Jeanne Posted October 14, 2018 Posted October 14, 2018 I just watched a very sad show called "Family Lost" that mentioned a bishop and LDS Social Services. I was wondering if any of you have had good experiences with this...or if any member here can relate to the good of this organization and the placement of babies for adoption. Thank you in advance.. I am kind of upset.....
Duncan Posted October 14, 2018 Posted October 14, 2018 I had a good experience with it! I know some others who have as well! 2
Calm Posted October 14, 2018 Posted October 14, 2018 I had a great experience with it. I also know a number of couples who said adopting through the Church's adoption service allowed them to adopt or saved their family from significant financial burden. And they appear to be good families who did well by their adopted children. 1
JulieM Posted October 14, 2018 Posted October 14, 2018 (edited) I’ve heard both good and bad feedback with those in our ward who have gone there. It’s mainly been for marital relations (that I’m aware of) and they were my friends. Many do not know and are upset when they learn that the counselor shares info with the Bishop from their sessions. It’s in the fine print (for those who’s sessions are paid for by church funds). That’s mainly the negative I’ve heard. I’ve known of two women who were very upset about that and had thought what they were sharing was confidential. The Bishop also shared what they’d said with their husbands and I’m not sure how right that was. Edited October 14, 2018 by JulieM 1
Jeanne Posted October 15, 2018 Author Posted October 15, 2018 3 hours ago, Duncan said: I had a good experience with it! I know some others who have as well! Thank you...are you comfortable about expanding on this experience?
Jeanne Posted October 15, 2018 Author Posted October 15, 2018 3 hours ago, Calm said: I had a great experience with it. I also know a number of couples who said adopting through the Church's adoption service allowed them to adopt or saved their family from significant financial burden. And they appear to be good families who did well by their adopted children. Thank you...I wondered because in the program I watched, I was baffled not by the bishop or LDS Services itself, but the fact that the family kicked her out after the baby was born...she was pushing just 13 years old and went into foster care. I can't imagine a bishop, ward or family understanding any of this and help the situation in perhaps a different way.
Jeanne Posted October 15, 2018 Author Posted October 15, 2018 2 hours ago, JulieM said: I’ve heard both good and bad feedback with those in our ward who have gone there. It’s mainly been for marital relations (that I’m aware of) and they were my friends. Many do not know and are upset when they learn that the counselor shares info with the Bishop from their sessions. It’s in the fine print (for those who’s sessions are paid for by church funds). That’s mainly the negative I’ve heard. I’ve known of two women who were very upset about that and had thought what they were sharing was confidential. The Bishop also shared what they’d said with their husbands and I’m not sure how right that was. Thank you JulieM...I just can't imagine grandparents giving up on grandchildren...am I crazy? Confidentiality should be the most secured in a situation like this in my view.
katherine the great Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 Do you have a link to the show Jeanne? I haven't heard of "Family Lost". Is it a series like "The Locator" that tries to reunite adopted children with their birth families? I think a popular trend now is open adoption. My friend's daughter gave up her child for adoption through LDS social services and it is an open adoption. It seems to be much better for the mental health of the birth mother and keeps the child in the light as far as her/his heritage and still fills the need for a childless couple to be parents. I like it. 1
Calm Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 (edited) 56 minutes ago, Jeanne said: Thank you...I wondered because in the program I watched, I was baffled not by the bishop or LDS Services itself, but the fact that the family kicked her out after the baby was born...she was pushing just 13 years old and went into foster care. I can't imagine a bishop, ward or family understanding any of this and help the situation in perhaps a different way. What did they show of the bishop, etc.? And did the family say it kicked her out or was that the interpretation she had? Because I have seen where the individual describes it as being kicked out while the parents describe it as either not living by family rules or making extreme demands the family couldn't in good conscience do as they saw it as ultimately harmful. Not saying that is what happened this time, but I prefer to hear all participants tell their perception of what happened before even attempting to judge. Quote ..I just can't imagine grandparents giving up on grandchildren...am I crazy? It just may be grandchildren giving up on grandparents. Edited October 15, 2018 by Calm
katherine the great Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 3 hours ago, JulieM said: I’ve heard both good and bad feedback with those in our ward who have gone there. It’s mainly been for marital relations (that I’m aware of) and they were my friends. Many do not know and are upset when they learn that the counselor shares info with the Bishop from their sessions. It’s in the fine print (for those who’s sessions are paid for by church funds). That’s mainly the negative I’ve heard. I’ve known of two women who were very upset about that and had thought what they were sharing was confidential. The Bishop also shared what they’d said with their husbands and I’m not sure how right that was. Wow. That doesn't seem right. Just to clarify: If the counseling session is paid for by the church then there is no therapeutic confidentiality? It only seems ethical to share with the Bishop whether or not the couple is attending and if the number of sessions approved is adequate. Certainly no intimate details of the husband/wife relationship. 1
JulieM Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 56 minutes ago, katherine the great said: Wow. That doesn't seem right. Just to clarify: If the counseling session is paid for by the church then there is no therapeutic confidentiality? It only seems ethical to share with the Bishop whether or not the couple is attending and if the number of sessions approved is adequate. Certainly no intimate details of the husband/wife relationship. Yeah, I’ve seen the form online (that you sign), but am on my phone now and can find it on my computer tomorrow if you’re interested in seeing it. Here’s a discussion about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/7so0e7/can_anyone_confirm_an_insiders_claim_about_lds/#thing_t1_dt65kke A quote from there: “If your bishop orders therapy sessions and pays, you are required to sign a form giving him the right to reports.”
Duncan Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 2 hours ago, Jeanne said: Thank you...are you comfortable about expanding on this experience? counselling after my divorce. He told me his point was not to help me stay in or out of the Church but a counselling situation for help with the task at hand 1
katherine the great Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 2 hours ago, JulieM said: Yeah, I’ve seen the form online (that you sign), but am on my phone now and can find it on my computer tomorrow if you’re interested in seeing it. Here’s a discussion about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/7so0e7/can_anyone_confirm_an_insiders_claim_about_lds/#thing_t1_dt65kke A quote from there: “If your bishop orders therapy sessions and pays, you are required to sign a form giving him the right to reports.” Ugh. That seems unethical to me.
ksfisher Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, katherine the great said: Ugh. That seems unethical to me. exmormon reddits may not be the best source for information on the church. Sharing information in voluntary. Edited October 15, 2018 by ksfisher 1
JulieM Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, ksfisher said: exmormon reddits may not be the best source for information on the church. Sharing information in voluntary. I’ve seen the form and it’s true you give the counselor permission to share information with your Bishop. I’ll see if I can find it tomorrow (it used to be online in the information on social services). This is only if the ward is paying for your sessions as far as I know. I’d imagine if you’re paying on your own, the forms are different. Edited to add: I tried searching on my phone and the form is called "Authorization For Release of Confidential Information" that you're asked to fill out if the ward is paying for it (giving permission to the counselor to release info to the Bishop). Here's something more on that: "There are 2 ways to approach LDS family services. If you would like helping paying for the therapy, then that needs to be approved through your Bishop and they will contact LDS family services and arrange the payment. Also, if you are receiving financial assistance from the ward the Bishop can request that be conditional on your therapist reporting back to him and you waiving your confidentiality. You can always choose to not waive confidentiality, but then you might lose the financial assistance." Edited October 15, 2018 by JulieM 1
rchorse Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 (edited) If you're paying for yourself, then it works just like any other therapy or family counseling. The bishop would not even know about it. It's only if you explicitly give (voluntary) consent or if the church is paying for the services that the bishop is consulted. Having discussed matters as a bishop with LDS Family Services quite frequently, they do not share "intimate details", but rather whether the services are helping, what the bishop/church could do to support/enhance the therapy, and if the bishop has any information that they think would be helpful for the therapist. Another common topic was what exactly the church is paying for. Many people had a habit of telling LDS Family Services that I had authorized much more than I really had. The bishop/therapist should not be sharing confidential information without the consent of the individual. Edited October 15, 2018 by rchorse 4
ALarson Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, katherine the great said: Ugh. That seems unethical to me. The information that Julie is referring to is accurate. If the counseling is being paid for by funds from the church, the person is required to sign a release of confidential information. I know for a fact that sessions have been discussed with my Bishop that I serve with. Most Bishops would inform the person ahead of time (that this is one of the forms they are asked to sign and information from their sessions may be shared with him...), but I know some do not and it's caused some problems. The Bishop above that Julie posted about should not have shared that information with a sister's husband (especially if it was an abuse situation or other marital issue). I think that is a breach of confidence and he should have at least talked to the wife first regarding it. Edited October 15, 2018 by ALarson
Jane_Doe Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 An important fact I haven't yet seen mention: LDS Family Services stopped being involved with adoptions in 2014. https://www.lds.org/church/news/lds-family-services-no-longer-operating-as-adoption-agency?lang=eng
ALarson Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, rchorse said: If you're paying for yourself, then it works just like any other therapy or family counseling. The bishop would not even know about it. It's only if you explicitly give (voluntary) consent or if the church is paying for the services that the bishop is consulted. Having discussed matters as a bishop with LDS Family Services quite frequently, they do not share "intimate details", but rather whether the services are helping, what the bishop/church could do to support/enhance the therapy, and if the bishop has any information that they think would be helpful for the therapist. Another common topic was what exactly the church is paying for. Many people had a habit of telling LDS Family Services that I had authorized much more than I really had. The bishop/therapist should not be sharing confidential information without the consent of the individual. But they do and have at times (I'm just going from my experience). I know it's caused some issues for members who did not realize this may happen when they agreed to the release of confidential information to the Bishop (if the funds are coming from the church). Many don't even realize what they are signing as it's just grouped with other forms they sign before their first appointment. I think some counselors share more than they should (just my opinion) and also, some Bishops ask more questions than they should to get information . I definitely believe that the person receiving the counseling should have it made clear to them that information from their session could be shared with their Bishop if they sign that form. Edited October 15, 2018 by ALarson
Jeanne Posted October 15, 2018 Author Posted October 15, 2018 14 hours ago, Calm said: What did they show of the bishop, etc.? And did the family say it kicked her out or was that the interpretation she had? Because I have seen where the individual describes it as being kicked out while the parents describe it as either not living by family rules or making extreme demands the family couldn't in good conscience do as they saw it as ultimately harmful. Not saying that is what happened this time, but I prefer to hear all participants tell their perception of what happened before even attempting to judge. It just may be grandchildren giving up on grandparents. I am not understanding your comment on grandchildren giving up on grandparents In this particular case, her parents were never again a part of her life...but she had siblings that finally got to meet the niece that had looked for her.
rongo Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 If people want absolute professional confidentiality, they should find their own counseling/therapy. If they choose to go through LDS Social Services, I think they should assume (with or without a signed fine print document) that the counselor and the bishop will consult each other. Most people seeking LDS Social Services do so because they are also seeking assistance paying for it, and this gives the bishop an interest (not curiosity) in knowing certain things that may not have been disclosed to him. That's how I see it, anyway. Plus, for those of us who really think that the ecclesiastical side of counseling is essential (especially for people who are struggling), there isn't a reason why one would compartmentalize the "secular" counseling from the "spiritual" counseling. They are two sides to the same coin, and to try to have only one side of the coin is to have no coin at all.
Gray Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, rongo said: If people want absolute professional confidentiality, they should find their own counseling/therapy. If they choose to go through LDS Social Services, I think they should assume (with or without a signed fine print document) that the counselor and the bishop will consult each other. Most people seeking LDS Social Services do so because they are also seeking assistance paying for it, and this gives the bishop an interest (not curiosity) in knowing certain things that may not have been disclosed to him. That's how I see it, anyway. Plus, for those of us who really think that the ecclesiastical side of counseling is essential (especially for people who are struggling), there isn't a reason why one would compartmentalize the "secular" counseling from the "spiritual" counseling. They are two sides to the same coin, and to try to have only one side of the coin is to have no coin at all. Fine print or not, it's unethical, not to mention counter productive. Edited October 15, 2018 by Gray
rongo Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 Just now, Gray said: Fine print or not, its' unethical, not to mention counter productive. It isn't counter-productive to those who believe that bishops' counsel is important --- perhaps more important than secular counsel.
ksfisher Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 1 minute ago, rongo said: this gives the bishop an interest (not curiosity) in knowing certain things that may not have been disclosed to him You may know more about this than I would, but my impression from working with bishops is that it is more of a partnership between the bishop and Family Services. Someone seeking help will typically be meeting with the bishop as well as a counselor. Sharing appropriate information can be very beneficial in helping the individual.
rongo Posted October 15, 2018 Posted October 15, 2018 1 minute ago, ksfisher said: You may know more about this than I would, but my impression from working with bishops is that it is more of a partnership between the bishop and Family Services. Someone seeking help will typically be meeting with the bishop as well as a counselor. Sharing appropriate information can be very beneficial in helping the individual. A partnership is a good way to put it. Those criticizing this are insisting, really, that the bishop's counsel is essentially worthless, and the "secular" counseling is everything. And should therefore take precedent over the bishop's counsel, and should be compartmentalized and hermetically sealed off from the bishop.
Recommended Posts