Leaderboard

If my daughter did this, even if she truly felt uncomfortable with the Bishop's interview, I would be so ashamed--ashamed that my daughter has no regard for authority or appropriate behavior. Did I not teach her proper behavior? How could I as a parent fall so short of my responsibility of teaching correct manners. If this is an actual occurrence, and not some troll trying to get a rise out of us, I would be so embarrassed over my child's behavior. And, I as a mother, look at my children's behavior as a reflection on me. This is not a funny joke that she perpetrated. This is just totally uncalled for and inappropriate. I may rile a few people here, because I understand that children can go against their parent's teachings. But, this behavior is not acceptable. If the Bishop's questions were a little out of line, then she should have gone to her parents. This sounds to me like she purposefully egged him on. And recorded it! I should probably just erase what I just typed and not post this. I usually don't get upset over posts. And, it's not the post that is upsetting me, it's the behavior of a 15 year old girl. Not acceptable or funny!

None of us have heard the audio recording. We don't know if the questions being asked were out of line. Was the Bishop digging deeper into the details because he was a perv? Or did he need to dig a little deeper to decide if some disciplinary action was required. We've always been taught that conversations with the Bishop remain confidential. Most Bishops respect that aspect of their calling. Your daughter betrayed him with her recording and sharing of the audio. If she really was concerned she could have taken it to you as parents. Not share it around the school to get a few laughs. Yeh something wrong with the daughter here. I actually feel for the Bishop here.

I'll be blunt. Something is seriously wrong in this situation and it's not the bishop. Your child has some serious issues that if not resolved now will lead to misery down the road. Obviously this teenager is quite frankly rebellious and is playing you like a fiddle. You are more upset at the bishop for asking for details, rather than being more upset at your daughter for a) deceiving the bishop and actually explaining "tawdry fornications". I can only imagine what that might be, if it goes beyond just "having sex". I think I might be more upset at any of my kids for making up such stuff, actually feeling comfortable explaining such stuff to an adult (especially a religious leader when it didn't happen) than doing it. At least if they did it, they could say they got caught up in emotions, etc. But planning something like that shows a complete lack of respect for authority, religion, and a total disregard for the actual sin of fornication. If she feels comfortable talking about it now . . . there is very little doubt in my mind that later on it won't be just talk. Again, I'm going to be perfectly blunt, you need to wake up and take control . . .and even if you do now it might be too late.

While I agree with most here that the bishop is probably the greater victim here that the child, I would caution you against entirely dismissing your daughter's concerns. While it is possible and likely that some level of discipline (not necessarily church discipline) will need to be levied against your daughter, it needs to be done with respect to how she went about addressing her concerns. While doing that, you should also acknowledge her concerns and validate her feelings on the subjects. The goal needs to be teaching her how to respond to these matters appropriately. And to put a fine point on it, this should have been done two years ago. I can sympathize with your daughter on her feelings about the bishop's interviews with the youth being uncomfortable and potentially inappropriate. You need to find out what aspects of the interviews make her uncomfortable and help her define limits on what are and are not appropriate questions for her bishop to ask her. If she feels uncomfortable answering a question, she has every right to say "I'm not comfortable with that question." She also needs to know that if her bishop is unaccepting of that, she has the right to get up and walk out. After doing so, she should go to you, the parent, to discuss what just happened. Then it needs to be made abundantly clear that the way in which she handled this was childish and rude. Making the recording alone may be illegal, depending on your state. On the bishop's side of things, I see a couple of issues that he may need to address in himself. First, he needs to spend more time with these young women. He needs to attend classes with them, mutual activities, visit the families in their homes, if necessary. And he needs to get to know every child in Primary that will be in the youth program within the next two years. If he doesn't already have a relationship with these youth where they are comfortable talking to him by the time they turn 12, he's compromising his ability to serve them (that's an 'easier-said-than-done' thing). But that fact that your daughter was able to stage a revolt with nine girls at the age of 13 tells me that the majority of them had similar feelings about the interviews. That's a problem. Second, he needs to rethink the level of detail necessary when pursuing people's transgressions. While calling the police with respect to this interview may be overkill, the school psychologist is doing her job, which is to protect the child from potential abuse. If a professional psychologist is concerned at the level of detail brought up in this interview, I think it warrants some review*. Also, let's keep in perspective that the psychologist's concern is the level of detail he was asking for while alone with a young girl. There is an age and power imbalance in this situation that is ripe for abuse and it's generally in the best interests of all parties for someone to be present in the discussion that can normalize that imbalance. It's a crappy situation you're in, and I don't envy you. But I'm hesitant to go all crazy over what your daughter did. Her actions are a symptom of deeper issues, and it is those issues that you need to work to understand and address. * To be fair, bishops receive almost no training about this, which is something I think really ought to change.

+1 to everything you've said here. If this was my daughter, she'd be in so much trouble! I would not be concerned about the bishop -- I'd be focused entirely on her manipulation. I'd also be concerned about where/how she's learning such detail that she can just spout off extemporaneously.

Shepard... I have to ask... what was your response the very first time your daughter told you that the bishop creeped her out? Did you blow off her concerns? (at least in her mind). Or did you talk to her and try to figure out what was bothering her? (Again this was the very first time) As parents we need to take signs that our kids have issues with other adults that we would consider "Trusted" very seriously. Maybe it is just a personality clash, maybe its just a teenage rebellion thing, but in this day in age were we are very much aware of child predators and we can't expect a child to bring forth concerns and then not listen when they do. To me this sound very much like a "your not listening so I will make everyone listen" kind of response. I have not heard the recording but since you have and you aren't calling for the bishop's head and I going to assume that this is a parent/child issue with the bishop being caught in the middle. And since you are the adult you need to take charge in fixing it.

When I die I shall finally overcome my oxygen addiction.

Hmm. From the limited info given, I think the giggling with her friends about it implies something else. But perhaps. Interesting thought, either way.

It's not my intent to argue with you on this...However, consider how many children are groomed, abused, and violated by adults in positions of power over them. While the teen in question may be obnoxious and over the line, it may also have absolutely nothing to do with manners & appropriate behavior, at all. It may have to do with the teen protecting herself. ((Which is why I'm on the fence, since it could be either.)) I can't even count the number of cases I know of teens who DO record all their interactions with certain individuals that they don't feel safe around. It infuriates the police in my area, since I live in a "consent state" (meaning the person has to consent to being recorded, or it's I admissible in court). 100+ audio files of increasingly aggressive conversation, culminating in the 101st (or 112th, or 172nd, etc.) in a violent rape or assault. NONE of which can be used in court. None of the "grooming" conversations, none of the lewd conduct, and NOT EVEN the assault itself. Which is the part that drives police insane. A recorded violent crime doesn't have a loophole in the law. Unless the criminal agrees to it, the recording cannot be used against them. So they walk. And go abuse more kids. Since teens want to be self sufficient, or -worse- are smart enough to know that few people are going to believe them about a pervy teacher/priest/doctor/coach/etc... They think these recordings make them safe. It gives them a level of control over a situation they feel otherwise powerless in. Sharing them with their friends, adds another level of control. It makes them FEEL safe, even when they're not. ...OR... It could be, as you say, a seriously obnoxious brat. ...OR... 3rd option, is that she's been either groomed or assaulted by a DIFFERENT adult in her life, and is now hypervigilent & overreactingwith others, like her Bishop. Which means she has more than enough cause / it's understandable WHY she'd be doing this with someone who isn't vile and dangerous. Making both her and the bishop innocent of true wrongdoing. Like pooping in your boss's car. It's not okay in the general sense... But if you've become violently ill or have just been in a car wreck and your sphincters all relax due to sudden pain & trauma. Still a mess to be cleaned up, but it's an understandable mess, with cause. As opposed to sauntering out and having a squat because you don't like your boss. Which would be what she's done if she's being a brat. But if she's been assaulted and is overreacting... Then there would be cause. ________ All of the above is why I'm not arguing with you... For it could be as you say. Which is not funny at all. But it could also be her trying to keep herself safe. Q

I had a big long post written out for this. But it's probably easier just to read it on my blog. I'd Like Another Offspring. I Don't Want Another Child. What did it feel like when I'd decided. I don't really remember. What I do remember was that I didn't doubt that it was the right decision. From what you describe, Bini, (and I may be wrong in my interpretation, so take this for what it is) you seem to be showing the same kind of feelings Mrs MOE and I had before having #2. We liked the idea of a second child, but we had a really good thing going for us, and we didn't want to disrupt it. As we commonly described it, "Mini-MOE #1 has been so easy that we know we'll get come-uppance with #2." Apprehension over the unknown effect having a second will have on your family is a terrible reason not to have a second. If your only hesitation over having a second is that it will be different than what you have now, then I say--internet acquaintance to internet acquaintance--go for it. However, you blew it. You should have asked this a few months ago when there was hope that you could still deliver before the end of the year. If you start now, you'll have to wait until 2016 to get your tax credit for this kid. :)

Classy lady; Yeh, that describes most of it, not a good place. A mountain of shame, a small hill of disappointment with my bishop. Out-flanked by a withering frontal assault from my own blood and caught in friendly cross fire from the bishop. But there will be consequences. Applepansy; Scary. She is not primarily a liar, but uses deception to achieve another agenda. Perhaps worse in some ways. What would you have done differently with your son? Estradling75 What was our response when she said the interviews creeped her out? She is an oldest child, we had little experience with teenagers. We did what works with small children, we forced her to do the right thing. All of the parents did this, many with more experience than me. We do listen to our church leaders better than we listen to our youth. Yes, that was the origin of the problem. You're not listening I will make you listen. I guess she knew that sharing it with friends would eventually get back to us magnified. I think you hit the nail on the head. Do we really listen to our youth? Not only bishops need training. Parents need it too.

classylady, -- I also read agenda in the OP and the response and therefore have not engaged. I have also not engaged because there is not enough information. Unless we know what the bishop actually said how can we possibly assess its appropriateness? The OP stating that something bugged her does not tell us a thing. Either way, I find myself skeptical of the legitimacy of the report, and side with you on the inappropriate behavior of the teen. Ridiculous.

Bini, I don't have just the one child. But, when I was praying about having one last child, I got a distinct answer "It's your choice". I knew Heavenly Father would have been okay with a decision to stop if I felt I couldn't handle another child. I also know he would have been okay with my decision to have another child. My choice was to have one last child. After I had him, there was no question that we were done. I just knew we were. I didn't need to pray about having another child. I knew we were done. This may not help in your situation. Continue to pray. I usually don't get clear cut messages when I pray, but I did on this one. It was a distinct answer of "It's your choice". Most families I know who have just the one child, the child wants another sibling. That doesn't mean they make the decision for you, but most single children I know always wanted another sibling. My youngest brother, after the birth of his first child, said "I don't think I can ever love another child like this one. I love him so much". Well, two children later, he has fallen completely in love with all three of his children, plus one step-child.

Does being an only child* count? I grew up an only child, always wished I had a sibling. I decided every child should get to experience having siblings so our family will have at least 3 kids. One added benefit is to some extent they start entertaining each other, or beating each other up but it's the same thing right? *I do have a half-sister, didn't know about her until I was an adult.

Thank you for all of the advice I am almost overwhelmed by it. What a blessing to belong to a community such as this Mormon people. Only 24 hours and I have this much help. I agree with most of it but what to do? I realize I must do something about my daughter and her prank, that is obvious. I will. Anatess: “I'm not sure I understand what your problem is with the bishop” Yes, me too. I can’t explain why I feel so disturbed by hearing his words on the tape, but I do. What exactly did she do? 1. I doubt she committed the acts described, otherwise she would not have recorded it and not made it into a joke. (Perhaps some element of truth in jest but not much.) 2. Her prank does express extreme disrespect for the interview process. Not sure this rises to the level of the sons of Mosiah but it is a teenage prank gone way over the top. I have little experience with psychologists but: One bishop involved- clueless, disturbing. One psychologist involved- comprehends this is a prank and agrees with me being disturbed. Red hair: Yes, I agree. More later if time permits. Quinn: What the bishop said is recorded and he did not commit any clearly deviant acts. Else I would be the one calling the police and my wife might be hiding my guns from me. This was only talk, disturbing talk, but only talk. Which is different from perverse acts in my book. Bishop “a trusted adult with whom to share things one might share with no one else.” Yes, I understand but this is a far cry- from a required yearly interview that my daughter does not want to do. If the interviews were entirely voluntary and not a required yearly procedure, she probably would have never gone back a second time. We, the parents of her and her friends forced them all to have the interviews 2 years ago. It seemed like a solution at the time. YJacket: I am more upset with my daughter than with the bishop. But I expect a certain amount of rebellion and obnoxious behavior from a teenager. My expectations of the bishop are higher. He is an adult, a trusted spiritual leader with the Priesthood and conferred spiritual gifts. Hence my confusion at why I am so disturbed. “… I might be more upset at any of my kids for making up such stuff, actually feeling comfortable explaining such stuff to an adult (especially a religious leader when it didn't happen) than doing it.” Really? Do I understand that you prefer youth to be doing “it” instead of talking about doing “it”? I personally take some relief that she is probably not actually doing these things. Probably. Not yet. As for talking about "it": The youth today are saturated with “it” in the public schools as much as we attempt to shelter them. In my observation almost all teens talk about “it” with their peers often when they think adults are not listening. Not that I dismiss this as trivial but it is part of the dangerous landscape of living in this wicked world. AngelMarvel: Thank you for your prayers. I think it would be hard to stop the freight train of confession once it got rolling. So I think that like medical examinations, these interviews all need to be chaperoned from the beginning. We don’t let future bishops and fathers teach primary alone any more. The interviews have more risk in my opinion. FOR THE SAFETY OF THE BISHOP, more than anything else. I feel for the bishop too. Kaelee: More than being chaperoned I am wondering if the women should interview the girls and the men should interview the boys. Chaperones might be the parents or other trusted adults since less than half the children have two engaged parents. (Only suggestions to maybe consider, not demands). As an aside, (perhaps this is an overreaction due to my present state) but how dare your husband overrule you? LiterateParakeet; I agree about what she might do if angry and at this point she is defiant but not angry with me yet. I worry that might change when the consequences of her prank I impose fall on her. Fall they will. NeuroTypical: I have hesitated to talk to the bishop but based on your advice I will schedule an appointment with him. He may be expecting something since he advised her to meet with him on a weekly basis and apparently she has not been back to see him for a few weeks. Margin of Error: Wise words- I need some time to digest them. But I feel peace and truth in your words. I do. As for the close relationship a bishop builds with the youth, I have no control over the bishop. In his defense this might be impossible when we LDS all live so widely scattered in the community and rarely see each other except on Sunday. The bishop is probably overwhelmed getting all the rest of the urgent problems resolved to do much preventive relationship building. We members also move around to different wards and that doesn’t help. If the ideal close relationship is only rarely going to be in place, so much more the reason for chaperones and perhaps a more voluntary requirement for the interviews. My family is in a deep hole as far as a close relationship with the bishop after what has passed.

My mother was a member of the church when she passed. She had been inactive for as long as she was a member, I believe, since my dad was very against the church. I was determined to do her temple work for her once the year had gone by. But, I didn't. I never felt the Spirit telling me to do it. In fact, I felt like I should wait. Not sure why. Three years passed after her death when I got the distinct impression that I needed to do her temple work. Within a month, I was at the temple performing her ordinances. I had a very spiritual experience while there that let me know that my mom was there and was happy to accept the proxy ordinances. Remember that while your mom was not desiring baptism while in this life, there is missionary work happening on the other side. Perhaps after the year wait, she will be ready to accept the proxy ordinances--perhaps it will take longer for her. Even so, you doing that work will allow her to accept it when she is ready for it.

It's not that simple and likely leads some to simply not take the poll. I do not read them. But saying "no" would also be inaccurate because I have read one or two in the past. Saying yes implies things that are not true either. So I guess my answer is: Have I ever read them? Yes. Do I read them currently? No. Will I read them in the future? Probably no.

I agree with Pam. I do feel for the Bishop. I don't know what the protocol is for interviews. Sounds like the beginning of some very trying learning experiences for this young lady. I will say that I have heard of a Bishop taking questions too far. I know it happened with my brother when he was went to the Bishop in the MTC with some things he had not repented of. My father (also a Bishop) was furious when he was told about how the interview went down. If there is ever a problem you simply move up the chain of command and speak with the next authority, (Stake President).

I'm afraid your post made absoluty no sense to me.

Don't even bother to go there. If I want news of the church then I go directly to LDS.ORG.

The poll needs a few variations of 'sometimes'.

Quite to the contrary. I believe the saying is that you go to heaven for the climate and you go to hell for the company. I don't think we fundamentally disagree at all: there's certainly a component of addiction that is chemical/physiological, and is just something that the spirit inhabiting the body has to deal with; and to which death does offer release. But does addiction often run concurrently with a spiritual ailment that will persist beyond the veil? I think the answer can be (not always, but sometimes) "yes". Obviously, that doesn't change our obligation to be universally compassionate in the here-and-now. It just means that we can't medicate, operate, or electrically stimulate our way out of every form of addiction. On a semi-topical tangent: Just_A_Girl swears that there's a quote out there from JFS implying that our bodies are not immediately perfect on resurrection morning, but that they gradually become so over time. I can't find it anywhere. Does it ring a bell to you?

I think it is more complicated than that. "Coping mechanisms" can be described as physical traits as well. We know, for example, that self-mutilation is a form of an abnormal coping mechanism that can be triggered by brain injury such as traumatic brain injury to bilateral temporal poles. There was a recent study that showed that posterior hypothalamic deep brain stimulation removed that abnormal coping mechanism. Bialteral lesions to the anterior temporal lobe which can occur in traumatic brain injury (being in a car accident) can result in hypersexuality (see Kluver Bucy syndrome). In my career I have seen cases like that. They were previously wholesome, church going chaste people who turn into a different personality and one in particular I remember suddenly became hypersexual and had an addiction to pornography and would go to Tijuana for prostitutes after this injury. He truly had a sex addiction after the injury. The reason to point this out is that we don't know how much influence the wiring of the brain plays a role in these things in any given person versus some agency allowed choice, we can't judge that. The bottom line is whether something becomes written in our heart or not. Is it taken to heart, meaning do our spirits incorporate that trait or not. How do we know that Pauls "thorn in the flesh" was not some addiction, that he now does not have? What is of "their own making" is hard for us to distinguish in any given person. That is for only God to know. We have to assume, as we show love to those around us that may be suffering from addiction, that all of it is not of their own making, that the whole thing is a "thorn in the flesh". We are not allowed to judge that way because we don't have the ability to know which components are driven by brain anatomy vs. the part that is spiritual characteristics.

So...hell isn't other people?

My understanding is that we will continue to have the same appetites even after this life, which is why we need to overcome them here. I will have to look further into the quotes I have read in the past. I think though, having more a doctrinal approach than the NDE might clarify more, but that is just me.

Well, I'm usually skeptical of NDEs, so that colors my reaction somewhat. Overall, though, I'd have to say that I disagree, mainly because I think the most precise response possible is "we don't know." I agree with the LW's friend (and disagree with the accounts given in the NDE) because cigarettes and alcohol (for example) are cravings and addictions of a physical being. At the same time, I understand that all addictions have a psychological side to them, and I believe that it's possible that even once the body stops craving nicotine, alcohol, etc., the mind may still desire it. So to reiterate, I disagree, mainly because I think the most precise response possible is "we don't know." :)

Well we do know that there are other talents and gifts. And there are a few compelling cases... but for the most part what you're going to run into is gona be fraud... or the wrong kind of spirits.

My husband and I had seven kids. We had a mini van that seated seven though there were nine of us total. Car seats weren't the law until the younger children were born. Finances were always tight. I did what I could to bring in extra money like babysitting from my home, or at times I worked full time. I would put money aside on a regular basis so we could go on vacations. It was a priority for me. We managed to go to Disneyland several times. A lot of our vacations were visiting relatives out-of-state or going camping. When our oldest daughter graduated from High School, we rented a large 15 psg. van and went to Great Basin Nat'l Park, Yellowstone, Canada, Glacier Nat'l Park, Seattle, Mt. St. Helens, Oregon, and then down the cost of California to San Francisco and Sacramento. Then back over to Utah. It was a wonderful vacation. And, I knew it was going to be the last one we had as a whole family. A few years later when I went to work for a major airlines, my older children were already out of the house. The younger kids were able to travel internationally because of my flight benefits. We learned to travel inexpensively. As for providing for the family: Our home is a moderate 2400 sq. ft. But, it has six bedrooms. The basement was unfinished when we bought it, and over time we have finished bedrooms as needed. Now, whether if we had two children or the seven, we would be in the same house. So, mortgage would have been the same. We had our mini van, and usually one other vehicle. Church was within walking distance, and except for that and vacations, or driving to visit Grandparents, we didn't need to be all in one vehicle. Food and clothing would of course be more expensive for a larger family than a smaller family. But, you don't need designer clothes to be well dressed. And, you don't need to eat steak for every meal. I learned to cook casseroles, which by the way, my husband does not like, but he learned to eat them. Also, on the practical side of things, I did not over schedule my life or my children's. We couldn't afford it for one thing. They did manage to have swim lessons, piano lessons, and some of them played sports. When we had some really bad financial problems, all lessons were stopped because we were unable to afford them. But, I think my children would say, thank you for giving us birth, we didn't need all the sports, music, or dance lessons. Is it practical to have a large family in this day? Practical may not be the correct word. It's do-able. My son and his wife are expecting their sixth. And both of them are attending school full time right now. My daughter-in-law will be taking a short break after the baby is born, and then she'll be back in school. Now, their children are spaced a lot closer together than mine were. With most of my kids, I had a three year space and one four year space. They have about a two year space between all their kids. So, to me their house is more hectic than mine was. Their oldest is nine, and with the kids as young as they are, they don't go through too much food, yet. Just wait until they are teenagers! Diapers is one of their biggest expenses right now, but that won't be forever. They are struggling financially, but managing. I think even if they had one or two kids, it would still be a struggle financially. That's why they are both in school. They want to better their financial situation. For me, a large family was what I always wanted. I came from a large family, and so did my husband. On my mother's side of the family I have an Uncle and Aunt who had 14 children, another Aunt and Uncle that had 12. As a kid, my favorite place to visit was my Aunt and Uncle's house with the 14 children. There was always something happening, and it was so fun. I'm not an empty-nester yet, but almost. My home is so quiet without all the kids and their friends coming and going. I miss it. This week I've been able to watch my 16-month-old grandson while his mama is in So. Korea visiting her older sister. I love the snuggle time with the baby. I love his little happy dance when he sees me. I love his fresh baby smell right after a bath. I love it when he wants me to hold him. I love watching him play. I love to see the progress he has made, just in the week I've had him. These are things that I miss from when I was a young mother. And, because I was blessed with more than one or two children I had the joy of seeing the magic of childhood multiple times. Are children a lot of work? Yes. But, to me, so worth it. Children are a wonderful blessing. My heart is so full with the love for my own children and my grandchildren. I can't imagine not having the children that I had. In some ways I wish I could have had at least one more. But, by the time I was 39 when I had the last, my body had had enough, and I almost lost the last pregnancy. We were so blessed to have had that last baby, and he has been such a joy. And, I was attending college full time when I had him. I don't feel like I missed out on anything by having the family that I did. I would do it all over again in-a-heartbeat.

Consider for a moment that as LDS we believe in God, a Holy Spirit, and angels etc... All of which can be considered supernatural, all of which we believe can and does reach out and guide us from time to time. We also believe in Satan, and his followers... All of which can be considered supernatural, all of which we believe can and does reach out and tries to influence us from time to time. So the question isn't really can we have an supernatural influence in our lives... the question becomes what is the source of that influence? And when you think about it then you can understand the LDS church's position. Tarot cards, psychics and other such things may be nothing but a sham (most probably are) but on the off chance they connect to something supernatural.... well we have every reason not to trust source of such a power, because its not the way God tells us he is going to work.

My husband would love to ride motorcycles with a group. We've just never been able to afford it. He always had a motorcycle as a teenager. When I met him he only owned a motorcycle. We ditched school one day to go riding up by the Bountiful B.