Does your church do background checks for all people who work with the children and youth?

[Veritaserum]

I am more and more uncomfortable with the idea of my children attending a church that doesn't do background checks on all of the volunteers that work with the children. The only ones who are checked are Boy Scout leaders (because BSA requires it). While I expect that the vast majority of people at church are not child predators, it seems imprudent to me to not do a little legwork to verify that someone at least doesn't have a documented history. The church is well-funded and can afford to do this. I don't understand why it doesn't. The church is actually getting used right now in another state because of a sex abuse scandal involving a volunteer. I hope that pushes the church into implementing better safety standards.

[scholastica]

It's mandated by the Archdiocese in which we live.  Everyone who will have contact with children has to attend a seminar and have a background check. Catechists, scout leaders, coaches of sports teams, school volunteers, even to drive on field trips, etc.  If you are going to be around kids, you have to do it.   I am glad they do.

 

scholastica

[mytwomonkeys]

Yes. No exceptions. I would feel uncomfortable otherwise, especially in a church our size. No way.

[pdalley]

The United Methodist Church requires all of its churches to participate in background checks for anyone working with Youth or Children. They call it Safe Sanctuaries. Also at any activity there must be two unrelated (to each other) adults of each sex to supervise. 

 

I know a lot of sex offenders have never been caught so they wouldn't show up on a background check but I still would not be comfortable at a church who did not perform them. 

[luvnlattes]

Yes, our church does background checks for anyone working with minors. I don't understand why your church wouldn't want to either. It's in their best interest as well as the interest of their members/attendees.

[Chris in VA]

I just asked Dh. He said staff does, but not volunteers. Hmmm.

[marbel]

Our church does and I am very glad that they do.  But I voted "other" because I am not sure I would not attend a church that didn't do it.   Maybe it's because my kids are older so it's not as big a concern for me; I really don't know.  I honestly don't know if it would be a deal breaker for me.  Every church we've attended since having kids has done it, so it hasn't come up.

[AimeeM]

Yes, and all are required to go through a "Protecting God's Children Workshop" at some point too.

(catholic church)

[HRAAB]

Yes, it is required by the Diocese.  In addition, everyone that has anything whatever to do with children are required to complete a Safe Environment Workshop.  My 16 yr old is doing that right now since she helps teach religious ed weekly.  (This is the Catholic Church my family attends)

 

I think it would be extremely foolish not to do so.  I probably wouldn't let my children attend youth events if they didn't do so.

[hillfarm]

Our church does background checks for children's workers. I think they do it primarily due to insurance requirements, not in reaction to any problems that we have had.

 

I marked Other, because this is not as much of an issue for our family due to my dd being 14yo and trained in combat martial arts. If I had concerns, I would not allow my child to participate in the children's program until the concerns were addressed to my satisfaction.

 

I understand that some small churches cannot afford to have everyone checked out and several that I have visited were filled with only the members of 4 or 5 families who all know each other and have for the last 200 years. I understand that familiarity does not guarantee a problem will not happen, but I do understand that it doesn't do as much good to restrict access at church when the children will be around all the same adults at every family gathering and social event in the community.

 

Our church is surprisingly large, pulling in members from throughout our county and across the river, from another state. We have background checks and I think it is a good idea. No, it doesn't feel as warm and cozy when you have to go through all the security measures (background checks for workers, photo ID'd kids and authorized caregivers who can retrieve the child, gates, 1/2 walls, and windows to limit access, etc .), but I do believe it is safer for the children.

 

In a smaller church I used to attend, there was one guy who set off my creep-O-meter and I watched him like a hawk whenever he was around my child. He eventually left the area. And there was one problem when non-custodial grandparents tried to pick up the children to take them purportedly "out for an afternoon of lunch and shopping". Who knows? But definitely not the church's call to determine whether this was okay.

 

In general, I think background checks are a good thing, but I would not select my place of worship based solely on that criterion.

[Davysmom]

I said yes I wouldn't attend otherwise. But I really mean yes, my kids wouldn't attend alone otherwise. I might go to a church that doesn't do background checks, but my kids would never go to something without me or dh if that was the case.

I would work hard to convince them of the wisdom of a background check. We have lived in areas where there weren't a lot of options of churches that believe what we believe. We would not sacrifice doctrine for background checks, but we would not put our children at risk. And no matter the background checks we still practice basic safety measures with our kids cause background checks aren't enough protection.

[Punks in Ontario]

Here in Ontario, the main impetus for background checks has been insurance requirements, but I would seriously expect it of any church anyways.  In our church if anyone is considered a sketchy person, they don't help even with a check.  We also expect people to attend for at least 6 months before helping anywhere.  This give us time to get to know them and to weed out obviously unstable people.

 

That said, I was able to allow some helpers for VBS this year whose checks were "in process".  We knew them and they were still subject to the 2 deep rule as were those with criminal checks.

 

Unfortuately, even checks don't screen out all predators.   We had a fellow a couple of years ago, who could pass a check, but we didn't trust and didn't allow him with children in a formal capacity and who did allegedly molest a girl (not a church kid).  After he was charged, he was not allowed on church property without a personal escort.

[Trish]

Just want to point out an interesting story I read a while back concerning Florida. Florida mandates background checks for organizations that deal with youth. BUT. They have no enforcement of it. So it's up the organization to decide to comply with the requirement.

 

As a result of this, there have been sex offenders who have SET UP CAMPS (summer camps, etc) expressly for the purpose of having access to kids. And of course they don't comply with the requirement. So you need to ask the individual camp if they are complying with that policy. And then trust that what they are telling you is true.

[momofkhm]

Right now, the church doesn't require it.  But if the diocese required it, we'd do it.  The mission organization we use requires it of the chaperones on the trip, so those adults have had one - 6 total.  But certainly not everyone in the children's and youth's ministries.  

 

I trust everyone there because I have known them so long.  So for me it is not a deal breaker.  I can see where you are coming from, but my church is also small and can't afford it.  The place we do use for background checks charges $30 per person.  And for our church, due to it's small size, you'd have to do a check on about 1/2 the congregation to get everyone who works with children checked.

 

 

[QueenCat]

The United Methodist Church requires all of its churches to participate in background checks for anyone working with Youth or Children. They call it Safe Sanctuaries. Also at any activity there must be two unrelated (to each other) adults of each sex to supervise. 

 

I know a lot of sex offenders have never been caught so they wouldn't show up on a background check but I still would not be comfortable at a church who did not perform them. 

 

Sort of.......... each UMC can create their own guidlelines based on Safe Sanctuaries but they can individualize it to their church. We do background checks at ours but we do allow husband/wife teams to teach Sunday School. We wouldn't get enough volunteers if we didn't. My dh and I love to teach but it is something we will only do together. We teach every other year, and attend our own class in the opposite years. Additionally, for VBS, we can't always process enough background checks in time for those who only serve at that time. Instead, we ensure that in every team, there is at least one who has gone through the full process, and no child is ever alone with one adult who is not their relative. Even going to the restrooms.

[Soror]

Catholic here, it is required for everyone. Fwiw our hs group looked into using a Methodist church for some events and they were going to require our leaders to do some kind of check or training one just for being there even though our group shared no affiliation with them.

[Farrar]

We haven't been attending church lately, but the last church we did attend for many years didn't check.  They required that there always be two teachers and preferably one parent in the room as well (most of the teachers are parents too).  If there was one teacher, class couldn't run.  In order to check all the volunteers, they would have to check every single parent at the church with children under 10 since all Sunday school parents were required to be the extra volunteer at least a couple of times a year.  The cost of doing that boggles my mind a little.  And the massiveness of that undertaking...  Well, I get why they wouldn't want to.  And to be honest, if I'd had to pay and spend a couple of months tracking down my report (that's what dh did when he volunteered at a free preschool - it took months and it took him going to places several times to get the final clearance - ah, city bureaucracy...) then I would have just left the church.  That wouldn't be worth it to me.

 

I trust the two teacher policy more than I trust background checks anyway.  No system is perfect.  We have to be alert to predators (there were a lot of really good articles, IIRC, after the Sandusky case finished) and continually check in with our kids, but beyond that, I'm not going to live in paranoia.

[QueenCat]

Catholic here, it is required for everyone. Fwiw our hs group looked into using a Methodist church for some events and they were going to require our leaders to do some kind of check or training one just for being there even though our group shared no affiliation with them.

 

I go to a Methodist church. Our liability insurance requires any adults that are in the building and working with youth/children to go through training and a background. We have a minor exception during VBS but take special precautions during that time.

[maize]

As long as the two teacher policy is strictly followed I am comfortable with that. If such a policy were not being followed I would not send my children to classes without me.

[AmyontheFarm]

We've had back ground checks for a long time here.  2 non-related people in the room with each group.  No adults in the bathrooms, except to stand at the door.  Adults can not walk through the kids area without a volunteer walking them in and out.

 

We still had an issue rise up.  Having all those checks and balances helped us as a church to prove we were being diligent.  Even though the crime never happened on or at our church property, and it didn't happen during a church event.  One family member tried to go after the church because their child went to an event a few times and the convicted criminal attend our church and worked at those events.

 

Please ask your church leadership to consider doing this.  For their own protection.  Later we were told that the parties involved were going after the church because the congregation had been gifted a large sum of money to use for ministry.

[Veritaserum]

There is a two-deep policy, but it isn't strictly enforced and there are built-in, normalized exceptions (that I am not comfortable with). Most people have an attitude that everyone at church is trustworthy because they are members of the church. My children know that if an adult asks to speak privately (there are LOTS of official reasons for this sort of interview), they are supposed to get me or dh. But really, it should be *policy* for an adult to get permission from a child's parents beforehand and to have a parent present.

 

I'm aware of issues in other congregations where known sex offenders weren't appropriately kept away from children. The legal case right now is exactly this issue. The parents reported. Clergy did not take appropriate actions. The person abused more children. Repeat. The official policy is for suspected abuse to be reported to the bishop (like the pastor of the congregation) instead of the police. Many bishops are not appropriately trained to report to the police and make sure the alleged perpetrator has no access to children and that parents are aware of his/her identity. There's sometimes more emphasis on forgiving the offender instead of protecting the harmed. It really bothers me.

[Jenn121]

Our church does background check son all who will be working with children of any age. 0-18.

 

We also have a computerized checkin/out system and is realtivly new. It prints a sticker that on one half has the child's name, any allergies, and the parent/guardian contact phone number. You peel it off and stick on the child and you keep the other half. You cannot pick up the your child without the other half.

 

This sytem was implemented becasue of incident at another church in the area where a non-custodial parent picked up a child from church and ran away. The child has been found and returned but at that point our children's pastor and elders decided we had better put in some safety checks.

[NicAnn]

The United Methodist Church requires all of its churches to participate in background checks for anyone working with Youth or Children. They call it Safe Sanctuaries. Also at any activity there must be two unrelated (to each other) adults of each sex to supervise.

 

I know a lot of sex offenders have never been caught so they wouldn't show up on a background check but I still would not be comfortable at a church who did not perform them.

Do you know if this is supposed to be the rule of all united Methodist churches? My former church didn't do that, and still doesn't.

 

Eta- I'm referring to the two unrelated adults part.

[Trish]

Plus a lot of people are first-time predators (in terms of not having been caught yet), so I would not RELY on background checks, a 2-person system is much better IMO.

[Whereneverever]

Two unrelated, background checks are required for anything involving minors. Any suspected incidents reported to the police, not internally investigated.

[Alice]

We do and we also have the two deep policy. We are a really small church and when we started doing them we were even smaller. It felt a little silly at the time. I filled out the form for my check and then had to turn it in to an elder, my husband.  The kids in the class I taught were all close friends’ kids who are at our house all the time. Anyone teaching my kids were people who I’d known for 10 years or more and that I would trust to babysit. 

 

But now we’ve grown and it’s been nice as we’ve grown to be able to reassure visitors that we already have these policies in place. I’m now the CE chair of our church and it’s also I think good to have the policy in place so that when we have new people who want to teach or be involved in children’s ministry we can just state the policy and treat them all the same. Then we aren’t in a position of saying “oh, this seems like a nice family they can teach Sunday school, I trust them. But this guy who is interested seems sketchy so I don’t want him teaching.†It’s just a blanket policy and not us making judgements about who is ok to teach. For us everyone has to have attended six months to be involved in children’s ministry and do a background check. We make exceptions on the six months when approved by our elders, it’s usually someone who is military (very common in our area) and who has a referral from their previous church. 

[trinchick]

I voted other. Our church doesn't do background checks, and I happily send my kids to church school, but it's not because I necessarily trust each and every other member of our church. I actually just trust our church's process, which doesn't allow for one-on-one time. We don't always have two adults in the room (sometimes it's hard to rustle up one teacher to lead each class), but we never have one adult and one child. If only one child shows up for class, then either the class is merged with another grade or the child joins his/her parents in the main church.

[*Lulu*]

I voted that our church does, and it is requirement for my personal comfort.

 

However, background checks cannot compare to the protection of a two deep policy and a real understanding within the leadership and congregation that an abuser does not necessarily look like the weird guy at the park but can be charming, likable, and is often the last person you'd suspect.

[poppy]

CORI checks are really easy and FREE.  Any church that didn't bother doing them, I would think of as not prioritizing children's safety.  Or, at best, as being really disorganized and poorly run.

 

And I assume two unrelated adults with children is a given, too.

 

Background: I teach Sunday school at my UU church.

[Xuzi]

There is a two-deep policy, but it isn't strictly enforced and there are built-in, normalized exceptions (that I am not comfortable with). Most people have an attitude that everyone at church is trustworthy because they are members of the church. My children know that if an adult asks to speak privately (there are LOTS of official reasons for this sort of interview), they are supposed to get me or dh. But really, it should be *policy* for an adult to get permission from a child's parents beforehand and to have a parent present.

 

I'm aware of issues in other congregations where known sex offenders weren't appropriately kept away from children. The legal case right now is exactly this issue. The parents reported. Clergy did not take appropriate actions. The person abused more children. Repeat. The official policy is for suspected abuse to be reported to the bishop (like the pastor of the congregation) instead of the police. Many bishops are not appropriately trained to report to the police and make sure the alleged perpetrator has no access to children and that parents are aware of his/her identity. There's sometimes more emphasis on forgiving the offender instead of protecting the harmed. It really bothers me.

I've not heard that the policy was to report to the bishop ONLY. Why would (and how COULD) the church try to stop you from reporting a CRIME to the police?

 

IMO, I think background checks are a false sense of security. There was a case at one of my previous congregations where a young man at church was arrested for sodomizing a young boy who lived next door to him. He wasn't working with children at church at the time, but he very well could have been, even with a background check, because he had a squeaky clean criminal record prior to this arrest. Not even so much as a traffic ticket.

 

Perhaps you could speak with your Bishop about the way he's following the church's safeguards?

[TechWife]

 The official policy is for suspected abuse to be reported to the bishop (like the pastor of the congregation) instead of the police. 

 

This is absolutely inappropriate, IMO. Crimes are to be reported to the police, period! I find it unhealthy in a number of ways that a church would tell it's congregants what it could/could not say to people outside the church. It's manipulative. 

[Veritaserum]

I've not heard that the policy was to report to the bishop ONLY. Why would (and how COULD) the church try to stop you from reporting a CRIME to the police?

  

This is absolutely inappropriate, IMO. Crimes are to be reported to the police, period! I find it unhealthy in a number of ways that a church would tell it's congregants what it could/could not say to people outside the church. It's manipulative.

 

I agree that the policy is horrible. Here is is, though. :(

 

"The Church’s position is that abuse cannot be tolerated in any form. Those who abuse or are cruel to their spouses, children, other family members, or anyone else violate the laws of God and man. All members, especially parents and leaders, are encouraged to be alert and diligent and do all they can to protect children and others against abuse and neglect. Members who have abused others are subject to Church discipline.

 

"If leaders or teachers become aware of instances of abuse, they should counsel with the bishop. Instructions for the bishop are provided in Handbook 1, 17.3.2."

 

http://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church/selected-church-policies/21.4#214

[Live2Ride]

In our state we've always been trained that the policy is to first call the church abuse/crime hotline and that they would then give us the appropriate local services number to call.  We were also to always stay two deep when dealing with children and only inform as minimal people as possible to avoid having too many people/opinions involved with the local police/lawyers. The police recommended this as well.   

 

We had an incident involving a teen boy years ago.  I did report it to our Bishop (who I trusted) and he directed me to immediately call our local police to be advised on what to do next.  The Bishop took appropriate measures to protect the victim and then turned it over to our Stake Leaders who did the same.  The boy could not return as the parent would not take appropriate measures to watch the kid. 

[Xuzi]

It says they should council with the Bishop, but nowhere do I see "and don't call the police". That's a pretty big leap. There's need for BOTH to be put "in the know", the police to handle the legal side of things, and the Bishop to take steps needed to protect the ward.

[Veritaserum]

The policy should explicitly tell people to contact the police. It only mentions the bishop. It should be changed because there are several documented cases of only the bishop being told. If the bishop doesn't follow through, nothing gets reported. That shouldn't happen.

[Veritaserum]

Here is the court case I mentioned:

 

http://journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/600380/Lawsuit-filed-against-church-for-coverup-of-sex-abuse.html

[Davysmom]

We haven't been attending church lately, but the last church we did attend for many years didn't check.  They required that there always be two teachers and preferably one parent in the room as well (most of the teachers are parents too).  If there was one teacher, class couldn't run.  In order to check all the volunteers, they would have to check every single parent at the church with children under 10 since all Sunday school parents were required to be the extra volunteer at least a couple of times a year.  The cost of doing that boggles my mind a little.  And the massiveness of that undertaking...  Well, I get why they wouldn't want to.  And to be honest, if I'd had to pay and spend a couple of months tracking down my report (that's what dh did when he volunteered at a free preschool - it took months and it took him going to places several times to get the final clearance - ah, city bureaucracy...) then I would have just left the church.  That wouldn't be worth it to me.

 

I trust the two teacher policy more than I trust background checks anyway.  No system is perfect.  We have to be alert to predators (there were a lot of really good articles, IIRC, after the Sandusky case finished) and continually check in with our kids, but beyond that, I'm not going to live in paranoia.

 

Background checks are not hard to get for organizations like churches. Doing my own was a royal pain when I worked at a preschool, but doing them as an organization was very easy and inexpensive. The results were instant. I run background check for a program that offers camps for kids, but it is the same one our church uses. They take minutes and cost very little. There are free options too.

 

Our church always has 2 people. When they first started going background checks, they just did the lead teacher for time and $$. Implementing background checks can be very overwhelming. So we started with just the leads. So one person is each room had a background check and no one was ever left alone. Then eventually they got most of the second or thirds in the room.

Now, they simply do it when you come into the church. Every 3 months they offer a class and run background checks on new people who want to work with kids.

[Aura]

I voted "No, but I wish they did." But I don't allow my kids (of any ages) to go with just anyone, church activities included. There are adults that I trust, and some that I do not. (Not that I suspect anything, I just don't trust them.) This leads to my kids being able to participate in some activities but not others.

 

I think it's foolhardy for any organization to not take steps to avoid potential problems: background checks, two-deep policies, sign-in/out procedures, windows on doors, etc. BUT, even if an organization does everything realistically possible, there is no guarantee against abuse. So, I worry less about what the official policies are than (1) what I'm going to do, and (2) the general attitude about child safety.

[Ripley]

I voted Other.

 

I attend a Catholic church, so we have background checks and two-deep leadership.  It's not something I feel strongly about either way, for or against, but that's not because I necessarily trust the people at my church. It's because I don't necessarily trust the background checks and two-deep leadership approach.

[Incognito]

The church we attend does checks for people working with kids or vulnerable adults (seniors or mentally handicapped).  The extent to which people are checked and screened has increased over the last few years, in order for our small church to comply with insurance requirements and the desires of the conference the church is a part of.  Non-profits get free checks on volunteers with kids and seniors in our city.  In the neighboring city (where some of our volunteers are from) it is $20ish.

 

HOWEVER, I also know that there are people who do not think this policy is important and they are willing to bring in random parent volunteers who are not even a part of the church community during kids' events.  I understand why (to build relationships with the parents, the parents have something to offer, etc), but I find it inappropriate.  I have chosen not to send one of my children to some such events this year, partially because of this (it wasn't THE deciding factor, although maybe it should have been).

 

 

[poppy]

Colleges handle it the same way as the church mentioned above.... report it within the organization, don't call police. The military too.
 I think it's ridiculous and I would call the police if I were assaulted, period.

 

It is different state-by-state, but where I live, criminal background checks are entered online, and they are free for nonprofits that meet certain criteria that any church would meet.... inexpensive programming and has services available for children & the elderly. 

 

I'm a little amazed at the "false sense of security" argument.  I suppose the argument is that not having background checks make parents more wary? I don't see the wisdom of that.  Educate parents, but still screen out volunteers who should not be working with kids.   

 

 

[K&Rs Mom]

 

Ours does, it's been the policy for several years now, but having worked as a court clerk and later having a job doing background checks I know how useless they are.  

[Luanne]

My parents work with a group that goes out to the nursing homes in the area and has church services with them.  Both of my parents had to get background checks.

[QueenCat]

Do you know if this is supposed to be the rule of all united Methodist churches? My former church didn't do that, and still doesn't.

 

Eta- I'm referring to the two unrelated adults part.

 

It is required to have a plan, from what our pastor said........ However, each church can choose how to implement Safe Sanctuaries, and write the guidelines to suit the individual church. There are national guidlelines that are recommended to use.

[Xuzi]

 

 

I'm a little amazed at the "false sense of security" argument.  I suppose the argument is that not having background checks make parents more wary? I don't see the wisdom of that.  Educate parents, but still screen out volunteers who should not be working with kids.   

Actually, in my (albeit limited) experience, they tend to make parents *less* wary. "They passed a background check, therefore they're safe to leave my kids with."

 

Educate parents, absolutely.

 

ETA: There was a case in Arizona this summer of a BSA leader in my church who molested a bunch of kids, even though he passed a background check. Problem was, he used a stolen identity.

[PrincessMommy]

yes, the diocese requires it.  but it isn't a deal-breaker for me personally.

[Ellie]

 

I understand that some small churches cannot afford to have everyone checked out and several that I have visited were filled with only the members of 4 or 5 families who all know each other and have for the last 200 years.

 

It doesn't cost anything to check someone's name on-line to see if he's listed as a s*x offender. It isn't as comprehensive as a background check, but it is free, and it is enough *legally,* according to the Assemblies of God legal department (I found this information while sleuthing around the AG site).

 

I have been a nursery coordinator. I wanted to institute policies certain policies that I believed would protect the children (it's a long story, lol). The parents were all in favor of it; it was the two women who were paid to work in the nursery, and who had been there for many years, who gave me grief. After all, they knew all of the parents and couldn't see any reason for things like signing the children in and out. o_0

 

Which is to say that TPTB sometimes have to make decisions for the safety of the children in their care whether the parents understand the issues or not. More than one nursery coordinator has horror stories of children being kidnapped by noncustodial parents whom everyone had known for years.

[ScoutTN]

All Sunday school teachers, youth leaders, choir leaders etc. have background checks. All church staff - everyone regardless of his or her job - have background checks. I know churches where all officer (elder/deacon/vestry etc.) nominees have background checks.

 

The Sunday morning nursery and preschool helpers are not screened because they only serve 2-3x a year and always serve alongside workers who have been screened - either paid staff or Sunday school teachers. These volunteers do not change diapers or take kids to the bathroom. We have a rotation where all able-bodied church members take turns helping in the early childhood area because the littles need so much attention.

 

Two adult rule is followed very strictly. 

 

 

Sad, but necessary! Not safe and not wise to skip the background checks!!!

[Veritaserum]

Even mandatory training and better safety protocols would help. Right now there's almost nothing and few people care. I don't think that's safe.

[prairiewindmomma]

Handbook one requires the bishop to call the 24h church headquarters number, if I remember correctly. The 24h number is to church legal counsel and they present the bishop with a checklist of items that must be completed, including reporting to the police. While many states have a "clergy exception" where clergy are not required to report abuse if the abuser is the one making the admission as part of confession, the LDS church does not allow a member abuser that privilege. Abuse = reporting. Reminder letters and training happens often, but it is done via reminder letter to leaders and not read over the pulpit.