Popular Post HappyJackWagon Posted April 9, 2019 Popular Post Posted April 9, 2019 I realize that background checks aren't a perfect solution in the effort to keep children safe from predators, but I'm curious if anyone has a strong argument for why the church should not utilize background checks for members serving in positions that involve children/youth, or really in any position of authority and trust. Here is yet another example of a church leader, in this case an EQ President, who is on the registered sx offender list, yet through his position of trust is able to access another child. Why doesn't the church utilize background checks? They do when required by BSA (which doesn't prevent all abuse- but at least it's an effort) but to my knowledge they don't do background checks for bishops, SP, primary workers, YW leaders etc. Why not? Is it the expense of the background check? Is it too obtrusive into the private lives of members? In a church that regularly schedules worthiness interviews with every member 11+ it hard to imagine the obtrusiveness of a check is the problem. Seriously, if for no other reason, than to at least look like they are doing something to protect children, why doesn't the church do background checks as the bare minimum of child/youth protection? https://kttc.com/news/minnesota-news/2019/04/05/lifetime-registered-sex-offender-arrested-in-kasson-for-sexual-assault/?fbclid=IwAR1_n0lHy1Znf6-tNeggk_8iZVAXKQApiDWO4-Sfuo3gAX_52kaR6Ebk39g 7
Duncan Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 (edited) My guess is $$$, you have to notify police do the check and then it runs and for all the callings out there that would add up. Just checked, in Canada a background check for "volunteers" is $10. So not much but you know it adds up. But I guess you could leverage that out to say how much court costs(if something happened) vs. a 10 buck check. It's like insurance, good to have but you may (hopefully?) be paying for nothing. Edited April 9, 2019 by Duncan
SouthernMo Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 Background check services for sx offender registries cost very little. We do them often in my line of work. Anyone can do it for free, but it can be time consuming based on the state/county. It’s unclear if he had an annotation on his member record before this event. Even if he did, that would not preclude him per policy from serving as EQP. 1
bsjkki Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 26 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: I realize that background checks aren't a perfect solution in the effort to keep children safe from predators, but I'm curious if anyone has a strong argument for why the church should not utilize background checks for members serving in positions that involve children/youth, or really in any position of authority and trust. Here is yet another example of a church leader, in this case an EQ President, who is on the registered sx offender list, yet through his position of trust is able to access another child. Why doesn't the church utilize background checks? They do when required by BSA (which doesn't prevent all abuse- but at least it's an effort) but to my knowledge they don't do background checks for bishops, SP, primary workers, YW leaders etc. Why not? Is it the expense of the background check? Is it too obtrusive into the private lives of members? In a church that regularly schedules worthiness interviews with every member 11+ it hard to imagine the obtrusiveness of a check is the problem. Seriously, if for no other reason, than to at least look like they are doing something to protect children, why doesn't the church do background checks as the bare minimum of child/youth protection? https://kttc.com/news/minnesota-news/2019/04/05/lifetime-registered-sex-offender-arrested-in-kasson-for-sexual-assault/?fbclid=IwAR1_n0lHy1Znf6-tNeggk_8iZVAXKQApiDWO4-Sfuo3gAX_52kaR6Ebk39g I agree, it won’t catch everything but it would help. It is really sick to think a registered sex offender would be placed in a position of trust. We don’t even ask? We could at least have a series a questions people need to attest to to hold certain callings plus a background check. 1
bsjkki Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 8 minutes ago, bsjkki said: I agree, it won’t catch everything but it would help. It is really sick to think a registered sex offender would be placed in a position of trust. We don’t even ask? We could at least have a series a questions people need to attest to to hold certain callings plus a background check. The story is confusing because they call him the Elders Quorum President but also say he is in charge of the young men. 1
hope_for_things Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 50 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: I realize that background checks aren't a perfect solution in the effort to keep children safe from predators, but I'm curious if anyone has a strong argument for why the church should not utilize background checks for members serving in positions that involve children/youth, or really in any position of authority and trust. Here is yet another example of a church leader, in this case an EQ President, who is on the registered sx offender list, yet through his position of trust is able to access another child. Why doesn't the church utilize background checks? They do when required by BSA (which doesn't prevent all abuse- but at least it's an effort) but to my knowledge they don't do background checks for bishops, SP, primary workers, YW leaders etc. Why not? Is it the expense of the background check? Is it too obtrusive into the private lives of members? In a church that regularly schedules worthiness interviews with every member 11+ it hard to imagine the obtrusiveness of a check is the problem. Seriously, if for no other reason, than to at least look like they are doing something to protect children, why doesn't the church do background checks as the bare minimum of child/youth protection? https://kttc.com/news/minnesota-news/2019/04/05/lifetime-registered-sex-offender-arrested-in-kasson-for-sexual-assault/?fbclid=IwAR1_n0lHy1Znf6-tNeggk_8iZVAXKQApiDWO4-Sfuo3gAX_52kaR6Ebk39g I believe they easily could afford this. Thinking about the cost of the average new temple in the $30M - $50M range, there is no shortage of funds. I imagine the church doesn't want to implement this practice as it somewhat undercuts the authority of the whole "discernment" spiritual gift. I also wonder if they feel that there are any legal ramifications to implementing this. If they do the background check and the person checks out fine, and then later is guilty of abuse, does the church have more or less culpability than if they didn't do the background check in the first place? I don't know, but I wonder if there is a legal angle going on here. 2
clarkgoble Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 I'd certainly favor such checks for primary teachers, youth teachers and leadership working with youth. I'm honestly surprised they don't do that since it'd provide a major liability cover for the Church. I'd also like to see video training much like the Scouts did for primary teachers and leaders. 4
Gray Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 Quote The Dodge County Sheriff’s office reminds the public that organizations with activities involving children should be conducting criminal background checks on any adults, paid or volunteer, that are allowed to have contact with children. 1
Gray Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 21 minutes ago, bsjkki said: The story is confusing because they call him the Elders Quorum President but also say he is in charge of the young men. Maybe it was a small branch and he had some kind dual EQ/YM responsibility 1
bluebell Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said: I realize that background checks aren't a perfect solution in the effort to keep children safe from predators, but I'm curious if anyone has a strong argument for why the church should not utilize background checks for members serving in positions that involve children/youth, or really in any position of authority and trust. Here is yet another example of a church leader, in this case an EQ President, who is on the registered sx offender list, yet through his position of trust is able to access another child. Why doesn't the church utilize background checks? They do when required by BSA (which doesn't prevent all abuse- but at least it's an effort) but to my knowledge they don't do background checks for bishops, SP, primary workers, YW leaders etc. Why not? Is it the expense of the background check? Is it too obtrusive into the private lives of members? In a church that regularly schedules worthiness interviews with every member 11+ it hard to imagine the obtrusiveness of a check is the problem. Seriously, if for no other reason, than to at least look like they are doing something to protect children, why doesn't the church do background checks as the bare minimum of child/youth protection? https://kttc.com/news/minnesota-news/2019/04/05/lifetime-registered-sex-offender-arrested-in-kasson-for-sexual-assault/?fbclid=IwAR1_n0lHy1Znf6-tNeggk_8iZVAXKQApiDWO4-Sfuo3gAX_52kaR6Ebk39g How did his calling as an EQP give him access to the 13 year old though? Even if the church had run a background check in this case, why would we assume that that would mean the man wouldn't be given a leadership calling working with adults? The boy claims that they started hanging out together after the two met at church, but no background check could prevent that. Or are you thinking that bishops would publish the results of background checks for the congregation? On a separate note, that article was not well researched. It claims that the man, as EQP, was a leader over young men. 4
bluebell Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 While I don't think that background checks would do that much, I'd be in favor of them. At least they could weed out the low hanging fruit, and that's better than nothing. 3
stemelbow Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 I admit, if I were the father of this 13 year old I'd be really pissed at the Church. Hopefully I know about my 13 year old's whereabouts and this would never happen in the first place, but if it did...oh boy. How dare the church put someone into a trusted position in Church if this person is a registered sex offender. even if he is the EQP and may not directly involved working with the youth, it surely is a trusted position. Background check? Sure. But you don't need that to know whether a person is a registered sex offender. The church had to have that on his record somewhere already, and if not, it is still easily accessible info....and he should have divulged that himself. i'm getting more angry thinking about this.
Calm Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: I realize that background checks aren't a perfect solution in the effort to keep children safe from predators, but I'm curious if anyone has a strong argument for why the church should not utilize background checks for members serving in positions that involve children/youth, or really in any position of authority and trust. Here is yet another example of a church leader, in this case an EQ President, who is on the registered sx offender list, yet through his position of trust is able to access another child. Why doesn't the church utilize background checks? They do when required by BSA (which doesn't prevent all abuse- but at least it's an effort) but to my knowledge they don't do background checks for bishops, SP, primary workers, YW leaders etc. Why not? Is it the expense of the background check? Is it too obtrusive into the private lives of members? In a church that regularly schedules worthiness interviews with every member 11+ it hard to imagine the obtrusiveness of a check is the problem. Seriously, if for no other reason, than to at least look like they are doing something to protect children, why doesn't the church do background checks as the bare minimum of child/youth protection? https://kttc.com/news/minnesota-news/2019/04/05/lifetime-registered-sex-offender-arrested-in-kasson-for-sexual-assault/?fbclid=IwAR1_n0lHy1Znf6-tNeggk_8iZVAXKQApiDWO4-Sfuo3gAX_52kaR6Ebk39g It is possible that background checks are becoming more effective, but iirc it was the last time this conversation came up that I posted some info from one of those assigned by the Church to deal with such cases. Iirc, during the process where he was evaluating the system, he didn't find any cases which would have been changed by doing a background check. It makes sense in the past if the leadership ever tested the effectiveness of background checks and they weren't helpful, they wouldn't feel,obligated to use them. When I have time, I will go dig it up to see if there is a time frame of more than a few years involved. I think times have changed and they may need to use them. The only thing I fear is if this becomes public knowledge (as it will), that parents and others will think that is enough and not be as vigilant themselves in keeping an eye on things. There is also the problem the sex offender may mean different things. I have a relative who is on the list due to having what he thought of as consensual sex when he was 18 with a 15 year old (she invited him to her room) I wish they made it clear on the registries. Some should never, ever imo be in any position of authority (abuse of children or violent abuse, for example). Edited April 10, 2019 by Calm 2
Kevin Christensen Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 When Shauna and I were called to serve in the primary in our last PA ward, we did have background checks as a matter of routine. FWIW, Kevin Christensen Canonsburg, PA 3
Tacenda Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 27 minutes ago, bluebell said: How did his calling as an EQP give him access to the 13 year old though? Even if the church had run a background check in this case, why would we assume that that would mean the man wouldn't be given a leadership calling working with adults? The boy claims that they started hanging out together after the two met at church, but no background check could prevent that. Or are you thinking that bishops would publish the results of background checks for the congregation? On a separate note, that article was not well researched. It claims that the man, as EQP, was a leader over young men. So you don't believe that he was also over the YM's as well?
Robert D. Crockett Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 I represent many schools and religions in childhood sexual abuse cases. In every single one, the perpetrator would have passed a background check if one had been done. Background checks do not contain accusations. They contain convictions. In one famous case in Los Angeles, involving the LAPD, Mark Kalisch (I'm a little uncertain today as to the spelling) was LAPD's second-highest policeman under Chief Darryl Gates. He was LAPD's chief spokesman during the OJ trial. He was a predator and preyed on young men in LAPD's explorer program. He, obviously, passed all sorts of background checks.
sjdawg Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: I realize that background checks aren't a perfect solution in the effort to keep children safe from predators, but I'm curious if anyone has a strong argument for why the church should not utilize background checks for members serving in positions that involve children/youth, or really in any position of authority and trust. Here is yet another example of a church leader, in this case an EQ President, who is on the registered sx offender list, yet through his position of trust is able to access another child. Why doesn't the church utilize background checks? They do when required by BSA (which doesn't prevent all abuse- but at least it's an effort) but to my knowledge they don't do background checks for bishops, SP, primary workers, YW leaders etc. Why not? Is it the expense of the background check? Is it too obtrusive into the private lives of members? In a church that regularly schedules worthiness interviews with every member 11+ it hard to imagine the obtrusiveness of a check is the problem. Seriously, if for no other reason, than to at least look like they are doing something to protect children, why doesn't the church do background checks as the bare minimum of child/youth protection? https://kttc.com/news/minnesota-news/2019/04/05/lifetime-registered-sex-offender-arrested-in-kasson-for-sexual-assault/?fbclid=IwAR1_n0lHy1Znf6-tNeggk_8iZVAXKQApiDWO4-Sfuo3gAX_52kaR6Ebk39g to me it seems like it should be absolutely required for some positions (primary, YM, YW. Not sure if it should apply to EQ presidents always but it seems weird that the ward doesn't seem to have known about his history)
Calm Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 1 minute ago, sjdawg said: to me it seems like it should be absolutely required for some positions (primary, YM, YW. Not sure if it should apply to EQ presidents always but it seems weird that the ward doesn't seem to have known about his history) Sex offenders include those who attack adults.
sjdawg Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 Who needs background checks when you have the power of discernment to guide decisions.
bluebell Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 1 minute ago, Tacenda said: So you don't believe that he was also over the YM's as well? I've never heard of it happening before but I suppose it's possible. I was a member of a small branch for a while and none of the adults had more than one calling so it seems weird to me. Could be though.
Robert D. Crockett Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 I've had teachers, lawyers, petty criminals, videographers, financial advisors, college students, boyfriends, husbands, fathers, grandfathers -- predators all who would have passed background checks.
Robert D. Crockett Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 2 minutes ago, sjdawg said: Who needs background checks when you have the power of discernment to guide decisions. The Church does not operate that way. Bishops are not mind readers or oracles. There are plenty of scriptural examples of deceptions practiced against priests and prophets. Yes, there are the rare examples of oracular intervention, such as Anna and Ananias's case. But they are very rare. I can cite examples of general authorities who were adulterers, practicing homosexuals and fraudsters for many years. God does not interfere with agency.
bluebell Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 Just now, Robert D. Crockett said: I've had teachers, lawyers, petty criminals, videographers, financial advisors, college students, boyfriends, husbands, fathers, grandfathers -- predators all who would have passed background checks. I think that background checks are better at making adults feel like they their kids are protected than they are at actually protecting kids. But they are something I guess. 2
sjdawg Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 3 minutes ago, Robert D. Crockett said: I've had teachers, lawyers, petty criminals, videographers, financial advisors, college students, boyfriends, husbands, fathers, grandfathers -- predators all who would have passed background checks. Do you think we should skip the background check process because there are some flaws in the process?
Robert D. Crockett Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 Just now, sjdawg said: Do you think we should skip the background check process because there are some flaws in the process? Background checks should play no role in religion. Exactly how does my insurance broker bishop know how to obtain a background check? And when?
Recommended Posts