New Church policy regarding Bishop and Stake President interviews

[The Folk Prophet]

9 hours ago, truthseaker said:

But a bishop is in a position of spiritual authority over these people, it is unethical to offer advice on their personal lives (marriage or otherwise) from a counselling perspective, its very different than talking to a friend about your problems. I understand that is your culture but it invites a lot of problems, problems that could be avoided.

I find this view really odd. It's unethical for a spiritual leader to counsel people on spiritual matters?

[Guest MormonGator]

10 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

@Jane_Doe according to the article, the specific changes are:

The changes are:

• "Members should never be encouraged to remain in a home or situation that is abusive or unsafe."

• "When a member of a stake presidency or bishopric or another assigned leader meets with a child, youth, or woman, he or she should ask a parent or another adult to be in an adjoining room, foyer, or hall. If the person being interviewed desires, another adult may be invited to participate in the interview. Leaders should avoid all circumstances that could be misunderstood."

• "Church leaders should never disregard a report of abuse or counsel a member not to report criminal activity to law enforcement personnel."

• "At least two adults must be present on all church-sponsored activities attended by youth or children."

These are some great common sense reforms. Wise move. 

[NeuroTypical]

9 hours ago, truthseaker said:

I understand, I think you are missing my point.  The point is no one should be going for counselling or referrals for counselling to someone not qualified to make that judgement.  A Bishop is not qualified to counsel people or refer people for further counselling to anyone else.  He shouldn't be involved in it at all.

I don't understand your bolded statement here.  Consider the following:

"Fred, we need counselling, but we're poor. Let's go to the bishop and see if he'll refer us to an LDS counselor and pay for it."
"Ok Martha."
"Hi Fred and Martha, I'm glad you came to me for help.  Yes indeed, here is the contact info of the LDS counselor this ward has been working with for a long time.  She's very good at what she does, and I'm sure she can help you.  I understand you're having financial hardship, and I'm happy to use fast offerings to pay for a few sessions. How about you come see me in two months and we'll touch bases on how things are going."

This happens quite often.  I would be surprised if you could find a finance clerk who has never written a check for counseling.  Are you sure there's something wrong here?

Edited March 27, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

I don't understand your bolded statement here.  Consider the following:

"Fred, we need counselling, but we're poor. Let's go to the bishop and see if he'll refer us to an LDS counselor and pay for it."
"Ok Martha."
"Hi Fred and Martha, I'm glad you came to me for help.  Yes indeed, here is the contact info of the LDS counselor this ward has been working with for a long time.  She's very good at what she does, and I'm sure she can help you.  I understand you're having financial hardship, and I'm happy to use fast offerings to pay for a few sessions. How about you come see me in two months and we'll touch bases on how things are going."

This happens quite often.  Like, in most wards in the US.  Are you sure there's something wrong here?

I'm not saying that I agree with @truthseaker, but at first it does seem a bit odd to get counseling from someone who doesn't have mental health training and experience.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with them, but I can see why someone who isn't LDS would think that way. 

[NeuroTypical]

Just now, MormonGator said:

I'm not saying that I agree with @truthseaker, but at first it does seem a bit odd to get counseling from someone who doesn't have mental health training and experience.

@truthseaker is doing more than saying non-professional counselors shouldn't counsel.  I get that.  She is also saying you shouldn't go to your bishop for a referral.  I don't get that. 

Again, maybe I'm reading her comments wrong.   "The point is no one should be going for counselling or referrals for counselling to someone not qualified to make that judgement."

In other words, "No one should go to a non-counselor for a counselling referral".  Am I misreading?

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

Am I misreading?

I'm the one probably misreading/misunderstanding in some way. 

Like I said, I don't agree with what they are saying but I can understand why they think that way. 

Edited March 27, 2018 by MormonGator

[The Folk Prophet]

3 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I'm not saying that I agree with @truthseaker, but at first it does seem a bit odd to get counseling from someone who doesn't have mental health training and experience.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with them, but I can see why someone who isn't LDS would think that way. 

A bishop's "counsel" is as follows: Pray together. Be more Christlike. Sacrifice. Love. Read your scriptures. Serve each other more. Etc.

In other words the teachings of Christ. How is it that one needs mental health training and experience for this?

[NeuroTypical]

FYI, I'm a ward finance clerk.  I write 98% of the checks that get written.  Here's a breakdown of the kinds of checks I write, from most often to least often:

- Reimbursement checks (folks bought the food for some church-sponsored event and turned in their receipts.)
- Utilities payments
- Car payments
- Counseling
- Rent/mortgage payment
- Home/car repairs
- Medical bills

Yeah, Bishops refer people to (and pay for) counseling all the time.  I've written counseling checks for the missionary that came home early and nobody knows why. I've written counseling checks for the couple who lost another baby early in pregnancy.  And for the recently divorced.  And for random individuals or couples that the casual observer has no clue something is up.  I've written two, maybe three this year. 

I'm confused why @truthseaker would think there is something wrong here.  Fast offerings are wonderful things that bless people's lives, and it all starts with a bishop's referral.

Edited March 27, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[Jane_Doe]

9 hours ago, truthseaker said:

I must be reading this wrong, surely bishops (who from what I understand are just members in good standing with the church and have a bishop 'calling', certainly not qualified counsellors) are not counselling sexual abuse/assault victims.  These people need specialised counselling.  

Actually anyone who needs counselling for anything needs a professional (be it marriage issues/personal issues/depression etc), not an 'bank manager or similar' with a 'calling'.  

Im horrified if this is the case.

(I'm going to address this big-picture first, and then zoom specifically to talking about bishops).

LDS very much believe in the importance of mental health.  Taking care of yourself (including mentally) is part of your duty to God.  This is so important that Apostles have spoken directly on the subject from the pulpit in our world-wide broadcasts, not just once but repeatedly.   Here's just one talk wherein Apostle Holland speaks of his own struggles with clinical depression, and how seeking help for such things is not something to be stigmatized but encouraged when needed https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/like-a-broken-vessel?lang=eng.  This talk here (https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2017/04/songs-sung-and-unsung?lang=eng&country=br) about "singing in your own voice" is the the only sermon in my life that floored me so hard upon finishing it, I literally immediately walked up to the computer and hit "play again".  And then listened to it a third time just an hour later.  The Church sponsors mental health resources, both directly and many many links to other resources (see here: https://www.lds.org/mentalhealth?lang=eng).  In high density LDS areas there are even counselors specifically specialized for LDS clients.  

Just two months ago, my Relief Society (aka women's group) devoted two weeks of lessons to the critical topic.  We talked about sign of mental illness, getting help, helping others (while maintaining your own health), healthy boundaries, and thoroughly shredded any stigma against seeking help.   Many people shared their positive experiences getting help, either for themselves or watching a loved one's transformation.  On the board we listed all the professional mental health resources in town, starring those which have free or reduced fees for certain demographics.  

 

Now zooming into a bishop's role: a bishop is indeed a spiritual advisor.  Spirituality is not an isolated part of a person, but is effected by mental health, physical health, and relationship health (just as all those things effect each other).   Say a person comes to his office, seeking help because they are unable to sense the Spirit.  Many times the person will not know why they are having issues sensing Him, and there are a variety of possible reasons.   It could be that they have a major sin that needs resolving, or that they are in need of mentoring on how to recognize His voice, or because clinical depression is obscuring their ability to sense His love, or many other reasons.  Part of working with the bishop is figuring out what's going on and how to best address it.  If indicators point to there being a mental health issue going on, then that person needs to see a mental health doctor.   If the person doesn't have a mental health doctor (which is pretty likely), the  bishop has a number of referrals available to connect them (in addition to the resources I listed earlier).  For example, my aunt who's a psychologist and LDS has many of her clients referred to her via their bishops (she's proven herself to be a capable mental health professional).  Additionally, many of her LDS clients have their fees paid for (either in part or whole) by the bishop/church.

Now, does the system always work perfectly?  Obviously not.  People do make mistakes, LDS folks are no exception.  

[Dgal]

The following is not a criticism but an observation.

Part of the big problem with this is that bishops are not trained to know the difference. Life JaneDoe said above, a member may go to their bishop with concerns. The bishop may think it has to do with sin, or may think they need to pray more, etc etc. When what really is before him is someone with some form of mental health problem, mood disorders being very common (depression/anxiety/ etc)

Bishops need better training, much better training prior to dealing with members of their parish. The whole idea of a bishop receiving inspiration, as true as that may be at times, may also be the very reason for the failures of getting people the help that they need. 

[Guest MormonGator]

44 minutes ago, Dgal said:

The following is not a criticism but an observation.

Part of the big problem with this is that bishops are not trained to know the difference. Life JaneDoe said above, a member may go to their bishop with concerns. The bishop may think it has to do with sin, or may think they need to pray more, etc etc. When what really is before him is someone with some form of mental health problem, mood disorders being very common (depression/anxiety/ etc)

Bishops need better training, much better training prior to dealing with members of their parish. The whole idea of a bishop receiving inspiration, as true as that may be at times, may also be the very reason for the failures of getting people the help that they need. 

Perfectly said. Welcome to the forum! 

[Vort]

47 minutes ago, Dgal said:

Bishops need better training, much better training prior to dealing with members of their parish.

Assuming you're talking about LDS bishops and the wards (not parishes) they lead, I disagree. The bishop is not filling a paid position; he is volunteering his time as a leader. A bishop already spends 20-40 hours per week in unpaid service in his calling. To expect him to attend hours of training on top of that, and in effect become a certified counselor, is outrageous.

[Vort]

It's always interesting to me to see people who reject the Church's authority and spiritual claims, yet seem to think they're qualified to tell the Church how it ought to administer.

[The Folk Prophet]

51 minutes ago, Dgal said:

or may think they need to pray more, etc etc.

Everyone needs to pray more, etc etc.

Pretty safe counsel.

52 minutes ago, Dgal said:

When what really is before him is someone with some form of mental health problem, mood disorders being very common (depression/anxiety/ etc)

Which should be treated appropriately professionally, etc....but has nothing to do with the need to pray more.

There is no, go to your bishop but don't see a professional rule. We're not FLDS or....Amish or something.

[Sunday21]

55 minutes ago, Dgal said:

The following is not a criticism but an observation.

Part of the big problem with this is that bishops are not trained to know the difference. Life JaneDoe said above, a member may go to their bishop with concerns. The bishop may think it has to do with sin, or may think they need to pray more, etc etc. When what really is before him is someone with some form of mental health problem, mood disorders being very common (depression/anxiety/ etc)

Bishops need better training, much better training prior to dealing with members of their parish. The whole idea of a bishop receiving inspiration, as true as that may be at times, may also be the very reason for the failures of getting people the help that they need. 

Hello! Welcome!

[NeuroTypical]

Absolutely, our leaders think about the workload placed on bishops, and how to best help them manage it.  But truth be told, two of my last three bishops have confided in me they wish there was more training on this stuff.

I've made it a habit to hand out copies of Alexander Morrison's book Valley of Sorrow: A Layman's Guide to Understanding Mental Illness to every new Bishopric.  They've all universally thanked me and said they found it very important, even though a bishop's first year is full of busybodies coming out of the woodwork to tell them how to do their job.

Edited March 27, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, Dgal said:

Bishops need better training

I can get behind this, as a general principle.  We all need better training, more time in the scriptures, more education.  We all need to gain wisdom and experience.

God sent us here to get it, and we get it through our lives.  It's not like there's a magic "you now have all you need" wand that gets waved, just because someone gets a calling to bishop.

Edited March 27, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[Dgal]

4 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Absolutely, our leaders think about the workload placed on bishops, and how to best help them manage it.  But truth be told, two of my last three bishops have confided in me they wish there was more training on this stuff.

I've made it a habit to hand out copies of Alexander Morrison's book Valley of Sorrow: A Layman's Guide to Understanding Mental Illness to every new Bishopric.  They've all universally thanked me and said they found it very important, even though a bishop's first year is full of busybodies coming out of the woodwork to tell them how to do their job.

It's good to hear that there are those who recognized that they need more training, that some things are just beyond their pay grade, or in Mormon culture, volunteered time

[Dgal]

15 minutes ago, Vort said:

Assuming you're talking about LDS bishops and the wards (not parishes) they lead, I disagree. The bishop is not filling a paid position; he is volunteering his time as a leader. A bishop already spends 20-40 hours per week in unpaid service in his calling. To expect him to attend hours of training on top of that, and in effect become a certified counselor, is outrageous.

Not saying that they need to be a certified counselor. Saying that they need more training to recognize when someone's issue is not a spiritual one, but more psychological. 

[The Folk Prophet]

14 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

It's not like there's a magic "you now have all you need" wand that gets waved, just because someone gets a calling to bishop.

I disagree...though it's a bit argumentative since part of the "all you need" is the ability to study, etc.

[Vort]

10 minutes ago, Dgal said:

Not saying that they need to be a certified counselor. Saying that they need more training to recognize when someone's issue is not a spiritual one, but more psychological. 

I believe that bishops already get fairly extensive training to recognize exactly this. in addition, I don't think there is a clear separation between a spiritual issue and a psychological issue. On the contrary, it seems axiomatic to me that spiritually unhealthy behavior (a.k.a. sin) will produce negative psychological effects.

[The Folk Prophet]

12 minutes ago, Dgal said:

It's good to hear that there are those who recognized that they need more training, that some things are just beyond their pay grade, or in Mormon culture, volunteered time

Everyone recognizes this except the very rare straight-up egomaniac.

[The Folk Prophet]

13 minutes ago, Dgal said:

Not saying that they need to be a certified counselor. Saying that they need more training to recognize when someone's issue is not a spiritual one, but more psychological. 

Everyone's "issues" are psychological. And everyone's "issues" are spiritual.

[Guest MormonGator]

17 minutes ago, Dgal said:

It's good to hear that there are those who recognized that they need more training, that some things are just beyond their pay grade, or in Mormon culture, volunteered time

The LDS culture is changing-I think more and more people are beginning to agree with you @Dgal. I hope so anyway. It's not taking away from the authority of the bishop, it's just saying that yes, some things are above their pay grade. 

[Jane_Doe]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

The LDS culture is changing-I think more and more people are beginning to agree with you @Dgal. I hope so anyway. It's not taking away from the authority of the bishop, it's just saying that yes, some things are above their pay grade. 

I would say "some things are not their specialization" would be a better way of saying it.  People have different skill sets, and sometimes you need a referral.