KUTV report reveals how the LDS Church responded to MTC sex scandal

[rongo]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Perhaps a bishop could clarify if any notes are kept from confessional interviews (outside of annotations a person should not be called to work with youth or other safety issue) if none have yet.

I don't normally take notes from interviews, but if, they are handwritten and destroyed after they aren't needed any more (usually, the need would be in typing up a report of disciplinary action). 

There is no information for an annotation other than the note to call confidential records. Upon calling, further information is given (verbally). So, there is a database with the notes. Let's hope that none of the MormonLeakers work in that department . . . 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, rongo said:

I don't normally take notes from interviews, but if, they are handwritten and destroyed after they aren't needed any more (usually, the need would be in typing up a report of disciplinary action). 

There is no information for an annotation other than the note to call confidential records. Upon calling, further information is given (verbally). So, there is a database with the notes. Let's hope that none of the MormonLeakers work in that department . . . 

Just to be clear...because my brain is going every which way today and not in a good way and therefore I want certainty where I can get it...the kind of things kept in the SL confidential records would likely be any criminal records or anything confessed to or shared that might affect callings ( for example, if someone told you they had attraction towards children, though they controlled and did not nurture them, I wouldn't call that a confession exactly because I don't see it as a sin but a weakness , but I would still expect they should not be placed in callings with children as no need to make it harder for them or to take a risk) add-on:  as well as formal discipline procedures that could then be followed up by others as necessary.   Am I correct?  What about adoptions, either a child who was adopted through Family Services or someone who had a child they had adopted by a family?  Anything else?  I am thinking if someone was abused would be kept in the SL file to help bishops know not to place survivors in potentially triggering situations.  If this is on record, are bishops told whether or not to bring it up with a member...to ask if they have any needs or if support would be wanted?

If you feel comfortable sharing, of course.  Some people will assume examples you give are from personal experience as a bishop whether this is true or not as it might be from training only, so if you prefer not to get into specifics for that reason, no problem.

I find it reassuring to know what is and isn't shared on records and what goes on in interviews, whether it is Church, school, government stuff, etc.  I suspect it has to do with wanting to be able to predict life as much as possible.  

Edited April 10, 2018 by Calm

[HappyJackWagon]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

Just to be clear...because my brain is going every which way today and not in a good way and therefore I want certainty where I can get it...the kind of things kept in the SL confidential records would likely be any criminal records or anything confessed to or shared that might affect callings ( for example, if someone told you they had attraction towards children, though they controlled and did not nurture them, I wouldn't call that a confession exactly because I don't see it as a sin but a weakness , but I would still expect they should not be placed in callings with children as no need to make it harder for them or to take a risk) add-on:  as well as formal discipline procedures that could then be followed up by others as necessary.   Am I correct?  What about adoptions, either a child who was adopted through Family Services or someone who had a child they had adopted by a family?  Anything else?  I am thinking if someone was abused would be kept in the SL file to help bishops know not to place survivors in potentially triggering situations.  If this is on record, are bishops told whether or not to bring it up with a member...to ask if they have any needs or if support would be wanted?

If you feel comfortable sharing, of course.  Some people will assume examples you give are from personal experience as a bishop whether this is true or not as it might be from training only, so if you prefer not to get into specifics for that reason, no problem.

I find it reassuring to know what is and isn't shared on records and what goes on in interviews, whether it is Church, school, government stuff, etc.  I suspect it has to do with wanting to be able to predict life as much as possible.  

I know you didn't ask me, and I hope to hear from Rongo later, but I'll just chime in.

For the most part Bishops really aren't privy to what is in a person's church file. Sure, there's a record of ordinances etc, but even if someone has been exed and then readmitted with all blessings, the record won't look any different than a person who hadn't been exed. The record the bishop sees looks like the person had always been a member. I submitted an individual to be a temple worker and was shocked when the application was rejected. I'd never seen that before. I then find out it was rejected because he had been previously exed and there was a restriction on him serving in the temple until he had his full blessings restored for a minimum of 5 years. This was all news to me at the time, and something I couldn't see merely from looking at records, yet the church clearly keeps record of it. A bishop also cannot see notes from an  individual's past disciplinary council unless he requests them so a DC can be reconvened for a new action (additional discipline or removal of discipline). IOW- there are a lot of church records they keep at the COB that local leadership can't see. That should make everyone feel a little better. But it's still a little disconcerting that those records are held somewhere and we really don't know what's on them.

[rongo]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

Just to be clear...because my brain is going every which way today and not in a good way and therefore I want certainty where I can get it...the kind of things kept in the SL confidential records would likely be any criminal records or anything confessed to or shared that might affect callings ( for example, if someone told you they had attraction towards children, though they controlled and did not nurture them, I wouldn't call that a confession exactly because I don't see it as a sin but a weakness , but I would still expect they should not be placed in callings with children as no need to make it harder for them or to take a risk) add-on:  as well as formal discipline procedures that could then be followed up by others as necessary.   Am I correct?  

Yes, and many other things, too, I believe. If a priesthood leader shares any concerns with the hotline, or with Confidential Records, or through the chain of command, I believe those things are noted and can come into play in instances like recommendation to ordain as bishop, temple workers, etc. 

What about adoptions, either a child who was adopted through Family Services or someone who had a child they had adopted by a family?  Anything else?  I am thinking if someone was abused would be kept in the SL file to help bishops know not to place survivors in potentially triggering situations.  If this is on record, are bishops told whether or not to bring it up with a member...to ask if they have any needs or if support would be wanted?

That, I'm not so sure of. 

I find it reassuring to know what is and isn't shared on records and what goes on in interviews, whether it is Church, school, government stuff, etc.  I suspect it has to do with wanting to be able to predict life as much as possible.

A brother who was ultimately excommunicated for homosexuality had his record annotated before his disciplinary council. I've seen that. Unless the stake president called Salt Lake (he must have, otherwise, how would it have been annotated?), I can't imagine how that happened. He also wasn't a threat to children or anything, just garden variety active homosexuality. I had another member with an annotated record, and when I called Salt Lake, I was told that he had been accused of incest at the age of 14. There was never any disciplinary action, just the note in his file. 

In my PPI on Thursday, the stake president asked me if I thought that the Church ran criminal background and credit checks on proposed priesthood leaders, and he was surprised when I told him that I think they do. Why wouldn't they? It's never a good thing to approve a call and have something bad and embarrassing emerge. 

[rongo]

19 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

A bishop also cannot see notes from an  individual's past disciplinary council unless he requests them so a DC can be reconvened for a new action (additional discipline or removal of discipline). IOW- there are a lot of church records they keep at the COB that local leadership can't see. That should make everyone feel a little better. But it's still a little disconcerting that those records are held somewhere and we really don't know what's on them.

Bishops can also request the discipline file simply to see what the details are (no DC in sight). In that case, they are sent to the stake president, who then gives them to the bishop. These are very helpful; more so in the past than now, now that there is a character limit in the reports (when they were paper reports, they could be as long as needed. Now, you need to be succinct and brief). The most helpful ones read like Supreme Court deliberations, with interplay and dialogue (questions, answers, and comments) between those present. The best one I ever worked with was a BYU disciplinary council. Talk about an all star cast in the stake presidency and high council! Richard L. Anderson, Eugene England, etc. It was very well written, and you could reconstruct the entire deliberation, testimony, etc. from it. 

Now, they are mostly very terse, brief statements of some basic details. 

[Calm]

Thanks for the info from all, points to come when I get more.  I have never heard or seen this topic discussed in detail and it is very helpful in understanding how these things are communicated.