Missionaries leaving

[stemelbow]

I've been told and have witnessed missionaries coming home early and fading away into inactivity or leaving the Church in a very short time frame.

Our SP, some months ago addressed this in a QandA (he brought the questions he was going to answer which was a cute Q and A) at our ward conference.  I don't know how to gauge it Church wide, but he indicated while we've seen it a lot in our stake it is a Church wide issue these days. 

A friend of mine said after his son came home his SP told him he had to enroll in institute and gave him a number of other requirements (going to the temple and volunteering there, etc)--as my friend said.  I don't know if that SP is taking liberties he should not or if it was exaggerated by my friend as in suggestions turned into requirements by my friend (a former active member who rarely attends and doesn't believe anymore).  

It got me thinking, how do we address these types of issues?  Do we put more requirements on each other?  or do we be more open about problems everyone faces? 

My thing is we'll continue to see the problems of people leaving, particularly the younger generations, and we'll continue to see lower conversion rates, until we accept that our traditions need adjusting, our message and focus need reconsidering, and our meddling in other's affairs stop.

But I realize I'm the oddball at Church on this stuff.  Just wondering what people here thought. 

[ksfisher]

I don't think a watered down version of the gospel would bring people into the church, or keep people from leaving.  Liberalizing doctrine or practices has not seemed to stem the tide of departures from other churches, I wouldn't expect it the help the LDS church either.  The world continues to be more and more secularized every year.  I expect that this trend will continue until something shakes people out of the spiritual sleep they have fallen into and reminds them that there is a God.

My opinions.  Yours, of course, many vary.

I think that the advice given to the young man in your example above would be good for almost any young adult in the church. 

[smac97]

7 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I've been told and have witnessed missionaries coming home early and fading away into inactivity or leaving the Church in a very short time frame.

Our SP, some months ago addressed this in a QandA (he brought the questions he was going to answer which was a cute Q and A) at our ward conference.  I don't know how to gauge it Church wide, but he indicated while we've seen it a lot in our stake it is a Church wide issue these days. 

A friend of mine said after his son came home his SP told him he had to enroll in institute and gave him a number of other requirements (going to the temple and volunteering there, etc)--as my friend said.  I don't know if that SP is taking liberties he should not or if it was exaggerated by my friend as in suggestions turned into requirements by my friend (a former active member who rarely attends and doesn't believe anymore).  

It got me thinking, how do we address these types of issues?  Do we put more requirements on each other?  or do we be more open about problems everyone faces? 

My thing is we'll continue to see the problems of people leaving, particularly the younger generations, and we'll continue to see lower conversion rates, until we accept that our traditions need adjusting, our message and focus need reconsidering, and our meddling in other's affairs stop.

But I realize I'm the oddball at Church on this stuff.  Just wondering what people here thought. 

I have heard somewhat similar stories about some people who leave the Armed Forces and in somewhat short order succumb to maladaptive behaviors (substance abuse, unemployment, listlessness, homelessness, etc.).  The abrupt transition from being in a highly organized, highly motivated, highly structured/scheduled, objective-oriented organization (like the Army) to a life of do-whatever-you-want-and-you-aren't-really-accountable-to-anyone-anymore can be a bit daunting.  So that may be a factor.

Also, "civilian life" can be something of a letdown.  When I was in the Army, I felt like I had a very strong sense of purpose.  That what I was doing was important.  That even if I was asked to do something boring or mundane in the moment, it mattered because, in the aggregate, I was contributing to the protection of my country.  To have that outlook on life on Monday, and then to be discharged on a Tuesday and hence summarily deprived of that outlook . . . that can be tough.

As far as what we can do . . . 

1. Make sure there is a support structure for the RM.  Family needs to be there.  Friends.  Priesthood leaders.

2. The structured, objective-oriented outlook of missionary life needs to be revised to adapt to a different set of structures and objectives.  Accountability to someone will help.  Identifying objectives for education, career, family, etc., and also coherent, quantifiable steps for achieving those objectives.

3. Our stake has RMs speak in the stake several times during the first few months.  This seems to be a good thing for many of them.

4. Family and priesthood leaders should be close at hand in case the RM starts to struggle.

5. Professional counseling as needed (or even as preventive medicine).

Those are my thoughts.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Gray]

31 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I've been told and have witnessed missionaries coming home early and fading away into inactivity or leaving the Church in a very short time frame.

Our SP, some months ago addressed this in a QandA (he brought the questions he was going to answer which was a cute Q and A) at our ward conference.  I don't know how to gauge it Church wide, but he indicated while we've seen it a lot in our stake it is a Church wide issue these days. 

A friend of mine said after his son came home his SP told him he had to enroll in institute and gave him a number of other requirements (going to the temple and volunteering there, etc)--as my friend said.  I don't know if that SP is taking liberties he should not or if it was exaggerated by my friend as in suggestions turned into requirements by my friend (a former active member who rarely attends and doesn't believe anymore).  

It got me thinking, how do we address these types of issues?  Do we put more requirements on each other?  or do we be more open about problems everyone faces? 

My thing is we'll continue to see the problems of people leaving, particularly the younger generations, and we'll continue to see lower conversion rates, until we accept that our traditions need adjusting, our message and focus need reconsidering, and our meddling in other's affairs stop.

But I realize I'm the oddball at Church on this stuff.  Just wondering what people here thought. 

I don't think clamping down and sending people off to even more meetings and getting stricter about Sabbath rules is the answer. Not sure what the answer is though.

There are issues specific to Mormon doctrines and history that cause people to leave, but there are also broader cultural changes in the West that are moving people away from organized religion in general. Which of those factors is causing more people (esp returned missionaries) to leave? I don't know. I'm not sure if there is anything that can be done to change it. 

[ALarson]

49 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I've been told and have witnessed missionaries coming home early and fading away into inactivity or leaving the Church in a very short time frame.

Yes, sadly we just had one more missionary return home early in our ward this month and the Bishop just received word that a sister who is out is struggling and wants to come home.  From what I've seen of those who have recently returned, they have stopped attending.  

I'm not sure what the answer is, but I do sometimes doubt the wisdom behind sending these youth out at a younger age now (some boys right out of high school).  

I also feel they have not been prepared to answer some of the questions they are now asked or to see material that is more readily available.  I think that at the very least, the essays should be studied and discussed before they go out.

.

Edited August 3, 2016 by ALarson

[Gray]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

Yes, sadly we just had one more missionary return home early in our ward this month and the Bishop just received word that a sister who is out is struggling and wants to come home.  From what I've seen of those who have recently returned, they have stopped attending.  

I'm not sure what the answer is, but I do sometimes doubt the wisdom behind sending these youth out at a younger age now (some boys right out of high school).  

I also feel they have not been prepared to answer some of the questions they are now asked or  see material that is more readily available.  I think that at the very least, the essays should be studied and discussed before they go out.

Even 19 is a pretty young age. Instead of lowering the ages for boys and girls, maybe they should have raised the age for boys up to 21. 

Edited August 3, 2016 by Gray

[Gray]

33 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I have heard somewhat similar stories about some people who leave the Armed Forces and in somewhat short order succumb to maladaptive behaviors (substance abuse, unemployment, listlessness, homelessness, etc.).  The abrupt transition from being in a highly organized, highly motivated, highly structured/scheduled, objective-oriented organization (like the Army) to a life of do-whatever-you-want-and-you-aren't-really-accountable-to-anyone-anymore can be a bit daunting.  So that may be a factor.

Also, "civilian life" can be something of a letdown.  When I was in the Army, I felt like I had a very strong sense of purpose.  That what I was doing was important.  That even if I was asked to do something boring or mundane in the moment, it mattered because, in the aggregate, I was contributing to the protection of my country.  To have that outlook on life on Monday, and then to be discharged on a Tuesday and hence summarily deprived of that outlook . . . that can be tough.

As far as what we can do . . . 

1. Make sure there is a support structure for the RM.  Family needs to be there.  Friends.  Priesthood leaders.

2. The structured, objective-oriented outlook of missionary life needs to be revised to adapt to a different set of structures and objectives.  Accountability to someone will help.  Identifying objectives for education, career, family, etc., and also coherent, quantifiable steps for achieving those objectives.

3. Our stake has RMs speak in the stake several times during the first few months.  This seems to be a good thing for many of them.

4. Family and priesthood leaders should be close at hand in case the RM starts to struggle.

5. Professional counseling as needed (or even as preventive medicine).

Those are my thoughts.

Thanks,

-Smac

Do you think relaxing the rigid structure of missionary life would help? That kind of structure seems to create challenges for both RMs and vets. 

[stemelbow]

9 minutes ago, Gray said:

Even 19 is a pretty young age. In stead of lowering the ages for boys and girls, maybe they should have raised the age for boys up to 21. 

nah...send kids out on summer missions starting at about age 16, each summer until they finish college, ro something.  I question whether age is the big issue here.  I still feel its more about us, what we're teaching, emphasizing, how we're living it.  But the missionary program could sure use a redo as well.  I'd love to see these kids going out and serving people in more temporal way.  Mix it up a bit. 

[rpn]

I am often saddened at the pressure, the burden of not being good enough, I hear others attribute to their church membership.   I think there is far too much discussion of rules and expectations and insufficient talk of grace, but I've never experienced that pressure and burden from church personally.  So I'm not sure whether it is internal or in certain communities or types of communities, or even locations.   And I'm not sure different [fill in the blank] would make any difference in this anyway. 

When people feel like they can't do something, can't ever make it,the easiest thing is to decide they don't want to do it.

[thatjimguy]

Screen the kids and see if they even want to go in the first place before they go. I mean, were they dedicated to Christ or "mailing it in" as a member? So much is assumed that going on a mission is part of every LDS kids life. You see it in articles, cheerleader website news reports, etc. I highly believe there is a lot of passive group coercion in our society for kids to go. I can see kids having as much choice to go on a mission or not as they did getting baptized exactly at eight years old.

 

[thatjimguy]

16 minutes ago, Gray said:

Even 19 is a pretty young age. In stead of lowering the ages for boys and girls, maybe they should have raised the age for boys up to 21. 

We should stop focusing on the age as the requirement, and instead focus on who really desires to go. 

 

[stemelbow]

Just now, thatjimguy said:

Screen the kids and see if they even want to go in the first place before they go. I mean, were they dedicated to Christ or "mailing it in" as a member? So much is assumed that going on a mission is part of every LDS kids life. You see it in articles, cheerleader website news reports, etc. I highly believe there is a lot of passive group coercion in our society for kids to go. I can see kids having as much choice to go on a mission or not as they did getting baptized exactly at eight years old.

 

I think that you have a point, Jim.  Sure.  Lowering the age might actually increase this problem--because the younger the kids are as they go, the more likely they'll do what their parents want or expect. 

Ok, fine...maybe age is a factor and the age change. 

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, Gray said:

Do you think relaxing the rigid structure of missionary life would help? That kind of structure seems to create challenges for both RMs and vets. 

I think structure is necessary for the purposes of those endeavors.  Military life requires structure, discipline and order.  I think the military works hard to maintain discipline necessary to perform its function, while also considering and working to improve the quality of life of the individual and his/her family.

Similarly, missionary life is strict, but not inordinately so.  I had only a 2-3 week gap between leaving the military and going into the MTC.  Frankly, I found the strictures of missionary life to be more exacting, but also easier to adhere to.  In the Army I had plenty of downtime.  Plenty of time to myself.  Plenty of boredom.  Plenty of opportunity to mess up behavior-wise.  In contrast, life as a missionary had little downtime, little or no time to myself, and little opportunity to mess up behavior-wise (my companion was always nearby).  So missionary work was morally "safer" than service in the military.  It was also "stricter" in terms of my daily calendar, daily activities, etc.

I don't think relaxing missionary standards is the answer.  Personally, one change I would like to see (from my missionary days, anyway) is the number of service hours per week.  IIRC, we were limited to four hours per week.  I think 8-10 hours would be great, maybe even more.  There is something delicious about pure, no-questions-asked service to others.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[Jeanne]

I believe missionaries should really want to be there.  At the age of 18, they don't what they want..but they know that their parents/family are counting on them to go.

Edited August 3, 2016 by Jeanne

[ksfisher]

8 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Personally, one change I would like to see (from my missionary days, anyway) is the number of service hours per week.  IIRC, we were limited to four hours per week.  I think 8-10 hours would be great, maybe even more.  There is something delicious about pure, no-questions-asked service to others.  

 

 

Is this 4 hours/week church wide of set by each mission?  I've worked with missionaries in our stake in the Salt Lake Mission for 5 years now and never heard of a limit.  Could be because I never knew of a limit to ask about.

[Gray]

6 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I think structure is necessary for the purposes of those endeavors.  Military life requires structure, discipline and order.  I think the military works hard to maintain discipline necessary to perform its function, while also considering and working to improve the quality of life of the individual and his/her family.

Similarly, missionary life is strict, but not inordinately so.  I had only a 2-3 week gap between leaving the military and going into the MTC.  Frankly, I found the strictures of missionary life to be more exacting, but also easier to adhere to.  In the Army I had plenty of downtime.  Plenty of time to myself.  Plenty of boredom.  Plenty of opportunity to mess up behavior-wise.  In contrast, life as a missionary had little downtime, little or no time to myself, and little opportunity to mess up behavior-wise (my companion was always nearby).  So missionary work was morally "safer" than service in the military.  It was also "stricter" in terms of my daily calendar, daily activities, etc.

I think downtime is necessary for mental health, though. Part of the problem is, I think, that missionary life can be emotionally scarring. It's something that can take years to recover from (it did for me). Does it need to be that way? I'm not saying more downtime would solve the problem, but I think it could help. 

6 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I don't think relaxing missionary standards is the answer.  Personally, one change I would like to see (from my missionary days, anyway) is the number of service hours per week.  IIRC, we were limited to four hours per week.  I think 8-10 hours would be great, maybe even more.  There is something delicious about pure, no-questions-asked service to others.  

Thanks,

-Smac

I agree about service hours increasing - I think it would be emotionally beneficial for the missionaries and have the potential to do a lot of good in the world.

What do you think about maybe increasing number of calls home? It might help these kids to retain their familial support network through the process. 

[smac97]

7 minutes ago, Gray said:

I think downtime is necessary for mental health, though.

Well, that's P-day.  And much of missionary life consists of sitting in a room and talking quietly with other people.  

Quote

Part of the problem is, I think, that missionary life can be emotionally scarring. It's something that can take years to recover from (it did for me). Does it need to be that way? I'm not saying more downtime would solve the problem, but I think it could help. 

I can't speak to that.  I have never heard of someone describing "missionary life" as "emotionally scarring."  Missionary life involves getting up in the morning, praying, getting breakfast and getting dressed, reading scriptures, and then going out to appointments, service projects, tracting, and so on. 

I'm not trying to diminish your adverse experience.  I am sorry to hear about it.  But I wonder if yours was more the exception than the rule.

Quote

 

I agree about service hours increasing - I think it would be emotionally beneficial for the missionaries and have the potential to do a lot of good in the world.

What do you think about maybe increasing number of calls home? It might help these kids to retain their familial support network through the process. 

 

Well, maybe.  But not by much.  I would like to see calls authorized on Father's Day.

Missionaries are strongly encouraged to write letters/emails.  I think that's a great thing.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Tacenda]

38 minutes ago, thatjimguy said:

Screen the kids and see if they even want to go in the first place before they go. I mean, were they dedicated to Christ or "mailing it in" as a member? So much is assumed that going on a mission is part of every LDS kids life. You see it in articles, cheerleader website news reports, etc. I highly believe there is a lot of passive group coercion in our society for kids to go. I can see kids having as much choice to go on a mission or not as they did getting baptized exactly at eight years old.

 

I believe along these lines, and think that the missionary might believe if they don't then they may not find the perfect mate in life (they might not want a returned missionary, or there's a stigma with not going on one), his/her parents will be disappointed, they'll miss out on a great opportunity to see the world etc. I agree with the third one. But I think it would be so great if everyone that turns 18 go out in the world doing good. Armed forces, helping in orphanages, so many groups that they could volunteer in.

ETA: I remember a time someone said to me not to say if their child goes on a mission, but when. So if I spoke to my child I would say, "When you go on your mission", rather than, "If you go on a mission". This was this mother's tactic, haha.

Edited August 3, 2016 by Tacenda

[Scott Lloyd]

In another month, my eldest son will have reached the midway point on his mission.

There are a dozen elders in his mission group. Of that number two have come home early.

One of those ran away; he was soon found and sent home. That happened relatively early on.

The other one has recently been beset with an unfortunate health condition that has required he return home for treatment. There is still hope is that he will be able to go back and finish his mission.

I don't know the extent, if any, that this anecdotal information can be extrapolated out to the whole population, but I don't really find two out of 12 to be an alarming number, (though zero out of 12 would have been preferable, of course.)

As for my son, I am glad and grateful to say that his development from almost immediately in his mission has been astounding in terms of work ethic, dedication, spirituality, attitude, eloquence in teaching (judging by the letters he writes us), ecclesiastical administration, and social skills. I never would have dared dream his development would have been so dramatic in such a short period. For him, the mission experience has been perfect at this stage in his life (he turned 18 in February of last year and left in September).

Edited August 3, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[thatjimguy]

5 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I believe along these lines, and think that the missionary might believe if they don't then they may not find the perfect mate in life,

I always wondered if the idea of LDS women wanting an "RM" on their "must have" list for marriage promoted men going on a mission. I can only imagine, not too many years ago when the church was smaller, this would have been a big thing. Effective, but not exactly the correct motivation to go. 

[Scott Lloyd]

23 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I believe missionaries should really want to be there.  At the age of 18, they don't what they want..but they know that their parents/family are counting on them to go.

As I said, going at age 18 was perfect for my son.

I'm thinking it has largely to do with the fact that he is able to stretch his wings, to be at last involved in an endeavor where his success depends on his own efforts, more so than any undertaking in his life, as up to now he has had our home and family as a safety net to fall back on. To put it another way, I'm thinking greater autonomy -- while at the same time being engaged in something he knows to to be worthwhile -- has done wonders for his psyche.

But all of this is really just speculation on my part. It may be that he was better prepared than I realized. Our children sometimes come wired in ways we don't realize at first.

 

[Duncan]

This mission apparently sends home early 40% of its missionaries. I can't speak so much to other missionaries who served in other areas here but the ones here i'd say mostl are still active. One elder that kills me, is he was here for 9 months and he went through you know what on his mission. Well, he finished his mission and promptly went inactive and now he is a drinks, drugs etc. in Calgary. His mom emails me trying to get him active but I try with limited success. I have friends there i've contacted to help him out so I dunno. He was one of the finest elders and we couldn't have asked for better

[Gray]

23 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Well, that's P-day.  And much of missionary life consists of sitting in a room and talking quietly with other people.  

My missionary life was walking for probably 10 miles a day in the hot sun. P-Day gave you barely enough time to get some chores done, and maybe a few hours of actual down time. For me it wasn't enough. I think giving missionaries a couple of hours a day of downtime would work better.

23 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I can't speak to that.  I have never heard of someone describing "missionary life" as "emotionally scarring."  Missionary life involves getting up in the morning, praying, getting breakfast and getting dressed, reading scriptures, and then going out to appointments, service projects, tracting, and so on. 

I'm not trying to diminish your adverse experience.  I am sorry to hear about it.  But I wonder if yours was more the exception than the rule.

No idea how prevalent it is. Some people absolutely love their missions. I have a lot of fondness for mine, but it left its scars. 

A lot of RMs do seem to get persistent bad(ish) dreams where they dream they've been called as missionaries again, sometimes for years and years after the experience. 

23 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Well, maybe.  But not by much.  I would like to see calls authorized on Father's Day.

Missionaries are strongly encouraged to write letters/emails.  I think that's a great thing.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

[ksfisher]

2 minutes ago, Gray said:

 

A lot of RMs do seem to get persistent bad(ish) dreams where they dream they've been called as missionaries again, sometimes for years and years after the experience. 

 

I've had that dream!  I'd leave for work but somehow find myself back in Sweden tracting.

More commom is the dream where I'm back in high school and can't remember my locker combination.

[jkwilliams]

32 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Well, that's P-day.  And much of missionary life consists of sitting in a room and talking quietly with other people.  

I can't speak to that.  I have never heard of someone describing "missionary life" as "emotionally scarring."  Missionary life involves getting up in the morning, praying, getting breakfast and getting dressed, reading scriptures, and then going out to appointments, service projects, tracting, and so on. 

I'm not trying to diminish your adverse experience.  I am sorry to hear about it.  But I wonder if yours was more the exception than the rule.

Well, maybe.  But not by much.  I would like to see calls authorized on Father's Day.

Missionaries are strongly encouraged to write letters/emails.  I think that's a great thing.

Thanks,

-Smac

I had a coworker in Utah who had been home from his mission about 25 years. He said the experience was so traumatic that he had refused to give a homecoming talk. I asked him what had happened, and he simply said, "I told you, I don't talk about it."