Church provides more guidance for youth interviews

[bsjkki]

The church has come out with more guidance for youth interviews. https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/new-guidelines-for-interviewing-youth

Guidelines for Interviewing Youth

Bishops have a sacred responsibility to lead, teach, and inspire youth. Effective personal interviews are one important way they do this. These interviews provide opportunities to help youth become disciples of the Savior, repent of transgressions, and live the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Those who conduct interviews with youth should prepare themselves spiritually to be guided by the Holy Ghost. As part of that preparation, we encourage them to carefully review the guidelines for interviews and counseling in chapter 7 of Handbook 1. Section 7.1.7 of that chapter, “Guidelines for Youth Interviews,” has been updated in the enclosure and will soon be updated online and in the Gospel Library. Also, the language in question 7 for limited-use recommends has been simplified.

To help ensure that youth and parents are aware of the topics and questions covered in these interviews, the bishop should share the enclosed guidelines with them before the first interview.Generally, children younger than 11 are not interviewed except in preparation for baptism or to be sealed to their parents in the temple. These interviews are different in nature from youth interviews, and parents are typically present.

Edited June 21, 2018 by bsjkki
fixed link

[bsjkki]

Here is the secton on what the Bishop should explain to the parents before interviewing children. 

The Bishop’s Communication about Interviews

As a young woman prepares to become part of the Young Women organization, and as a young man prepares to receive the Aaronic Priesthood, the bishop shares with youth and their parents the following information about interviews. He could do this as part of the annual Temple and Priesthood Preparation meeting or at other times as needed.

• Parents have the primary responsibility to teach and nurture their children.
• Typically, the bishop or one of his counselors will interview the young man or young woman at least twice a year for the reasons outlined in “Purposes of Interviews” below. A bishopric member may also meet with youth to answer questions, give support, or extend assignments.
• To help youth prepare spiritually, interviews are required for sacred matters such as temple recommends, priesthood ordinations, and mission calls. Leaders work with parents to help youth prepare for these interviews.
• Parents encourage their children to meet with the bishop when they need his help with spiritual guidance or with repentance.
• If a youth desires, he or she may invite a parent or another adult to be present when meeting with the bishop or one of his counselors.

[JulieM]

28 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

Here is the secton on what the Bishop should explain to the parents before interviewing children. 

The Bishop’s Communication about Interviews

As a young woman prepares to become part of the Young Women organization, and as a young man prepares to receive the Aaronic Priesthood, the bishop shares with youth and their parents the following information about interviews. He could do this as part of the annual Temple and Priesthood Preparation meeting or at other times as needed.

• Parents have the primary responsibility to teach and nurture their children.
• Typically, the bishop or one of his counselors will interview the young man or young woman at least twice a year for the reasons outlined in “Purposes of Interviews” below. A bishopric member may also meet with youth to answer questions, give support, or extend assignments.
• To help youth prepare spiritually, interviews are required for sacred matters such as temple recommends, priesthood ordinations, and mission calls. Leaders work with parents to help youth prepare for these interviews.
• Parents encourage their children to meet with the bishop when they need his help with spiritual guidance or with repentance.
• If a youth desires, he or she may invite a parent or another adult to be present when meeting with the bishop or one of his counselors.

I especially like that last point and I hope that’s made clear to parents.  It has been by our bishop and I’ve seen several parents attend their youth’s interviews.  I think many just didn’t realize it was an option before, so this is progress, imo.

Edited June 21, 2018 by JulieM

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, JulieM said:

I especially like that last point and I hope that’s made clear to parents.  It has been by our bishop and I’ve seen several parents attend their youth’s interviews.  I think many just didn’t realize it was an option before, so this is progress, imo.

This is what I wanted. Where having another adult is allowed but it is the interviewed person who has the option and they choose whom it should be.

[Calm]

Church policy speaking, a bishop could see a youth who came to him privately because they didn't want parents to be present even if the parents had insisted they be present for the official interviews and of course, the kid agreed.

Would there be legal issues if this happened?

[JulieM]

17 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

This is what I wanted. Where having another adult is allowed but it is the interviewed person who has the option and they choose whom it should be.

I think it’s good too!

Parents can still legally object to their child/teen being alone for interviews though, isn’t that correct?  I think they can still insist one of them is present (legally).  

I would hope they’d discuss it with their child though as well.

Edited June 21, 2018 by JulieM

[jkwilliams]

18 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

This is what I wanted. Where having another adult is allowed but it is the interviewed person who has the option and they choose whom it should be.

That sounds totally reasonable. 

[JulieM]

7 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

That sounds totally reasonable. 

My husband has requested (in writing) that none of our kids are interviewed without one of us being present.  Our bishop has been very supportive and wonderful about it.  

[HappyJackWagon]

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

Church policy speaking, a bishop could see a youth who came to him privately because they didn't want parents to be present even if the parents had insisted they be present for the official interviews and of course, the kid agreed.

Would there be legal issues if this happened?

I'm really struggling to see what is different about these "changes". Seems like a reiteration of previous statements. It feels like this statement is being made because they feel they need to explain the purpose of the interviews, as if people don't know.

So if a parent tells a leader that they should never be alone with their minor child, I believe that should be honored. The parent is responsible for the child. The church doesn't have the right to tell the child they can do something the parent has already forbidden. IOW- If I tell the bishop my daughter that she should never be interviewed without a parent present, but my daughter tells him its okay to meet privately, and he does, we're going to have serious problems. Not only does grooming ingratiate someone to their potential victim but often times it also tries to alienate the victims from loved ones in whom they may confide. It's not ok to let a child override a parent's decision.

My daughter may not understand the risks from which I'm trying to protect her. And what if a youth and a leader are doing something inappropriate. The parent forbade it but the kid said it's okay, so no problem? I don't think so.

Parents are responsible for their children. Period.

If a child is needing to share information that implicates a parent in wrong doing, then they should be going to the police, not the bishop.

Edited June 21, 2018 by HappyJackWagon

[HappyJackWagon]

26 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

That sounds totally reasonable. 

I don't think it is. A child shouldn't be able to override a parent's attempts at keeping them safe. As long as he/she is a minor, the parent makes the decision. Someone who is grooming the child could convince the child it was okay to be alone and even work to alienate the child from the parent. Not reasonable at all.

[jkwilliams]

20 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I don't think it is. A child shouldn't be able to override a parent's attempts at keeping them safe. As long as he/she is a minor, the parent makes the decision. Someone who is grooming the child could convince the child it was okay to be alone and even work to alienate the child from the parent. Not reasonable at all.

I see your point. Do other churches have these kinds of interviews? Seems to me that this concept of worthiness is unique to Mormonism. I don’t know. 

[HappyJackWagon]

8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I see your point. Do other churches have these kinds of interviews? Seems to me that this concept of worthiness is unique to Mormonism. I don’t know. 

Not that I'm aware of. And I can't imagine another church meeting one-on-one with a youth after the parents expressly forbade it.

[blueglass]

These interview guidelines are anemic, and I don't see anything new here other than adult may be present.  I went into the interview with my son recently (14-yo) to become a teacher, and several questions related to the law of chastity went into detail about pornography.   He asked about whether my son looks for pornography, my son's understanding about pornography and said that pornography is a problem for kids as young as 9 years old so he has to ask about it.  It really got a bit depressing at that point.  We do so poorly helping kids look forward to sexuality, emotional intimacy, communication with young women and we drown them with the scary pornography warnings.  I was able to chime in and talk about the great things he has to look forward to with dances, and how important it is to strengthen relationships with young women by asking about their interests, and sharing your views on the gospel.  It was my feeble attempt to get a more positive mood back into the interview and turn it around.  When I was a counselor in the bishopric from time to time youth would voluntarily confess sexual sins as if they were expected to.  A young woman would ask about what serious sins they were supposed to confess to a priesthood leader?  Question14.   I had no idea what to say so I just referred her to her parents.

Edited June 21, 2018 by blueglass

[hope_for_things]

4 hours ago, bsjkki said:

The church has come out with more guidance for youth interviews. https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/new-guidelines-for-interviewing-youth

Thanks for posting the update.  Baby steps forward, that is the way the church seems to come around on these issues of importance.  

I noticed the comment at the bottom saying that if a Bishop or Stake Presidency interview with a woman is happening, that they can request another adult to be present.  This guideline used to apply to just youth if I'm not mistaken.  

There are still important things missing in these guidelines.  It should say something about not talking about any details of a sexual nature under any circumstances, that would be preferred.  Also, I would prefer if they not only allow for parents to be present, but expect parents to be present for interviews of children.  That should be a standard requirement.  Maybe these things will happen in future updates.  

 

[JulieM]

8 minutes ago, blueglass said:

These interview guidelines are anemic, and I don't see anything new here other than adult may be present.  I went into the interview with my son recently (14-yo) to become a teacher, and several questions related to the law of chastity went into detail about pornography.   He asked about whether my son looks for pornography, my son's understanding about pornography and said that pornography is a problem for kids as young as 9 years old so he has to ask about it.  It really got a bit depressing at that point.  We do so poorly helping kids look forward to sexuality, emotional intimacy, communication with young women and we drown them with the scary pornography warnings.  I was able to chime in and talk about the great things he has to look forward to with dances, and how important it is to strengthen relationships with young women by asking about their interests, and sharing your views on the gospel.  It was my feeble attempt to get a more positive mood back into the interview and turn it around.  When I was a counselor in the bishopric from time to time youth would voluntarily confess sexual sins as if they were expected to.  A young woman would ask about what serious sins they were supposed to confess to a priesthood leader?  Question14.   I had no idea what to say so I just referred her to her parents.

This is why my husband has made it clear that one of us needs to be present for our son’s interviews.  They should not be asking probing or sexually personal questions (nothing about masturbation, IMO).  My husband had a horrible experience with one of his leaders that really messed him up and he’s making sure nothing like that happens with our kids.  

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Church policy speaking, a bishop could see a youth who came to him privately because they didn't want parents to be present even if the parents had insisted they be present for the official interviews and of course, the kid agreed.

Would there be legal issues if this happened?

Yes, liability issues for the church leader.  This is why the 2 deep rule is enforced for scouting and other organizations.  I see this as a risk for the church, its leaders, and for the children.  Hopefully they will change this in the future.  

[hope_for_things]

14 minutes ago, blueglass said:

These interview guidelines are anemic, and I don't see anything new here other than adult may be present.  I went into the interview with my son recently (14-yo) to become a teacher, and several questions related to the law of chastity went into detail about pornography.   He asked about whether my son looks for pornography, my son's understanding about pornography and said that pornography is a problem for kids as young as 9 years old so he has to ask about it.  It really got a bit depressing at that point.  We do so poorly helping kids look forward to sexuality, emotional intimacy, communication with young women and we drown them with the scary pornography warnings.  I was able to chime in and talk about the great things he has to look forward to with dances, and how important it is to strengthen relationships with young women by asking about their interests, and sharing your views on the gospel.  It was my feeble attempt to get a more positive mood back into the interview and turn it around.  When I was a counselor in the bishopric from time to time youth would voluntarily confess sexual sins as if they were expected to.  A young woman would ask about what serious sins they were supposed to confess to a priesthood leader?  Question14.   I had no idea what to say so I just referred her to her parents.

So sad.  Another problem with the church way of leaving the guidelines so open for the leaders "use your judgement and follow the spirit".  This has leaders perpetuating problems from their prior generations and how they were taught by those old leaders.  If there were some comprehensive training on how to handle these topics in appropriate ways, perhaps they could navigate these waters better.  As is, following the spirit just has people repeating what they learned from other leaders and perpetuating their own personal inexperience and biases.  We can do better.  

[katherine the great]

6 minutes ago, JulieM said:

This is why my husband has made it clear that one of us needs to be present for our son’s interviews.  They should not be asking probing or sexually personal questions (nothing about masturbation, IMO).  My husband had a horrible experience with one of his leaders that really messed him up and he’s making sure nothing like that happens with our kids.  

I felt that way about my children's interviews too. The interview process presents potential problems no matter how it is conducted. Inappropriate questions can be asked if the parent is not present and the flip side is that in the rare case where the child is being abused at home, there is no chance for the child to report to the Bishop if the parent is always present. I'm just glad that all my children are grown and I don't have to deal with it directly any more. 

[strappinglad]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

 A child shouldn't be able to override a parent's attempts at keeping them safe. As long as he/she is a minor, the parent makes the decision.

Just so you know, I agree with this , BUT , the State may override. Where I live ( Canada ) there is a law on the books forbidding schools from informing parents that their student has joined a gay-straight alliance ( club) . Are topics of a sexual nature discussed at these club meetings ? Yes . Are there videos/ demonstrations showing gay/straight sex? Yes. The thinking is that telling the parents might put a student into a confrontation with a not-so-progressive adult. Parental rights are set aside. There is currently a court battle over this issue ongoing. Is it even conceivable that " grooming" could take place in such a setting? No, never, wouldn't happen... OK , if you insist .

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I don't think it is. A child shouldn't be able to override a parent's attempts at keeping them safe. As long as he/she is a minor, the parent makes the decision. Someone who is grooming the child could convince the child it was okay to be alone and even work to alienate the child from the parent. Not reasonable at all.

I agree (the parent has final say regardless of what the child wants).  However, statically speaking the child is at much more risk of being abused by a parent than by a bishop, and a parent's determination to be present against the child's wishes could keep the child from feeling safe enough to tell someone.

This issue is full of all sorts of gray areas.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'm really struggling to see what is different about these "changes". Seems like a reiteration of previous statements. It feels like this statement is being made because they feel they need to explain the purpose of the interviews, as if people don't know.

If a child is needing to share information that implicates a parent in wrong doing, then they should be going to the police, not the bishop.

People I have been talking to say no differences to how they have been handling things, just officially written now.  It is probably a good idea to issue slight changes now and then to get leaders actually reading guidelines to keep up rather than just assuming they know it all already.

"f a child is needing to share information that implicates a parent in wrong doing, then they should be going to the police, not the bishop."

How many children can casually drop by a police station these days?  Or know a policeman so they would not be facing talking to a total stranger.

I certainly never knew a policeman growing up or was in walking or biking to a police station until I was 15.  It would have likely never occured to me even though I was taught policemen are safe.  I can  think of one high school teacher I might have talked to but several church leaders.  Minorities that have negative history with police may have a big problem going to them for help.

Edited June 22, 2018 by Calm

[Calm]

3 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks for posting the update.  Baby steps forward, that is the way the church seems to come around on these issues of importance.  

I noticed the comment at the bottom saying that if a Bishop or Stake Presidency interview with a woman is happening, that they can request another adult to be present.  This guideline used to apply to just youth if I'm not mistaken.  

It was changed shortly before conference.

[hope_for_things]

16 minutes ago, Calm said:

It was changed shortly before conference.

Thanks, I must have missed that part.  

[Traela]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

I agree (the parent has final say regardless of what the child wants).  However, statically speaking the child is at much more risk of being abused by a parent than by a bishop, and a parent's determination to be present against the child's wishes could keep the child from feeling safe enough to tell someone.

This issue is full of all sorts of gray areas.

Or, the child might want to discuss something personal without the parents present.

 

[jkwilliams]

3 hours ago, katherine the great said:

I felt that way about my children's interviews too. The interview process presents potential problems no matter how it is conducted. Inappropriate questions can be asked if the parent is not present and the flip side is that in the rare case where the child is being abused at home, there is no chance for the child to report to the Bishop if the parent is always present. I'm just glad that all my children are grown and I don't have to deal with it directly any more. 

My kids are all grown. They have told me of things that happened in a church setting that I am sorry they went through. I feel worse that they felt that anything that was done by church leaders must be OK.