Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bluebell

Abuse Prevention Training Now Required for Youth Leaders

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, webbles said:

Since grooming can be done by asking about social life, school life, family life, alcohol/drug usage, etc, the adult really shouldn't ask any question.  Otherwise, the adult could be grooming the child.  And answering any questions from the child could also be grooming as well so I'm not sure if the adult can do anything that wouldn't be considered grooming.

I don’t think that is the definition of grooming. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Nacho2dope said:

I don’t think that is the definition of grooming. 

If a groomer is interacting at all with a potential victim, any and all actions are grooming IMO.  The same exact actions by a non groomer are not grooming. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

If a groomer is interacting at all with a potential victim, any and all actions are grooming IMO.  The same exact actions by a non groomer are not grooming. 

Yes, you have to have intent to want to abuse the child. I serve with the young men and on the weeks we meet we discuss social life, family life, school life there is no grooming going on there. So I agree with you

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, webbles said:

I'm serious.  A groomer can use questions that are not sexual in nature to groom the child.  If the adult isn't a groomer, then the questions are not being done with grooming intention and any question would be ok (sexual, social, etc).  Luckily, not all people are groomers.  But since we can't tell if a person is a groomer or not, then we should not allow adults to ask or answer any question in a one-on-one interview because IF the adult is a groomer, they can use those questions and answers to groom the child.

Just saying that we should stop sexual questions because of a fear of grooming is not enough.  If you really fear grooming, then you should stop all questions and answers in a one-on-one situation.

Do you fear grooming enough you think questions should be stopped or do you think the benefit outweighs the cost?  Asking out of curiosity, not debating. 

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Nacho2dope said:

I don’t think that is the definition of grooming. 

When adults make children feel like they have special access to them without warranted cause, they make it easier for others to have special access and take advantage of it. This is why organisations working with children can attract predators because the predators want the access.

It is very easy in the church to feel overly familiar with each other, and to feel like we are entitled to emotional and informational intimacy about each other, when we aren't. One thing I've learned interacting with kind people, especially those outside the church, is that it is generally impolite to ask probing questions of anybody. Such intimacy is earned and even when esteem is earned, such intimacy is still not always appropriate.

 

Share this post


Link to post

So we should lock children in vaults until they are 18 to make sure they never interact with an adult.  I am sure they will come out well-adjusted.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

When adults make children feel like they have special access to them without warranted cause

There may be a debate here if church leadership roles give the adults in these callings warranted cause to have access to a generous, but not unlimited degree  

I think teaching, guidance, friendship from church leaders is a warranted cause. 

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

So we should lock children in vaults until they are 18 to make sure they never interact with an adult.  I am sure they will come out well-adjusted.

Can you not see what is created by the boundary of "no **forced emotional or unwarranted informational intimacy?" The boundary does not make relationships impossible.

Edited ** to be more clear, and to account for natural situational intimacy.

.

Edited by Meadowchik
Clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Calm said:

There may be a debate here if church leadership roles give the adults in these callings warranted cause to have access to a generous, but not unlimited degree  

I think teaching, guidance, friendship from church leaders is a warranted cause. 

That's the rub, in my opinion. With a medical professional, for example, who may have cause to ask any number of probing questions to provide healthcare, there are still appropriate questions and behaviors. Teaching doesn't necessarily require the teacher to ask personal questions. Guidance can be offered, too, without asking probing questions. And friendship is a reciprocal relationship. 

Frankly, this to me is a difficult subject to articulate, because we're already trained in the church to share and expect too much information. What is perhaps unnecessary for teaching, guidance, and friendship is considered normal in the church. 

 

Edited by Meadowchik

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/17/2019 at 8:23 AM, HappyJackWagon said:

... Why are bishops and Stake presidents exempt from requirements for 2 deep leadership?
 

Because a third party already is allowed to be present in interviews?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Because a third party already is allowed to be present in interviews?

 

Required is not the same as allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

 

Required is not the same as allowed.

Thanks for the clarification.  I won't be dialoguing with you further.

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Thanks for the clarification.  I won't be dialoguing with you further.

That's fine. But I have to admit this is a strange exclamation. Any specific reason you tell me this?

Share this post


Link to post

In case there was some misunderstanding, being allowed is not the same safety mechanism as being required, and it is important. If a person is protected (even if they don't feel they need protection) by there being two-deep leadership in a class or activity, then similarly there can be protection by there being two-deep with a bishop or stake president. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

That's fine. But I have to admit this is a strange exclamation. Any specific reason you tell me this?

I don't see any reason to accord good faith to you when you insult the intelligence of your interlocutors.

Share this post


Link to post

Very respectfully and carefully, I didn’t see what you saw regarding an insult, kenngo.  While I don’t agree necessarily with a required third party, (I do think soundless video could be installed to protect everyone) , I do think the discussion of allowed(which is implemented) vs required is valid and not condescending at all.  But you see it differently-we must be considering different things? :) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I don't see any reason to accord good faith to you when you insult the intelligence of your interlocutors.

Huh. Well, I certainly meant no insult, that is not the way I like to communicate online, such is not productive at all! I was just being brief.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 8/18/2019 at 1:03 AM, The Nehor said:

So we should lock children in vaults until they are 18 to make sure they never interact with an adult.  I am sure they will come out well-adjusted.

Probably be better, IMO, if it's a leader that is told to ask these questions. Think about all of the harm that goes on with these personal questions or shame that they bring on without merit. When the youth admits to masturbating or watching porn, the guilt heaped on them creates a vicious cycle especially being told they can't take the sacrament. And their use of these were maybe very minimal, but the guilt and shame spurs addcition. I'm not an expert, but have read the stories. 

I think the youth are hopefully smarter now, and won't believe an adult that does this to them. They are IMO, getting very smart, and will not return to the church that does this. The church is in need of a change. If it's a church that gets revelation, I'm waiting to see it happen.

I say all of this, not to cut the church, but feel that the huge problem we have with members of the church being addicted to porn, sex, etc. is the way it's handled in the church. I firmly believe it's the church's fault, I know I'm going to get guff for saying it, but it's how I feel. 

 

Edited by Tacenda

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 8/16/2019 at 2:38 PM, phaedrus ut said:

Someone should ask Sam Young if their new website looks familiar. 

I've not taken it yet, but it seems pretty similar to what you had to do with scout callings. I think this has been expected for some time now that technology is there to enable it in this fashion. How they'll handle it in other countries without as good internet remains unclear.

I doubt it'll be enough for critics simply because I'm pretty convinced critics are just looking for anything to criticize the Church for. Sometimes they're actually valid criticisms, but nothing will ever be enough for them and every ill will be blamed on the Church. However clearly there's still more the Church can do and hopefully will. (In particular how to deal with complaints about bad Bishops, Stake Presidents, Mission Presidents and so forth remains an issue IMO)

Edited by clarkgoble
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I am trying to think of all the horrific suffering and shame interviewing with a bishop can cause but I find myself thinking instead of all the times I was inspired and encouraged by my bishop from tithing settlement as a small child, during my baptismal interview, during my checking in and Priesthood advancement interviews as a teen (some by my father who was then bishop), to the bishop I still love deeply (and still see occasionally) who guided me through pure inspiration to prepare for the temple and my mission. I would not deny those experiences to the growing youth today because of histrionics about a few bad cases.

And anyone who gives your unsubstantiated hypothesis about porn and sex addiction in the church being primarily due to bishop interviews and not the pervasiveness of sex and porn in our lives any consideration at all is an idiot.

Edited to Add: I am sorry for what happened in your family but your pathological to blame it all on the church and generalize that pain to everyone is unhealthy. Honestly it seems like you are trying to push your own guilt (rational or irrational guilt) for what happened onto the church. Please forgive yourself and stop blaming the many good people you slander by generalizing your experience.

Sorry, but the church needs to back off, that's all. I won't go into all of the stories I've read, you won't believe it. But I do get that I over generalized, I admit.

Nehor, in your early youth, I don't believe the church emphasized it like they do now. But I may be as crazy as a loon and not even realize it.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Sorry, but the church needs to back off, that's all. I won't go into all of the stories I've read, you won't believe it. But I do get that I over generalized, I admit.

Nehor, in your early youth, I don't believe the church emphasized it like they do now. But I may be as crazy as a loon and not even realize it.

No, the church does not need to back off. I am sure you read a lot of unsubstantiated anonymous horror stories. I could write one myself that would chill your blood. Some of the ones you read might have even been true.

Edited by The Nehor
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Sorry, but the church needs to back off, that's all. I won't go into all of the stories I've read, you won't believe it. But I do get that I over generalized, I admit.

Nehor, in your early youth, I don't believe the church emphasized it like they do now. But I may be as crazy as a loon and not even realize it.

The only time anyone really pushed the sex talk stuff for me was the stake president when I was getting married. Other than that, I never got asked more than do you keep the law of chasity.  

So of they can't ask about the law of chasity, does that mean no more youth on the temple? Is that what they want? I see no other way because you have to have a way to figure out who is worthy to go into the temple. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Huh. Well, I certainly meant no insult, that is not the way I like to communicate online, such is not productive at all! I was just being brief.

Okay.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

I've not taken it yet, but it seems pretty similar to what you had to do with scout callings. I think this has been expected for some time now that technology is there to enable it in this fashion. How they'll handle it in other countries without as good internet remains unclear.

I doubt it'll be enough for critics simply because I'm pretty convinced critics are just looking for anything to criticize the Church for. Sometimes they're actually valid criticisms, but nothing will ever be enough for them and every ill will be blamed on the Church. However clearly there's still more the Church can do and hopefully will. (In particular how to deal with complaints about bad Bishops, Stake Presidents, Mission Presidents and so forth remains an issue IMO)

Reports are that the training is taken easily within 20 minutes or less, which is, in time and content, far less substantial than the Boy Scout training.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...