New Church Policy Re: Background Checks in U.K.

[bsjkki]

1 hour ago, webbles said:

Adult ministering companions must pass the Enhanced check with the Barred List check as well (unless they are the parent of the youth).  Are you talking about the exception to the number of adults or an exception to the DBS check?  Because there isn't one for the DBS check.

I was talking about number of adults. I would be for a law requiring background checks for people who work with minors. 
 *But would like a strict two deep policy that doesn’t have huge loopholes. 

 

Edited June 28, 2023 by bsjkki

[Couganova]

7 hours ago, Duncan said:

I think it's a good thing. I have never heard of "Nemo the Mormon" but I checked his FB page and he is an activist, I wonder what he'll do next to prop his name up or will he fall by the wayside like other activists like Sam Young, Kate something, Bill some or other et al.

Everyone needs a friend, a responsibility, and nourishment by the good word of God. This will make him feel like he has the second.

 

[Couganova]

Kate Kelly has indeed moved on to other human rights projects. She lives a healthy life, relative to other exmos.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, bsjkki said:

But if not when traveling, when would they be alone? I also think when texting a youth, adult leaders should have to include a parent. Safe practices.

I guess I don’t see “avoid” as that strong since it is attached to “might be misunderstood”.  So much rationalization can be covered by “might be”.

[sheilauk]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

 Maybe Sheila will notice this topic and post if she has additional info. 

I have just been reading this thread.  But it’s late here and I need too go to bed!  So I’ll revisit it tomorrow evening.  I’m very familiar with the DBS so,if the guide linked to doesn’t provide answers, I’ll do my best to answer any questions.

 

[The Nehor]

10 hours ago, webbles said:

The letter says:

Interesting that it includes "vulnerable adults".  I guess this would include adult Sunday School, Relief Society, and Elder's Quorum.  I wonder if everyone in those orgs will need DBS or only if someone decides that there is a "vulnerable adult".

Here's the wiki page on DBS - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disclosure_and_Barring_Service.  It is a UK government agency that looks like it does both criminal background check and checking a "barred" list.

My guess is vulnerable adult is some kind of legal term in the UK. I suspect it includes those with dementia or conditions that make an adult potentially more vulnerable to a predator. Most likely this is just boilerplate covering all areas as the Church generally doesn’t have specific people responsible for people or teaching classes specifically for this group so few, if any, callings will fall under this designation.

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Will a conviction follow you from country to country? Would a conviction in the US show up in the UK system?

Nope and nope. It is usually something that would be picked up by immigration background checks.

5 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Is there a way to make sure church records for a convicted rapist are properly annotated?

No. They likely would be if the member were active at the time and the members aware. If not, probably not. There is no way to set up a notification from the court system to let us know if a member were convicted of something short of regular automatic background checks maybe which probably wouldn’t fly in the United States and the Church probably wouldn’t want that level of transparency in our records elsewhere.

5 hours ago, bsjkki said:

If someone is excommunicated but gets rebaptized, do the annotations stay?

Yes. The only way to get an annotation removed is to appeal to the First Presidency.

That being said it might be possible for someone who is removed from the records to be baptized by missionaries who doesn’t know the person was previously a member. I suspect this would be caught by Salt Lake when they have someone with the same name and same data popping up. I actually kind of want to test this now but have no idea how I could.

You could dodge this by using fake information but we are off in the super unlikely zone at this point. Most people aren’t that smart.

[bsjkki]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Nope and nope. It is usually something that would be picked up by immigration background checks.

No. They likely would be if the member were active at the time and the members aware. If not, probably not. There is no way to set up a notification from the court system to let us know if a member were convicted of something short of regular automatic background checks maybe which probably wouldn’t fly in the United States and the Church probably wouldn’t want that level of transparency in our records elsewhere.

Yes. The only way to get an annotation removed is to appeal to the First Presidency.

That being said it might be possible for someone who is removed from the records to be baptized by missionaries who doesn’t know the person was previously a member. I suspect this would be caught by Salt Lake when they have someone with the same name and same data popping up. I actually kind of want to test this now but have no idea how I could.

You could dodge this by using fake information but we are off in the super unlikely zone at this point. Most people aren’t that smart.

Thank you. So, church records wise, if a member is excommunicated due to sexual abuse and convicted of the crime snd current ward/stake did their job, the records should reflect that no matter where the member ends up. 
 

 

[bsjkki]

But there is no way to check.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Thank you. So, church records wise, if a member is excommunicated due to sexual abuse and convicted of the crime snd current ward/stake did their job, the records should reflect that no matter where the member ends up. 
 

 

Yes, if whatever the specific thing they did falls into the area requiring the annotation.