I think I understand the arguments for why universal background checks aren’t part of this announcement.

[Anonymous]

A little plot twist. I was talking to a friend in the ward who brought up the topic (sort of as if it were news to me). He said the bishop had asked the whole ward council to complete the training by the end of this week as an example. Fair enough. I should note is a mandated reporter in this state and has had to take child abuse/reporting professional development to maintain his license. But this is how the rest of the conversation went:

Him: So I did it on my phone last night.

Me: Yeah, it only takes about 15 minutes. I did it on the computer.

Him: I thought it was pretty good, talking about women and boys not being together.

Me: (not saying I watched it twice) I didn’t catch that, I thought they always talked about adults and youth generally except for the one scenario in the tent when it was a man and two boys.

Him: I had the volume off and just clicked through.

So, while I do believe the majority will actually do the 15 minute thing, it now occurs to me that it is possible some will do it to be done and will get nothing out of it.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

So, while I do believe the majority will actually do the 15 minute thing, it now occurs to me that it is possible some will do it to be done and will get nothing out of it.

I am so trying not to soapbox on this. I am also trying to see potential and not swamp the good that could come. However, we are talking about abuse. Not just did you wash your hands after you used the bathroom. Both have sad consequences. One is momentary. The other is soul wrenching. We have enough trouble having a meaningful Sacrament Experience.

Because we believe we are immune, largely based on being “The One True” – we don’t believe or even entertain that abuse happens. Like all things that hurt, our tribal answer, is sweep it under the rug. Cut out the pages, lock them away, don’t sully the narrative.

So we send out a video, give a few lectures, and most of the group will let it roll.

Quote:

Him: I had the volume off and just clicked through.

Yep. This.

*I am not intending to create a war. I am just aware from the people who have experienced abuse and tried going through the church, that we don’t do well here. I hurt for both parties. I imagine different answers to a real problem.

[Anonymous]

mom3 wrote:

Quote:

So, while I do believe the majority will actually do the 15 minute thing, it now occurs to me that it is possible some will do it to be done and will get nothing out of it.

I am so trying not to soapbox on this. I am also trying to see potential and not swamp the good that could come. However, we are talking about abuse. Not just did you wash your hands after you used the bathroom. Both have sad consequences. One is momentary. The other is soul wrenching. We have enough trouble having a meaningful Sacrament Experience.

I so hear you and this is me exactly. I work with people every day who have been affected by abuse trauma. It can happen to anyone in even what they thought was the safest situation. THEY WOULDN’T HAVE GONE THERE IF THEY DIDN’T THINK IT WAS SAFE! (Yes, I meant to yell. Sorry. Not sorry. This is serious.)

I really do see that this is a step in the right direction. I’ve expressed that I’d like if it were more, but using Curt’s good, better, best, this is good (it would only be better of there were a good before it, sorry to nitpick Curt). I’m trying so hard to make this as best as it can be and not rain on anybody’s parade or make it seem like I don’t appreciate it because I do. Before my friend came along I was actually more optimistic. BTW, this is the same friend who has 4 young daughters.

[Anonymous]

That story is so incredibly sad, frustrating, and more. It hurts, deep down. I might have been sharp with him, and it takes a lot for me to get there.

I do agree there really wasn’t a foundation Good (or even Not Bad), so this might just be a beginning Okay for Now as a first step. I do hope there is more official focus.

It just hit me that I probably saw this in a better light because I am aware of the other good resources on the Church’s website that deal with abuse. The training, however, doesn’t use those materials. That is sad.

[Anonymous]

You do make a good point Curt, there are other available resources on the church website and I appreciate that. They are referenced at the end of the presentation, perhaps when the “better” comes along they can make them more prominent and even give some demonstration of what’s there.

We did have a discussion in stake council relating to how to make some of these more obscure resources on the site known to the general membership of the stake.

And in fairness I haven’t had a great day. I will implement my sanctuary safety plan and come back tomorrow.

[Author]

Posts