Were you taught not to go to the police?

[JAHS]

According to the Church handbook:

"If confidential information indicates that a member’s abusive activities have violated applicable law, the bishop or stake president should urge the member to report these activities to the appropriate government authorities. Leaders can obtain information about local reporting requirements through the help line. Where reporting is required by law, the leader encourages the member to secure qualified legal advice.

So I guess the Bishop can report such things if required by local requirements. Should they report it anyway even if not required?

[mfbukowski]

3 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

You don't know me, nor what is hard for me to hear. So please do not assume you know me, nor my ability to deal with reality. I am on the side of the women who was raped by John Bishop, and find it as abhorrent as anyone. It is your comments that I find offensive, and your alleged comments and actions of others, willing to name no one but GA's, whom you claim to have taught others to not report crimes. I have served in many leadership positions in my 39 years of membership. In that time, no one, no leadership book, no lesson and no conference talk have ever suggested that crimes not be reported, and to be handled "in house". In fact, as a retired police officer, I would not only have taken issue with someone being told not to report a crime, but if in my jurisdiction, I would have arrested anyone for withholding a crime, as doing so is a crime itself. So, if I had ever been told to not report a crime, I would have been required to repost anyone who did so to the proper authorities.

The only reality here, is how so many wish to pile on to serve their agendas, and your agenda of putting all men, especially those who serve in the Church on the same level as the man who raped this young missionary. So forgive me, I am not buying what you are trying to sell. But, my "troll antenna", are out and working. 

Wow! Latin: "Sockituum" 

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Things are really changing though and I believe many more members (and most especially leaders) know that it's important to report the crime and allow the police to investigate from there.

It is not important to report crime, it is a crime not to report crime. When it involves the harming of others, or the potential of harming others, any Priesthood Leader can and will be charged with a crime, and if convicted, jailed. Unlike Catholic Priests and Bishops, our Priests and Bishops are required to report crimes that relate to the harming of others, such as rape, incest, murder, to name a few.   

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Wow! Latin: "Sockituum" 

Sometimes, polite kindness just will not work. I took no pleasure in doing so, as it is not in my nature to be so abrupt. 

[ALarson]

When you search abuse on lds.org, here is what a member is told to do:

Quote

 

Victims of abuse should seek help immediately, normally from their bishop or branch president. His first responsibility is to help those who have been abused and to protect those who may be vulnerable to future abuse.

Victims of abuse should be assured that they are not to blame for the harmful behavior of others. They do not need to feel guilt. If they have been a victim of rape or other sexual abuse, whether they have been abused by an acquaintance, a stranger, or even a family member, victims of sexual abuse are not guilty of sexual sin.

Victims of abuse can seek help from their priesthood leader to guide them through the process of emotional healing. Through the blessings of the gospel, victims of abuse can stop the cycle of abuse and be freed from the suffering they have experienced.

 

https://www.lds.org/topics/abuse?lang=eng

So even though it's not actively taught to NOT contact the police, it's easy to understand why members first go to their church leader.

Edited April 5, 2018 by ALarson

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, provoman said:

A victim of abuse has stated “We are taught in the church, we don’t go to police,”

 

I was never taught “we don’t go to police”, were any of you?

And I dont mean an instance after abuse was reported.

The statement clearly indicates the LDS people “are taught”, as a people, to not go to police when abuse occurs.

I think this BYU study from last year supports the idea that Mormons are taught this ethic of not going to the police.  According to the study only 3% of respondents reported abuse to police.  The clear preference for those reporting at all was to report to ecclesiastical leaders at 26%.  I was very saddened to see the results of this study, and I think it shows the need for significant progress on this topic.  

https://news.byu.edu/sites/default/files/Campus Climate Report_F2017.pdf

 

[hope_for_things]

9 minutes ago, ALarson said:

When you search abuse on lds.org, here is what a member is told to do:

https://www.lds.org/topics/abuse?lang=eng

So even though it's not actively taught to NOT contact the police, it's easy to understand why members first go to their church leader.

Thanks for finding this.  I think this policy is clearly outdated, and puts the victims and the church at risk.  I think the church would be wise to completely change direction on this topic.  Their best course of action in my opinion would be to clearly instruct abuse survivors to immediately contact the multitude of resources in the community for help.  I have an app on my phone in Utah called SafeUT, where someone can chat with a crisis counselor, many employers have EAP (Emergency Assistance Programs) through their insurance, there are free help lines people can call, all kinds of resources with trained and qualified individuals to help people.  

Option B, that does create some level of risk would be to provide church supported resources with properly trained individuals to assist, but I think it would be smarter if the church just completely deferred to the already prevalent resources out there.  Just like they defer in giving qualified medical, legal, financial or psychological advice, they should also defer on giving advice to victims of abuse. 

Church leaders are not "authorities in general" we need to quit treating them like they are. 

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, ALarson said:

I don't believe it's openly taught of course.

That doesn't change the fact that many church members go directly to their church leaders first (to get counsel as to how to proceed from there).  I've seen this happen so many times that I know many believe they first go to their Bishop.

I personally know of way too many instances where no police were called in after a member reported abuse as well.  The perpetrator (especially if an active member of the church) is first called in and even if they confess, are many times worked with privately to repent and no call is ever made to the police.  That is what needs to stop.

Of course, I know that there are cases where the police are called.  That needs to become EVERY time abuse is reported though.

provoman was not asking just about abuse, but about calling the police in general.  In the USA, police are nearly always called when crimes are committed.  There are obviously countries in which it would not be wise to call the police.  There is no general teaching in Mormonism that one should not call the police, but it is understandable that sexual and other domestic abuse crimes might automatically cause hesitation in going to the police.  But that would be true for people from any religious background. I don't know about non-religious people.  The level of embarrassment associated with some crimes seems to dictate the personal response.  That is a problem which is difficult to overcome.  Bishops should advise all victims to go to the police.  What does Handbook 1 say?

As to the perpetrator, it doesn't seem to me odd that a bishop might want to help such a person repent, since we supposedly believe in repentance.  Given clerical confidentiality law, the bishop can only advise a person to turn himself in.  A bishop might rightly hold the perp responsible and demand that he go to the police and confess, but he cannot force him to go.  That is even true in cases of murder and rape.  The bishop cannot go to the police.

[Stargazer]

The one thing that I have noticed is that sometimes people assume that what they have witnessed, even several times, is a systemic problem and "everyone has seen it". Generalizing from one's own subjective experience is endemic with the human experience, but this doesn't mean it's correct.  Except for what has been said here from time to time I've never heard of any incident where members were counseled to keep the police out of something.  And yet some insist that their personal experience is somehow universal, and get huffy when others say "I've never heard of it."  Well, what if we haven't?  We can't very well agree with you that it is universal when we've never seen it, can we?

I am reminded how people will discount statistical studies that indicate that something in particular happens with regular frequency to many people, and will then scratch their heads in puzzlement because it has never happened to them.  This goes both ways, by the way.  Just because you smoked your entirely life and never got lung cancer doesn't mean it doesn't happen.  Just because you got lung cancer as a result of smoking doesn't mean it always happens.

So go ahead with the meme about "Don't go to the police", but please don't expect everyone to go along just because YOU'VE heard of it or seen it.  You are not the amazing omnipresent person.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Stargazer

[Tacenda]

13 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks for finding this.  I think this policy is clearly outdated, and puts the victims and the church at risk.  I think the church would be wise to completely change direction on this topic.  Their best course of action in my opinion would be to clearly instruct abuse survivors to immediately contact the multitude of resources in the community for help.  I have an app on my phone in Utah called SafeUT, where someone can chat with a crisis counselor, many employers have EAP (Emergency Assistance Programs) through their insurance, there are free help lines people can call, all kinds of resources with trained and qualified individuals to help people.  

Option B, that does create some level of risk would be to provide church supported resources with properly trained individuals to assist, but I think it would be smarter if the church just completely deferred to the already prevalent resources out there.  Just like they defer in giving qualified medical, legal, financial or psychological advice, they should also defer on giving advice to victims of abuse. 

Church leaders are not "authorities in general" we need to quit treating them like they are. 

I cut and pasted from the link, I think this needs to be changed:

"Abuse is the treatment of others or self in a way that causes injury or offense. It harms the mind and the spirit and often injures the body as well. It can cause confusion, doubt, mistrust, and fear. It is a violation of the laws of society and is in total opposition to the teachings of the Savior. The Lord condemns abusive behavior in any form—physical, sexual, verbal, or emotional. Abusive behavior may lead to Church discipline.

Those who have been abusive in any relationship are urged to repent of their sin, to plead with the Lord for forgiveness, and to ask for forgiveness from those who have been harmed. Those who have been abusive should also speak with their bishop or branch president so he can help them through the repentance process and, if necessary, help them receive additional counseling or other assistance. Part of the repentance process may also include accepting whatever penalties are imposed by law.

Victims of abuse should seek help immediately, normally from their bishop or branch president. His first responsibility is to help those who have been abused and to protect those who may be vulnerable to future abuse.

Victims of abuse should be assured that they are not to blame for the harmful behavior of others. They do not need to feel guilt. If they have been a victim of rape or other sexual abuse, whether they have been abused by an acquaintance, a stranger, or even a family member, victims of sexual abuse are not guilty of sexual sin.

Victims of abuse can seek help from their priesthood leader to guide them through the process of emotional healing. Through the blessings of the gospel, victims of abuse can stop the cycle of abuse and be freed from the suffering they have experienced.

[ALarson]

12 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

provoman was not asking just about abuse, but about calling the police in general. 

He used the word "abuse" throughout his OP:

Quote

 

A victim of abuse has stated “We are taught in the church, we don’t go to police,”

 

I was never taught “we don’t go to police”, were any of you?

And I dont mean an instance after abuse was reported.

The statement clearly indicates the LDS people “are taught”, as a people, to not go to police when abuse occurs.

 

 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

You don't know me, nor what is hard for me to hear. So please do not assume you know me, nor my ability to deal with reality. I am on the side of the women who was raped by John Bishop, and find it as abhorrent as anyone. It is your comments that I find offensive, and your alleged comments and actions of others, willing to name no one but GA's, whom you claim to have taught others to not report crimes. I have served in many leadership positions in my 39 years of membership. In that time, no one, no leadership book, no lesson and no conference talk have ever suggested that crimes not be reported, and to be handled "in house". In fact, as a retired police officer, I would not only have taken issue with someone being told not to report a crime, but if in my jurisdiction, I would have arrested anyone for withholding a crime, as doing so is a crime itself. So, if I had ever been told to not report a crime, I would have been required to repost anyone who did so to the proper authorities.

The only reality here, is how so many wish to pile on to serve their agendas, and your agenda of putting all men, especially those who serve in the Church on the same level as the man who raped this young missionary. So forgive me, I am not buying what you are trying to sell. But, my "troll antenna", are out and working. 

Out of curiosity, Papa, how often did you hear training encouraging police involvement?

I don't remember hearing either at church.

My parents got royally shafted by a family who they allowed to move into their house while they moved into the converted garage at which point the parents refused to allow the kids to interact with my parents, the adults ignored them except at church, tore apart the yard including a beautiful brick and rod iron fence in the name of renovating and then left it a dirt and brick pile, tore up the carpet in the house without permission and actually did a nice job there where they were living (my parents are pretty certain the yard thing was to drive them out), and reported to the ward how they were taking care of my parents in their old age and oncoming dementia when my parents were only in their 60s and as healthy as they ever were and sharp as whips.  And it turned out the dad had defrauded several members in the previous ward and our bishop knew about it prior to them moving in but never warned my dad even though my parents had been good friends and members for 15 or more years.  It was just bizarre to me that no one spoke up until I heard stories of other members, such as Juliann.

 Affinity fraud is well known in Utah.  Not saying a lot of people do it, but there are many victims.  It is probably successful for the same reason abuse doesn't get reported.  I just hope this doesn't mean there is more abuse and less reporting among LDS than elsewhere, but rather we do okay and maybe even good in some ways because there is a strong support system, but like everyone else need to do better.

 

Edited April 5, 2018 by Calm

[sheilauk]

Not reporting to the police is a common idea among all people.  That some Mormons don't feel able to is of no surprise to me.  No one is taught it but no one will do it.   They are afraid of eg reprisals, the involvement of social services, breaking up the family, not being believed, being further humiliated,  or because they think the police will not do anything, or  its because they love the offender and believe/want him/her to change.  In the case of abuse, they and others involved or aware can also feel an unspoken pressure to stay silent.   This was particularly so in the past when sexual assault was not spoken about.   I have worked in criminal law for 30 years, sadly little has changed, though there has been a surge in reporting historical abuse. It can take years and many assaults before someone has the strength to report abuse. heck, people won't even get involved when they have witnessed fights, thefts, damage, etc.  When they do report it, they can feel ashamed or embarrassed about the delay. This attitude is not exclusive to Mormons, religious people or any group.  Most of the victims I have encountered have shown varying degrees of reluctance.  I have suffered two sexual assaults.   In neither case did I report it.  (I would now) Victims need support 1st before they report and no victim should be forced (encouraged,  yes) to report a crime, even if the perpetrator wants to confess.  its a traumatic experience. We need to stop blaming victims, Bishops, the Church, or whatever for what they didnt do and help people (victims and advisors and supporters) become stronger so that they feel capable of dealing with the trauma, including reporting it, when it occurs.  BTW, in the UK, it's not a crime to not report a crime.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

According to the Church handbook:

"If confidential information indicates that a member’s abusive activities have violated applicable law, the bishop or stake president should urge the member to report these activities to the appropriate government authorities. Leaders can obtain information about local reporting requirements through the help line. Where reporting is required by law, the leader encourages the member to secure qualified legal advice.

So I guess the Bishop can report such things if required by local requirements. Should they report it anyway even if not required?

Not if it is against the law, it could screw up prosecution from what I have heard (fruit of the poisonous tree).

If abuse was ongoing and there wasn't anything legal a bishop could do about it (the Church is not the government, people refuse help, they can't force it), I would definitely encourage a burner phone and anonymous tip though.  It might not be as effective, but police showing up asking questions might break the wall of silence of the family or scare the predator.

If a parent refuses to report the abuse of a child and a bishop has nothing but a confession he cannot share due to the law in his state or country, would threatening discipline or even excommunication of the other parent unless they go to the police be something ultimately helpful or damaging in people's view?  

I can see it as both and potentially destructive, but it might stop abuse as well.

It is also not like reporting abuse to police or child protection services is a magic  bullet either.  I am not impressed by the stats I have seen.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Calm

[hope_for_things]

37 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I cut and pasted from the link, I think this needs to be changed:

"Abuse is the treatment of others or self in a way that causes injury or offense. It harms the mind and the spirit and often injures the body as well. It can cause confusion, doubt, mistrust, and fear. It is a violation of the laws of society and is in total opposition to the teachings of the Savior. The Lord condemns abusive behavior in any form—physical, sexual, verbal, or emotional. Abusive behavior may lead to Church discipline.

Those who have been abusive in any relationship are urged to repent of their sin, to plead with the Lord for forgiveness, and to ask for forgiveness from those who have been harmed. Those who have been abusive should also speak with their bishop or branch president so he can help them through the repentance process and, if necessary, help them receive additional counseling or other assistance. Part of the repentance process may also include accepting whatever penalties are imposed by law.

Victims of abuse should seek help immediately, normally from their bishop or branch president. His first responsibility is to help those who have been abused and to protect those who may be vulnerable to future abuse.

Victims of abuse should be assured that they are not to blame for the harmful behavior of others. They do not need to feel guilt. If they have been a victim of rape or other sexual abuse, whether they have been abused by an acquaintance, a stranger, or even a family member, victims of sexual abuse are not guilty of sexual sin.

Victims of abuse can seek help from their priesthood leader to guide them through the process of emotional healing. Through the blessings of the gospel, victims of abuse can stop the cycle of abuse and be freed from the suffering they have experienced.

What about this language do you agree with?  The primary advice is for the victim to seek help from their ecclesiastical leaders, this is the key part I think needs to change.  

[juliann]

2 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

Wow, "men acting as men", yes indeed let's continue to reinforce the narrative that all men are evil, and all men are predators. More faceless, nameless indictments that cannot be proven, that paint all Preisthood holders with the same broad brush. The only names you wish to give are the GA's you blame, but none of the names, dates, and faces of these "men acting as men". Your cheap shot is noted, we "men" are all evil, and the Church most of all. Does that sum up your accusations? 

And this is why we can never have a reasonable discussion when women are victims. It suddenly becomes all about the men. Give it a rest, critics will always look for the weak spots and must love this one and I assume this poster, if male, isn't calling himself evil. We all know not all men are predators. Good grief this gets tiresome.

[juliann]

22 minutes ago, Calm said:

Out of curiosity, Papa, how often did you hear training encouraging police involvement?

I don't remember hearing either at church.

 

https://www.lds.org/manual/eternal-marriage-student-manual/abuse?lang=eng  This is from 2003, not a fully enlightened era.  There is not one mention of police.

Quote

 

Abuse is the physical, emotional, sexual, or spiritual mistreatment of others.

—Responding to Abuse

 

 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1987/09/random-sampler/protect-yourself?lang=eng

This is a 1987 standard list of what women should do to protect themselves from attack, like carrying car keys. As in be very, very afraid at all times. No mention of what men should do to not attack. Police are peripherally mentioned. 

Edited April 5, 2018 by juliann

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

It is not important to report crime, it is a crime not to report crime. When it involves the harming of others, or the potential of harming others, any Priesthood Leader can and will be charged with a crime, and if convicted, jailed. Unlike Catholic Priests and Bishops, our Priests and Bishops are required to report crimes that relate to the harming of others, such as rape, incest, murder, to name a few.   

Depends on the jurisdiction and how they have learned of the abuse, Papa, from what lawyers have told me.  They can report it if learned outside a confessional. It can vary if they learn it from within.  Sounds like your state had stricter rules about reporting.

Bishops are currently required to call the hotline, I believe, (and have been for quite sometime iirc) so they can be given the appropriate legal requirements for their area as well as given advice by a professional from Family Services (rongo iirc has described what happens for him).  However, if a Bishop refuses to use a hotline, he may be released and even disciplined, but the Church can't send him to jail.

Anything that applies to a Catholic priest in law would apply to other faith's clergy or it would be a violation of church and state, I am thinking (different rules for different religions means state support of religion).

Edited April 5, 2018 by Calm

[Hamba Tuhan]

15 minutes ago, sheilauk said:

Not reporting to the police is a common idea among all people.

I live in a jurisdiction that, following three high-profile cases, imposed a per-household family safety levy and is using this large sum of money to try to tackle the problem. They employed a fantastic woman to lead the effort, and her first task was to consult across the community, and especially with victims, in order to shape the government's practical response. This took about a year, and the results were published last year. The central message: victims of abuse overwhelmingly don't want the solution to involve police or courts

[Calm]

"I think this BYU study from last year supports the idea that Mormons are taught this ethic of not going to the police.  According to the study only 3% of respondents reported abuse to police.  The clear preference for those reporting at all was to report to ecclesiastical leaders at 26%.  I was very saddened to see the results of this study, and I think it shows the need for significant progress on this topic."

Do you have stats for nonMormons to compare this to?

[Calm]

1 minute ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I live in a jurisdiction that, following three high-profile cases, imposed a per-household family safety levy and is using this large sum of money to try to tackle the problem. They employed a fantastic woman to lead the effort, and her first task was to consult across the community, and especially with victims, in order to shape the government's practical response. This took about a year, and the results were published last year. The central message: victims of abuse overwhelmingly don't want the solution to involve police or courts

I really love this idea.

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

I really love this idea.

Yeah, our current government is riddled with corruption, but this is the best thing they're currently working on, in my opinion. It helps that they found and employed such a capable woman to lead the effort. Of course, now she has her head down with her team trying to craft a practical response that keeps people safe but doesn't rely (except when it absolutely needs to) on the traditional solution of law enforcement and courts. I'm cheering her on! If we get this even half right, it will become a model for jurisdictions all around the world.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The level of embarrassment associated with some crimes seems to dictate the personal response.  That is a problem which is difficult to overcome.

It is not just embarrassment.  As Sheila mentioned fear of reprisal is huge and just being place in such a vulnerable state, loss of confidence in oneself to be able to protect oneself, and having to relive the ordeal over and over again.  They need to put distance between themselves and that experience of extreme fear, violation, disgust, and often betrayal to give themselves a sense of control again.  Many victims talk themselves into believing if they just pretend it didn't happen, life will go back to normal, they won't have to think about it.

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Yeah, our current government is riddled with corruption, but this is the best thing they're currently working on, in my opinion. It helps that they found and employed such a capable woman to lead the effort. Of course, now she has her head down with her team trying to craft a practical response that keeps people safe but doesn't rely (except when it absolutely needs to) on the traditional solution of law enforcement and courts. I'm cheering her on! If we get this even half right, it will become a model for jurisdictions all around the world.

Please let us know what happens.

[sheilauk]

5 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I live in a jurisdiction that, following three high-profile cases, imposed a per-household family safety levy and is using this large sum of money to try to tackle the problem. They employed a fantastic woman to lead the effort, and her first task was to consult across the community, and especially with victims, in order to shape the government's practical response. This took about a year, and the results were published last year. The central message: victims of abuse overwhelmingly don't want the solution to involve police or courts

 

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

I really love this idea.

I like the idea of asking victims.  In my experience,  the courts are traumatic and heavy handed, but often there is nothing else available to make it stop or provide protection.  Counselling services and other help are just not available in the UK due to public spending cuts and a lack of caring.   It's frustrating.  Mormons at least have a bishop and family services.