Another Bishop and Sexual Misconduct

[Bernard Gui]

 

42 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I can only assume it’s about kids watching porn before age 11 these days and parents not knowing. 

I think it’s a really bad idea. 

Kids are being exposed to porn and adult material at younger and younger ages. We have to circle the wagons if we don't want to lose them to this mortal danger. As the lady said, it takes a village. Even the elders of the village.

[Hamba Tuhan]

We have strong local research about the overwhelmingly protective benefits that come from children having a close relationship with a clergy member. Our government is basically anti-faith in outlook, so they were not looking for this result. I can't help but suspect that at least some of those who are trying to drive a wedge between clergy and children know what the outcome will be.

[bsjkki]

3 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

 

Kids are being exposed to porn and adult material at younger and younger ages. We have to circle the wagons if we don't want to lose them to this mortal danger. As the lady said, it takes a village. Even the elders of the village.

If I trusted Bishops to always be wise and good, this could work but they are not.

Also, they are already too busy. 

[ALarson]

5 hours ago, bsjkki said:

If I trusted Bishops to always be wise and good, this could work but they are not.

Also, they are already too busy. 

I think it could have some positive results or influences.  But, it would certainly add another level of stress to the Bishopric's schedule and it can already be very difficult at times to even complete all of our YW's interviews and YM's interviews.  But I do like how they give the option of having others conduct the interviews (if the leaders decide to do this):

Quote

 

If the Church were to do interviews with 8-11 year old children, who would you prefer conduct those interviews?

The bishop

A counselor in the bishopric

Either the bishop or a counselor

A member of the Primary presidency

A member of the Young Mens or Young Womens presidency

 

And, I also like that they may be educating more parents regarding them attending the interviews (I know it was already announced, but even in our ward where many now attend, some parents don't seem to be aware of this option):

Quote

 

Aside from the interviewer and child, who else would you prefer to be present in an interview with your Primary child? (Mark all that apply)

No one else

Myself

My spouse

A bishopric member

A primary leader

 

Are you aware of the new Church policy allowing parents to sit in on youth interviews with members of the bishopric?

Yes

No

 

If this becomes a new practice, I do hope many parents will make sure another adult is present.  With all that's been in the news (inside the church and out), it would be a protection for all parties involved (including the leader).

Edited July 10, 2019 by ALarson

[MustardSeed]

54 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I think it could have some positive results or influences.  But, it would certainly add another level of stress to the Bishopric's schedule and it can already be very difficult at times to even complete all of our YW's interviews and YM's interviews.  But I do like how they give the option of having others conduct the interviews (if the leaders decide to do this):

And, I also like that they may be educating more parents regarding them attending the interviews (I know it was already announced, but even in our ward where many now attend, some parents don't seem to be aware of this option):

If this becomes a new practice, I do hope many parents will make sure another adult is present.  With all that's been in the news (inside the church and out), it would be a protection for all parties involved (including the leader).

Short of the other parent being present I agree that two adults in the room is crucial for this age .  As for parents, few young children will tell the truth with a parent present. Imo. Untruths are second nature For little ones under pressure IME. 

My vote would be primary president, PROFESSIONALLY trained 

Edited July 10, 2019 by MustardSeed

[Calm]

I think it would be a good idea for younger kids to get to know leaders are there to talk to so that interviews are less interview (kids feel they are being tested) and more conversation (a time to be supported and taught ), I think it might work better in a less formal setting so the kid doesn’t feel they are under scrutiny. 

[JulieM]

9 minutes ago, Calm said:

I think it would be a good idea for younger kids to get to know leaders are there to talk to so that interviews are less interview (kids feel they are being tested) and more conversation (a time to be supported and taught ), I think it might work better in a less formal setting so the kid doesn’t feel they are under scrutiny. 

I think that’s a great idea!

i agree about having another adult present (primary president, teacher or parent).  I would hope the interviews would be like you describe above.  

I hope they’re nothing sexual in nature (questions involved) as I would be extremely upset to hear of this taking place with my 8 year old.  I think most leaders would have the good judgement not to do that though.

Edited July 10, 2019 by JulieM

[The Nehor]

12 hours ago, strappinglad said:

I am told that public speaking is near the top of the "  most frightening " things to do. We raise our children to give short talks while in primary and also in front of the whole congregation . For many ( not all ) familiarity breeds confidence . That confidence is valuable in the real world and is noted . 

Any similarity for interviews ? 

I imagine that it helps the child feel like they are growing up. They are responsible enough to talk to the Bishop about their life. Children tend to react well to this kind of thing. Give them some responsibility and they might surprise you.

I remember a General Priesthood meeting as part of the old block. None of the Bishopric were there, none of the Elder’s Quorum Presidency was either. We went down the list and realized that the Teacher’s Quorum President was presiding and we gave him the meeting. He was nervous but did a fantastic job and took his calling much more seriously after that.

Edited July 10, 2019 by The Nehor

[bsjkki]

2 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Short of the other parent being present I agree that two adults in the room is crucial for this age .  As for parents, few young children will tell the truth with a parent present. Imo. Untruths are second nature For little ones under pressure IME. 

My vote would be primary president, PROFESSIONALLY trained 

Primary Presidents are not professionally trained. Bishops are not professionally trained. 

We used to have the Bishopric come to Primary once a month and introduce the theme. It is sad that with the new schedule there is no time.  I think the group setting in primary is a good way for kids to get to know the Bishop. 

I think 8 is too young for a formal interview without a parent present. I don’t think these should be ‘worthiness’ interviews.

[The Nehor]

12 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

 

Kids are being exposed to porn and adult material at younger and younger ages. We have to circle the wagons if we don't want to lose them to this mortal danger. As the lady said, it takes a village. Even the elders of the village.

I would hope the Bishop uses the Spirit about this. It might be necessary to talk about these things a little and the dangers of porn if the parents blew it.

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

I think that’s a great idea!

i agree about having another adult present (primary president, teacher or parent).  I would hope the interviews would be like you describe above.  

I hope they’re nothing sexual in nature (questions involved) as I would be extremely upset to hear of this taking place with my 8 year old.  I think most leaders would have the good judgement not to do that though.

For children I would want a trusted leader present (teacher or someone they trust and know well) but I would avoid a parent being there. If this is to be a growing experience they need to feel they did it without parental approval or disapproval directing them.

I do not think anything other then possibly porn would be discussed and then I would only do it if I was the bishop if the Spirit prompted me. Parents SHOULD be teaching that but some dodge that responsibility. A ridiculous scenario my bishop faced involved a parent saying she needed an interview with the Bishop for herself and her son because the Bishop needed to tell her son to behave at school. He told her that was her job and she got annoyed. This was not the first time she did this. She would come in and ask the Bishop to basically discipline her children while she mitigated what the Bishop said so she came across as a heroic defender to her kids while the mean Bishop told them to stop being bad. A lot going on there...........

[bsjkki]

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

I think that’s a great idea!

i agree about having another adult present (primary president, teacher or parent).  I would hope the interviews would be like you describe above.  

I hope they’re nothing sexual in nature (questions involved) as I would be extremely upset to hear of this taking place with my 8 year old.  I think most leaders would have the good judgement not to do that though.

‘Most’ is the worrisome word here. So there would be ‘some’ who might think it is okay. I don’t think this is needed. I think the ‘more’ interviews won’t necessarily accomplish what is hoped for. 

 

[bsjkki]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

. A ridiculous scenario my bishop faced involved a parent saying she needed an interview with the Bishop for herself and her son because the Bishop needed to tell her son to behave at school. He told her that was her job and she got annoyed. This was not the first time she did this. She would come in and ask the Bishop to basically discipline her children while she mitigated what the Bishop said so she came across as a heroic defender to her kids while the mean Bishop told them to stop being bad. A lot going on there.....

I also know parents that brought there kids to the Bishop because they were not behaving at home. Ridiculous.

[The Nehor]

Just now, bsjkki said:

Primary Presidents are not professionally trained. Bishops are not professionally trained. 

We used to have the Bishopric come to Primary once a month and introduce the theme. It is sad that with the new schedule there is no time.  I think the group setting in primary is a good way for kids to get to know the Bishop. 

I think 8 is too young for a formal interview without a parent present. I don’t think these should be ‘worthiness’ interviews.

The Bishop still does this in my ward.

I do not think they would be worthiness interviews. Most interviews with the youth unless for Priesthood advancement are not either. They are for the Bishop to feel out any problems or concerns and help encourage them individually to live the commandments. It is very different from a group admonition and if done by a loving Bishop (or counselor) can change lives.

8 hours ago, bsjkki said:

If I trusted Bishops to always be wise and good, this could work but they are not.

Also, they are already too busy. 

I think they can make time for this. These are also the situations that spiritually recharge Bishops. I imagine every Bishop would trade welfare interviews, Ward Council meetings, needy emotionally dependent adult member interviews who need way too much counsel, and disciplinary councils for time to talk to and encourage a child or youth. I am also not worried as much about abuse. In my Stake most bishops ask a counselor or their secretary or a clerk or a leader in the organization over the person they are talking to to come to an interview. The only general exception is a sin confession because the person interviewed may want to talk one on one.

[Tacenda]

3 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

Primary Presidents are not professionally trained. Bishops are not professionally trained. 

We used to have the Bishopric come to Primary once a month and introduce the theme. It is sad that with the new schedule there is no time.  I think the group setting in primary is a good way for kids to get to know the Bishop. 

I think 8 is too young for a formal interview without a parent present. I don’t think these should be ‘worthiness’ interviews.

I was just about to post about the bold I made of your comment! Very much agree!

And need to add that the bishop shouldn't bring up porn or any sexual connotation. And agree that the better way for the bishop to get to know the Primary children is every Fast Sunday like in the past. They should make time. 

I'm against these one on one interviews with children! The youth maybe, if the youth needs to get something cleared up. And if the church is worried about child abuse within the home, then maybe a teacher and another member of the bishopric could hold a meeting once or twice a year. Or however  many they do. 

 

 

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I would hope the Bishop uses the Spirit about this. It might be necessary to talk about these things a little and the dangers of porn if the parents blew it.

I was hoping that these kinds of discussion would happen in EQ and RS chair circle meetings. Schools are teaching our children these things in lieu of parents. In loco parentis taken to the logical extreme. (Sister Gui and I are public school teachers).

Quote

For children I would want a trusted leader present (teacher or someone they trust and know well) but I would avoid a parent being there. If this is to be a growing experience they need to feel they did it without parental approval or disapproval directing them.

I do not think anything other then possibly porn would be discussed and then I would only do it if I was the bishop if the Spirit prompted me. Parents SHOULD be teaching that but some dodge that responsibility. A ridiculous scenario my bishop faced involved a parent saying she needed an interview with the Bishop for herself and her son because the Bishop needed to tell her son to behave at school. He told her that was her job and she got annoyed. This was not the first time she did this. She would come in and ask the Bishop to basically discipline her children while she mitigated what the Bishop said so she came across as a heroic defender to her kids while the mean Bishop told them to stop being bad. A lot going on there...........

Yes. Bishops cannot solve everyone's problems. I suppose part of the problem is the way we misinterpret sheep and shepherds.

Edited July 10, 2019 by Bernard Gui

[HappyJackWagon]

16 hours ago, strappinglad said:

I am told that public speaking is near the top of the "  most frightening " things to do. We raise our children to give short talks while in primary and also in front of the whole congregation . For many ( not all ) familiarity breeds confidence . That confidence is valuable in the real world and is noted . 

Any similarity for interviews ? 

I think there is a similarity, but it's not good.

It seems like the church wants younger children to become comfortable talking to adults about private information.

That's a groomer's dream.

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

That's a groomer's dream.

But possibly also a groomer’s nightmare if children are more open about abuse.  Groomers thrive by instilling fear of other adults among other things. 

Edited July 10, 2019 by Calm

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

On 6/12/2019 at 10:55 AM, pogi said:

https://www.ksl.com/article/46571927/ex-bishop-sent-to-jail-for-sexual-misconduct-lewdness-with-teens

A couple things that stood out to me about this case is 1) the slap on the wrist sentence, and 2) the dozens of letters of support for Mr. Head that were sent to the judge ahead of sentencing - even though he acknowledged his guilt.  One of the letters came from former Utah House Speaker Greg Hughes (his brother-in-law) who will be running for governor in 2020.  Well...he has lost my vote! 

The letters of support should be sent to the victims and not in support of the perpetrator.  What is wrong with people!? 

Despite his acknowledge guilt, his community still seems to trust him while the victims feel shamed by the community.  What is going on here?  

Sadly, many child predators are masters of doing as much good as they can, as to hide their behavior. They will do as much good as they can, as long as it can shield them from suspicion for as long as possible. Then when they are caught, people they have done good for will foolishly come to their aide, no matter how inexcusable. Those who do come forward to defend them, or call for mercy, should not be extended mercy. Even more horrible, is these type of men are always part of a greater conspiracy, and those not caught will sometimes be the one’s calling for mercy. 

[bsjkki]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

But possibly also a groomer’s nightmare if children are more open about abuse.  Groomers thrive by instilling fear of other adults among other things. 

 

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

That's a groomer's dream.

Both of  these statements are true. I feel the untrained and varied skills of Bishop's makes this overall, a bad idea. In the BYU research report recommendations about how the honor code dealt with sexual assault,  the final concern or item was letting the church know about the varied responses of Bishops to sexual assault and how they handled these victims. Some probably did great and some others did not. I do not trust the untrained nature of Bishops to deal properly with victims of abuse, rape or sexual assault whether they are 8 or 25. Bishops also rotate through, usually about every 5 years. The bishop that interviews the 8 year old will be gone by the time that child is 14. People move in and out of wards frequently (at least in my area) that precludes any lasting relationship with leadership. Some of my personal negative experiences were with a Bishop I did not know because we had just moved. That lack of history made things much harder. But, this happens all the time in the church. Add in the ward boundary changes that happen even when you don't move and a consistent Priesthood leader is probably quite rare these days. 

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

 

Both of  these statements are true. I feel the untrained and varied skills of Bishop's makes this overall, a bad idea. In the BYU research report recommendations about how the honor code dealt with sexual assault,  the final concern or item was letting the church know about the varied responses of Bishops to sexual assault and how they handled these victims. Some probably did great and some others did not. I do not trust the untrained nature of Bishops to deal properly with victims of abuse, rape or sexual assault whether they are 8 or 25. Bishops also rotate through, usually about every 5 years. The bishop that interviews the 8 year old will be gone by the time that child is 14. People move in and out of wards frequently (at least in my area) that precludes any lasting relationship with leadership. Some of my personal negative experiences were with a Bishop I did not know because we had just moved. That lack of history made things much harder. But, this happens all the time in the church. Add in the ward boundary changes that happen even when you don't move and a consistent Priesthood leader is probably quite rare these days. 

Simple fix.....increase training for bishops. My son Abogadissimo is serving as bishop. I'll ask him what's happening. Any current bishops reading this to describe what is being done?

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I think there is a similarity, but it's not good.

It seems like the church wants younger children to become comfortable talking to adults about private information.

That's a groomer's dream.

And an attribute of a well-adjusted child.

[Calm]

What I would be concerned about with a bishop or other leader addressing porn with someone under 12 is if they treated it like a sin for that age group in the same way as they might for an older age group.  Maturity and self control and even understanding what is at risk differs greatly for the younger group imo.  I would be very concerned about any discipline measures taken with younger kids setting them up for future failure because of lower self control levels, etc.

Edited July 12, 2019 by Calm