Child Sex Offenders at Church

[Bini]

For everyone who thinks the buddy system / supervision is this great idea or a good compromise...

... You know it Doesn't. Work., right?

ESPECIALLY when people are kept in the dark. Please go research 'grooming'. And then reflect seriously on how you yourself and children would be likely to regard an 'obviously' well liked and respected member (his company is so often sought out! Special attentions paid to him)... And the children who see him week in and week out. Would you stop to chat in the parking lot? Invite him over for dinner? Ask him to keep an eye on your little one as you go corral the boys running all over outside, or vice versa, leave your older child with the friendly man (most children looooove pedophiles, because pedophiles craft a very likable exterior) when your toddler has a diaper blowout or you realize you forgot the binki/ sign up sheet/etc., or the RS president wants a word.

But a family doesn't even have to be clueless. Wards are neighbors. Merely the act of seeing him every week in church lays the ground for the meeting in the park, restroom, leaf raking, lawn mowing, dog walking. Because the man is KNOWN to them, children don't have 'stranger danger' associated with him anymore. Because he attends their church, he is painted with the same broad brush ALL church members are painted with. Righteous. Trusted. Show respect toward. Help. And ADULTS not liking him/ even going so far as to say he hurts children? Major cognitive dissonance. Which means that typically, at about 8 or 9, kids think the adults are schtupid. The guy is obviously AWESOME. He treats them like grownups. Always lets them pet his dog. Has brownies or Popsicles at his house. Tips really well when you help him take his leaves. The OTHER adults saying 'stay away'? Are just being stupid adults treating them like babies AGAIN, or bullies, or unchristian, or ....

You see what I'm saying?

How about, if people want to "help" a pedophile so badly, they NEVER allow him to be around children... And take Sacrament to him in his home... Like what is done for other sick people?

If you're responding to MOE's and my post regarding "buddy system", you may have misinterpreted.

We're talking about having an ADULT priesthood holder be a "buddy system" to the CSO who is attending church, to act as a preventive measure, at least reducing risk.

[Tough Grits]

BadWolf,

Your post makes sense. I can totally see that happening. And because people are trying to forgive and move beyond the offender's past, they will refrain from telling others what he was (or is), thus making him seem safe.

SIGH

God is omniscient. As such He knows what this person will or will not do, or if this person has changed or not.

So, that still leaves us back at the original question...what do WE do.

Thankfully we have the Holy Ghost to help lead and guide us individually. For certainly this is a matter for prayer, pondering, and the guidance of the Holy Ghost.

[Bini]

If you're responding to MOE's and my post regarding "buddy system", you may have misinterpreted.

We're talking about having an ADULT priesthood holder be a "buddy system" to the CSO who is attending church, to act as a preventive measure, at least reducing risk.

For the record, this statement, is basically ONE option that could be utilised in the situation where law does not restrict a CSO from attending church (and the church welcomes him/her).

[Guest DeborahC]

I am going to ask a sincere question:

Isn't the abuse of your own children DIFFERENT than abusing the children of others?

It is my opinion that while the act and crime is the same, the situation where it can happen is not.

Family are those people whom you see anytime and anywhere. Others, are not so 'accessible'.

I'm thinking that the thinking behind it is different.

(deleted)

Anyway, I believe that reasonable precautions should be made... but I do think that it is a different mentality between an abuser who abused their children/grandchildren and one who will try to abuse any child.

Am I wrong?

No, there is no difference.

The abuse of a child is the abuse of a child, yours, mine, or theirs.

Sexual abuse beginning in a family easily spills over into the public.

Access to children is easy for a skilled molester.

My father abused his own children and we (unknowingly at first) brought OTHER children into his lair by inviting them over to play. My mother's friends brought their children over. My father's friends brought THEIR children into his lair, not knowing the danger. His employers brought THEIR children into his lair. He would meet teens on the street, compliment them, befriend them, and invite them. They would come willingly while we watched with frightened eyes. I even TOLD a girl once to be careful and she told me how lucky I was to have him as a father!!!

As another person has mentioned, he was VERY likable and a VERY beautiful man.

He was perfectly groomed

He had a "young at heart" feeling

He loved to sing and play games.

He liked current music

He was a flatterer, alway giving complements

He was smart and up on current affairs

He appeared to be reasonable

He always treated children like little adults which children found attractive.

He'd talk to them about things their parents would consider taboo, drinking, smoking, drugs, sex, and say how "square" the adults were.

He was brilliant and skillful

Everybody loved him, including his employers, his family, and strangers

He made a good impression.

He appeared to be very caring.

He was always "helpful"

Like someone else mentioned, he'd offer to babysit or hold your children, and there are places hands can touch that are not seen by others unless they're suspecting

He was very understanding about how OTHER adults just didn't understand children, blah blah

He was a salesman - he could tell you the sky was purple and after a while, you'd begin to see a purple cast, couldn't you?

I'm not saying be paranoid.

But do be watchful and train your children to tell you if anything happens that makes them uncomfortable.

Children have a built in guidance system.

They know when a person makes them uncomfortable.

There's no need to get too graphic when warning children.

All you have to do is tell them if someone makes them uncomfortable in any way, to tell you.

Also that nobody has the right to kiss them on the lips or touch certain places on their bodies (in language they'll understand) and if that happens, they should run and tell YOU or the closest adult.

I am also aware of people being unfairly accused.

This is unfortunate because there are great role models in the world.

I wouldn't agree when my ex-husband wanted to work at a nursery because I was afraid someone would accuse him. He really WAS a good person who DID love children in a healthy way. But it was too dangerous for him.

And remember, molesters are not only males!

It's a muddy line, a fine line, and a parent just has to be keenly aware.

Edited January 19, 2013 by DeborahC

[skippy740]

For everyone who thinks the buddy system / supervision is this great idea or a good compromise...

... You know it Doesn't. Work., right?

ESPECIALLY when people are kept in the dark. Please go research 'grooming'. And then reflect seriously on how you yourself and children would be likely to regard an 'obviously' well liked and respected member (his company is so often sought out! Special attentions paid to him)... And the children who see him week in and week out. Would you stop to chat in the parking lot? Invite him over for dinner? Ask him to keep an eye on your little one as you go corral the boys running all over outside, or vice versa, leave your older child with the friendly man (most children looooove pedophiles, because pedophiles craft a very likable exterior) when your toddler has a diaper blowout or you realize you forgot the binki/ sign up sheet/etc., or the RS president wants a word.

But a family doesn't even have to be clueless. Wards are neighbors. Merely the act of seeing him every week in church lays the ground for the meeting in the park, restroom, leaf raking, lawn mowing, dog walking. Because the man is KNOWN to them, children don't have 'stranger danger' associated with him anymore. Because he attends their church, he is painted with the same broad brush ALL church members are painted with. Righteous. Trusted. Show respect toward. Help. And ADULTS not liking him/ even going so far as to say he hurts children? Major cognitive dissonance. Which means that typically, at about 8 or 9, kids think the adults are schtupid. The guy is obviously AWESOME. He treats them like grownups. Always lets them pet his dog. Has brownies or Popsicles at his house. Tips really well when you help him take his leaves. The OTHER adults saying 'stay away'? Are just being stupid adults treating them like babies AGAIN, or bullies, or unchristian, or ....

You see what I'm saying?

How about, if people want to "help" a pedophile so badly, they NEVER allow him to be around children... And take Sacrament to him in his home... Like what is done for other sick people?

This was an excellent response to my question. Thank you.

Is there room for middle ground with CSO and church attendance?

Keep them assigned to family history work and the high priests group comes to my mind. You'll almost NEVER find any children with these classes.

Of course, the dynamics of being in a branch will certainly limit this option.

My only other suggestion, depending on geography and stake leaders, is to talk with the Stake President and ask for a membership exception - to have this person's record associate with another ward within the stake.

This wouldn't solve the problem, but it wouldn't give him a reason to go to the nearby meetinghouse, and perhaps find a more meaningful way to serve in a ward setting - like with family history and with a High Priests group.

Any thoughts?

[Star_]

I definitely have respect and compassion for survivors. I have two extended family members that were molested as children.

At the same time, being child-less, I can understand Dravin's comment.

Everyone could use a bit of compassion and kindness instead of an attack. We are all survivors of our own trials, whatever they may be.

We can't understand each other's trials exactly unless we have been there. Christ understands exactly. We have living prophets that receive revelation and lead this church. If a change needs to be made regarding child sex offenders at church, then I trust the right change will be done. As for now, yes, they should be allowed at church unless the Prophet and the 12 receive revelation otherwise.

Edited January 19, 2013 by Star_
typos

[rkhutchinson]

I am going to ask a sincere question:

Isn't the abuse of your own children DIFFERENT than abusing the children of others?

It is my opinion that while the act and crime is the same, the situation where it can happen is not.

Family are those people whom you see anytime and anywhere. Others, are not so 'accessible'.

I'm thinking that the thinking behind it is different.

That is not to say that there aren't precautions or other actions that can and should be taken.

But to put it in context, the above post talked about playing basketball and riding bicycles at the Church. This doesn't happen on Sundays. Would there be any reason why this person would need to be at the Church building during the week? The only thing I can think of, is to help clean the Church building. And yes, I know that there are some that bring their children to the building to help clean up.

Any other reason would be to participate in planning meetings, depending any callings extended.

Anyway, I believe that reasonable precautions should be made... but I do think that it is a different mentality between an abuser who abused their children/grandchildren and one who will try to abuse any child.

Am I wrong?

I would love to allow myself the peace of mind in agreeing with you- he only attacks, rapes, molests children in his own family- my kids are safe and life can go on as usual. However, this doesn't ring true in my heart and if it isn't true how can I expose my kids to this threat.

[Dravin]

That is why I asked Dravine if he HAD children. I was interested in knowing where he was coming from. Instead, I got, "Do you have a cat?" which didn't feel like a compassionate or sympathetic response.

First an apology:

Deborah, I am sorry that I responded to what was an earnest question with a flippant question in response.

Now the explanation:

I took your asking me if I had children not as an earnestly asked question to understand where I might be coming from but as a lead up to either or both:

A) Discounting my position as invalid because I do not have children.

B) Implying that my position will change as soon as I have children, which is just a variation of A.

[Guest DeborahC]

First an apology:

Deborah, I am sorry that I responded to what was an earnest question with a flippant question in response.

Now the explanation:

I took your asking me if I had children not as an earnestly asked question to understand where I might be coming from but as a lead up to either or both:

A) Discounting my position as invalid because I do not have children.

B) Implying that my position will change as soon as I have children, which is just a variation of A.

Thank you so much for the apology and explanation.

I can see how you might have mistook my comments.

It's difficult to be clearly understood without seeing a person's face and body language.

It's forgotten.

[Dravin]

Thank you so much for the apology and explanation.

I can see how you might have mistook my comments.

It's difficult to be clearly understood without seeing a person's face and body language.

It's forgotten.

Did you still want to know more where I am coming from concerning my position that pedophiles should not all be executed, or do you just want to let it lie? I can understand either desire.

[skippy740]

No, there is no difference.

The abuse of a child is the abuse of a child, yours, mine, or theirs.

Sexual abuse beginning in a family easily spills over into the public.

Access to children is easy for a skilled molester.

My father abused his own children and we (unknowingly at first) brought OTHER children into his lair by inviting them over to play. My mother's friends brought their children over. My father's friends brought THEIR children into his lair, not knowing the danger. His employers brought THEIR children into his lair. He would meet teens on the street, compliment them, befriend them, and invite them. They would come willingly while we watched with frightened eyes. I even TOLD a girl once to be careful and she told me how lucky I was to have him as a father!!!

As another person has mentioned, he was VERY likable and a VERY beautiful man.

He was perfectly groomed

He had a "young at heart" feeling

He loved to sing and play games.

He liked current music

He was a flatterer, alway giving complements

He was smart and up on current affairs

He appeared to be reasonable

He always treated children like little adults which children found attractive.

He'd talk to them about things their parents would consider taboo, drinking, smoking, drugs, sex, and say how "square" the adults were.

He was brilliant and skillful

Everybody loved him, including his employers, his family, and strangers

He made a good impression.

He appeared to be very caring.

He was always "helpful"

Like someone else mentioned, he'd offer to babysit or hold your children, and there are places hands can touch that are not seen by others unless they're suspecting

He was very understanding about how OTHER adults just didn't understand children, blah blah

He was a salesman - he could tell you the sky was purple and after a while, you'd begin to see a purple cast, couldn't you?

I'm not saying be paranoid.

But do be watchful and train your children to tell you if anything happens that makes them uncomfortable.

Children have a built in guidance system.

They know when a person makes them uncomfortable.

There's no need to get too graphic when warning children.

All you have to do is tell them if someone makes them uncomfortable in any way, to tell you.

Also that nobody has the right to kiss them on the lips or touch certain places on their bodies (in language they'll understand) and if that happens, they should run and tell YOU or the closest adult.

I am also aware of people being unfairly accused.

This is unfortunate because there are great role models in the world.

I wouldn't agree when my ex-husband wanted to work at a nursery because I was afraid someone would accuse him. He really WAS a good person who DID love children in a healthy way. But it was too dangerous for him.

And remember, molesters are not only males!

It's a muddy line, a fine line, and a parent just has to be keenly aware.

Thank you. I'm beginning to understand more and more here.

Accusing and being accused are very important considerations. In BSA, we are to always have "two-deep" leadership. Boys are never to be alone with a leader.

Apparently, there is an exception that I'll have to begin on in February. We have a boy in our ward whose parents cannot bring him to cub scouts every week. According to BSA rules, leaders cannot offer rides. However, according to LDS rules, you can do so - 'as a friend'.

Since my mom is also their visiting teacher, and I don't have a time conflict, I will be providing this child a ride to cub scouts beginning next month.

But don't think that this won't be putting me on edge a bit. I'm constantly 'on-guard' for being accused of any wrongdoing. I think my bank training and working with the bank vault has a little something to do with it.

I also know that I have a temper and never thought that I would be good working with kids that are not my own. Well, I guess I actually LIKE my calling as Cubmaster and Asst. Webelos leader!

Two-deep leadership & accountability helps to:

- Protect the innocent from being accused.

- Protect the guilty from opportunity.

But it has to be executed correctly. In the vault, I'm watching the other person like a HAWK. There won't be any money missing when I was with that person. I won't be blamed for allowing such an opportunity to happen.

This mentality... or paranoia... isn't prevalent in the Church.

[Tough Grits]

...but I do think that it is a different mentality between an abuser who abused their children/grandchildren and one who will try to abuse any child.

Am I wrong?

In my opinion, there is only one mentality...a sick mind.

There is no way for me to know if my relative abused anybody other than family. I think it would be naive to assume that he would not have abused a non-family member if the perfect opportunity presented itself.

Abusers, in my simple opinion, only have one thought...to satisfy the urge with whatever opportunity presents itself.

It just happens that family members are often abused because they are easy, familiar, and readily-available targets.

[mirkwood]

I have not read this whole thread, I will do so at a later time, but I wanted to add the following.

I have a sex offender for a neighbor. His target is, or at least his conviction, was with a late teenage girl (17 I think). His version of events is that he thought she was 24 when they had thier "relationship." I call BS for a multitude of reasons. I think he likes younger girls then his victim was.

A couple years ago I was in the front yard working in my garden. I paused and stood up for a moment to rest. He was in his front yard staring down the street away from my house. I looked down the street to see what had his rapt attention. Two early teens girls, probably around 13-14 were walking up the street. I watched him intently watch them for about a minute and a half as the girls walked up the street, past his house and on up the street past me. I watched the turd as he watched the girls until his gaze crossed past my house. As soon as he saw me watching him, he made a startled jump, and immediately went inside his house. His "interest" was obvious. Yea, his target is young girls.

Never trust a convicted sex offender around their chosen victim/target. Never trust a child sex offender to be around defenseless children alone. Ever.

[beefche]

My friend was in a ward that had a convicted child molester attending. The bishop knew he was soon to attend the ward, so he held a special meeting for adults only (I believe they made sure at least one parent attended the meeting as the others needed to watch the kids). At this meeting, he informed the adults of this brother attending church. He assured them that he would not have any calling at all do with the youth or children. They also assigned hall monitors--adults to just hang out during church to have eyes in the halls. The primary teachers were instructed that children were never to attend the bathroom alone--an adult had to escort them there. As a result, this increased the number of adults teaching primary (this was before the 2 deep calling rule).

She said that he was assigned home teachers who sat with him in church as well as fellowshipped him away from church. I don't remember what his calling was, but it wasn't anything to do with kids. Any meetings (outside of normal Sunday) he had to attend was not during the same time as Mutual or anything kid related.

They probably broke some kind of privacy rule by announcing it to the whole ward. But, this man's actions prevented him a whole lot of privacy (convictions are public). But, their ward took care to protect the children as well as allowed this man access to saving ordinances. I don't know if there were any that opposed.

I would say that for myself, I would counsel with the bishop about my concerns. If the precautions taken did not alleviate my concerns, then I would seriously consider attending another ward. But, I would need to remember--at least in my ward, I know the offender. Another may be hiding in another ward and precautions aren't being made in that ward. There are other options that I could take and I would look into those options.

It can be done. It can be done with love and compassion.

[Guest DeborahC]

Did you still want to know more where I am coming from concerning my position that pedophiles should not all be executed, or do you just want to let it lie? I can understand either desire.

It's your call.

I know that my position is extreme.

It's coming from place of personal experience and pain.

If your intention is to change my mind, I don't feel hopeful.

However, if you just want to state your position so I and others will understand how you feel, of course I want to hear it.

Thanks for asking.

[Tough Grits]

I have no way of knowing if my relative was abused. It makes me sad to think he might have been, because that means he was introduced to something that damaged him.

Hear this, I do not think that condones the choices HE made, but I do think it matters.

Oh, these terrible ripples that are created by the evil one who wants so bad to take us all down like a row of dominoes.

Yes, I may be slightly more sensitive than the average person, maybe not...is there a scientific way to gauge that?

I do know this, the line of abuse stops with me. I will take my sensitivity any day, because it helps me to teach my children (not in fear or paranoia, but in love and stewardship), and it helps me to be cautious with other people's children.

But what if all my teachings and precautions aren't enough and something happens to one that I love?

I will have to find the faith to forgive. I will use my experience to help guide me in supporting and loving my loved one, and in helping them to become a survivor like me and not a victim.

And as it is with me, I will pray that the abuse stops with them...and that they do not carry it forward to others.

This is such a deeper issue than it seems on the surface. It isn't always about anger, or lynch mobs, or hate. I have seen lots of love and compassion in this thread, and much thought as well.

I just wanted to say that I do think about whether abusers had an abuser of their own. If so, this brings me sadness for them too.

Edited January 19, 2013 by Tough Grits

[Dravin]

It's your call.

I know that my position is extreme.

It's coming from place of personal experience and pain.

If your intention is to change my mind, I don't feel hopeful.

However, if you just want to state your position so I and others will understand how you feel, of course I want to hear it.

Thanks for asking.

I don't expect to change your position. Your experiences are of far greater magnitude than the words of some guy on the internet. My position has nothing to do with the trustworthiness or safety of pedophiles, it is simply that I feel the death penalty should be reserved for when lives are taken*. I understand that those who are the victims of non-fatal but particularly violating crimes may feel as if their lives are taken, and I can agree with that in a sense, but don't feel it applies in the literal way I feel it needs too. If we are going to, as a society, spill blood and end a life then it must be in response to the same.

*Not in all circumstances, but I don't feel it particularly pertinent to break it down.

Edited January 19, 2013 by Dravin

[Guest DeborahC]

I hear what you are saying and I understand that most people probably agree with you.

But for me, my life WAS taken and my brother's life WAS taken. In fact, in my family, I have watched several cousins end up on the street, dead, some by murder, as a result of the abuse.

These were sweet, loving children who were destroyed by one man. They tried to escape their nightmares by using drugs, alcohol, or getting into relationships that were familiar territory - with abusers. They all believed they had run out of options. They were all younger than I and they are all dead.

So for me, the act is no different from murder. You murder a person's innocence, self-respect, confidence, trust in other human beings, self-worth, and the list goes on and on. What's left is a broken shell that may or may not survive.

There are many instances in the BOM and Bible where God requested entire civilizations be destroyed by death. I'm sure not every one of those people had taken lives.

In the case of a thief or violent person, they can often change and go on to leave normal, good lives - they can get counseling, change their actions and become good citizens.

In the case of the pedophile, I know of not one single instance where the abuser is "healed" or changed.

They never change.

If not executed, they should be locked up away from society forever.

I understand you feel the death penalty should be reserved for those who take lives.

I respect your position and your right to have it.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

[rkhutchinson]

So- why aren't child rapist disfellowshipped? Or at least banned from the building- they could have home teachers and sacrament at home. Why is it more acceptable for an entire ward to have to constantly be on guard and children to be endangered than to have the offender forced to make accommodations? This is a sincere question and I am not making judgment. I am just looking for a little more insight to help me resolve the issue for myself.

[skippy740]

My guess is because ALL are supposed to be welcome in our meetinghouses... unless by a court order.

I've never heard of anyone being banned from our church buildings for any reason.

[rkhutchinson]

My guess is because ALL are supposed to be welcome in our meetinghouses... unless by a court order.

I've never heard of anyone being banned from our church buildings for any reason.

Why is this right? Why is the burden placed on the innocent and not the offender?

[Dravin]

So- why aren't child rapist disfellowshipped?

I would expect a convicted child predator to be disfellowshipped or excommunicated. Two things to understand though:

1) Being disfellowshipped or excommunicated does not bar one from attending services.

2) Being disfellowshipped or excommunicated are not, generally speaking, permanent. One can repent and return to fellowship or communion.

Edited January 19, 2013 by Dravin

[Tough Grits]

What should be the punishment for pedophiles and rapists?

Jail for life? I have a problem with that, because they are being supported by taxpayer money to be housed and fed for the rest of their lives.

Death penalty? I am not sure how I feel about this. Wouldn't death be easier for them than being tortured and abused in jail by the other inmates who detest pedophiles and rapists?

Castration? Well, as mentioned...this isn't just a physical illness, it is a mental illness that can be satisfied in means other than the castration would prevent.

Torture? As mentioned above, this is a mental illness...and torture will not remove the sickness from their minds.

Serving their time and paying their debts...is this even possible? How do we quantify the time a person should serve for their sexual crimes? Are you ever "paid up" on your debt for destroying innocence?

The only person who can accurately judge punishment is God, because He knows the intents of our hearts, our thoughts, our words, and our deeds. He also knows the trauma caused by those we hurt. He alone can dispense justice with absolute, perfect authority and accuracy.

So, where does that leave us?

[rkhutchinson]

I would expect a convicted child predator to be disfellowshipped or excommunicated. Two things to understand though:

1) Being disfellowshipped or excommunicated does not bar one from attending services.

2) Being disfellowshipped or excommunicated are not, generally speaking, permanent. One can repent and return to fellowship or communion.

I know this is the way it is but is this the way it SHOULD be? Isn't the church supposed to be a sanctuary?

As it stands in my branch, when I'm there 100% of my attention will be focused on making sure my children aren't in a position to be sexually assaulted. I can never relax or feel peace. How could I sit and enjoy a RS meeting or Sunday School w/o the thought- did one of my children go to the bathroom unattended... are they being assualted while I'm sitting here?

[Tough Grits]

So- why aren't child rapist disfellowshipped? Or at least banned from the building- they could have home teachers and sacrament at home. Why is it more acceptable for an entire ward to have to constantly be on guard and children to be endangered than to have the offender forced to make accommodations? This is a sincere question and I am not making judgment. I am just looking for a little more insight to help me resolve the issue for myself.

I hope I may offer a sincere answer without seeming flippant or dismissive in my words.

Maybe such a ward should be thankful for the one pedophile that they know about. For then they can be on their guard and know with whom their children should not be left without supervision.

As was mentioned earlier, it could be worse...there could be a pedophile that nobody in the ward knows about.

I hope that didn't sound dismissive, for it was not intended that way. I am merely trying to find a positive in a situation for which there does not seem to be a positive.