s/o Churches, Children, and Volunteers

[Bluegoat]

I do think that some of the rules in place get to be quite bizarre

 

The one about men changing diapers is quite negative IMO.  i have however met moms who freak out when they find a male daycare worker is allowed to chage girls diapers, or who won't leave kids at a friend's house when the father is home.  So, I can actually see having something like that as simply a way to avoid having people freak out.

 

And no one seems to remember that women are more likely to be perpetrators of some kinds of abuse than men.

 

I do think that Binip is right - some of the things we are in a way trying to artificially implement are the sorts of social rules that have existed for a long time in many cultures in order to prevent problems.  It's interesting that our culture recetly tended to see a lot of them as stifling and remove them precisly because they seem to see everyone as potentially predatory. 

[Mom22ns]

The bathroom situation is always a difficult one.  

 

The church we used to attend had a nursery for under 2 on Sunday mornings, and we never had to take anyone to the bathroom - most kids that age just aren't potty training yet.  Not seriously, anyway.  

 

Dd messed with an 1 yr old class when she completely potty trained at 18mos. The teachers were a little unprepared, but when she decided she wanted to use the potty, she never had an accident, so they got used to it quickly. :)

[Mom22ns]

The one about men changing diapers is quite negative IMO.  i have however met moms who freak out when they find a male daycare worker is allowed to chage girls diapers, or who won't leave kids at a friend's house when the father is home.  So, I can actually see having something like that as simply a way to avoid having people freak out.

 

We had a couple of men who worked in our toddler nursery (1-2 yr olds) at one time. They usually tried to schedule a female worker with them, but sometimes the two of them would work together. Once in awhile we had a parent freak out over it. I worked with both of them and knew them both personally. People were lucky to have them take care of their toddlers. The fear of men is so unfounded!

 

When I was a baby, my mom always said she could only leave me in a nursery if there was a male worker. I would cry until the women gave up and came and got her, but if there was a man, I never cried :)

[PeacefulChaos]

When I worked in the nursery, there were always some kids who liked DH better than me.  :D

 

Granted, he was also a lot nicer than me.  Guys do well volunteering in the nursery!  It was too bad he had to stop (other obligations on Sunday mornings).

[Southern Ivy]

Even if the felony was twenty years ago and had nothing to do with children? I hope that's not what you're saying.... that would be sad. Many people turn their lives around, have families and lead productive lives. And might be a GREAT person to work with kids/youth; perhaps even the best one!

No. Sorry. Not what I was saying - I meant issues with kids.

 

[Southern Ivy]

Does the bolded strike anyone else as insanely over the top?

 

These are men that have taken membership and volunteer classes, have passed a background check and are working with children in a very public, high-traffic area.  There are always at least two adults present and the powers that be have dictated that one of the adults must be female (because females are above reproach :glare:).

 

There are 4 area leaders walking the halls and popping into the rooms along with, one would assume, occasional parents coming and going.  There is security in the area.

 

With all those safety precautions in place, it is still considered too risky to let a man change a diaper?  If the female volunteer is busy then the child has to sit in a soiled diaper because too many highly vetted men will be uncontrollably aroused by infant and toddler genitalia?

 

I have three boys.  If any of them were to grow up to be a sexual predator, I would cry myself to sleep after turning them in so they would not be a further threat to society.  If, however, they grow up to be normal, morally responsible guys like the VAST majority of the population, I will cringe every time I see society treating them like felons and marginalizing the role they can play with children and youth even in situations that are statistically very safe.

 

Wendy

Unfortunately, while it is a rather stringent guideline (or as you said "over the top"), it was put in place to protect the men, not to treat them like potential pedophiles. 

For awhile, men used to be allowed to do changes, until the day that it all blew up in our face. Someone falsely accused a volunteer of abuse. It later came out that the person was upset at leadership and made it all up. However, the damage was done.

 

Like Bluegoat stated,

 

i have however met moms who freak out when they find a male daycare worker is allowed to chage girls diapers, or who won't leave kids at a friend's house when the father is home.  So, I can actually see having something like that as simply a way to avoid having people freak out.

 

I have actually had people ask me about the changing procedures. It wouldn't bother me if the guys changed my daughter, but there are some who freak far too easily.

It is fair to the men to be singled out like that? No, not at all, because I know that I could just as easily be accused of abuse.

So, while it may have been a knee-jerk reaction to the accusations, I do appreciate them doing their best to protect not only the children, but the reputation of the men (including my husband) who choose to serve in the children's area as well. 

It's certainly not meant to be sexist and appalling as another poster stated, but rather to try to prevent issues/accusations like the one we were in. I hope that makes sense. 

 

I realize not everyone will agree with the rule and not everyone will agree with how the situation was handled. That's fine, but it's how our leadership chose to handle it. So, it is what it is.  :001_smile: 

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Unfortunately, while it is a rather stringent guideline (or as you said "over the top"), it was put in place to protect the men, not to treat them like potential pedophiles. 

For awhile, men used to be allowed to do changes, until the day that it all blew up in our face. Someone falsely accused a volunteer of abuse. It later came out that the person was upset at leadership and made it all up. However, the damage was done.

 

Like Bluegoat stated,

 

I have actually had people ask me about the changing procedures. It wouldn't bother me if the guys changed my daughter, but there are some who freak far too easily.

It is fair to the men to be singled out like that? No, not at all, because I know that I could just as easily be accused of abuse.

So, while it may have been a knee-jerk reaction to the accusations, I do appreciate them doing their best to protect not only the children, but the reputation of the men (including my husband) who choose to serve in the children's area as well. 

It's certainly not meant to be sexist and appalling as another poster stated, but rather to try to prevent issues/accusations like the one we were in. I hope that makes sense. 

 

I realize not everyone will agree with the rule and not everyone will agree with how the situation was handled. That's fine, but it's how our leadership chose to handle it. So, it is what it is.  :001_smile: 

 

 

Sounds like your leadership has some serious issues of their own.

[Southern Ivy]

Sounds like your leadership has some serious issues of their own.

No, actually, not really. I've actually been very pleased with the way the majority of the things have been handled. 

 

When you are in a very large church, people get upset and things happen. Same things happen in small churches, as well, I guess. I've seen people get upset at leadership for tons of reasons.

Heck, at my old church, a family got mad and left because the pastor wouldn't let the man print incredibly racist and hateful propaganda in the church bulletin ("drums are of the devil and were brought over here by the slaves, so all blacks are evil" type crap). They caused a huge stink and left, all the while spreading rumors about the church.

Just because people get mad at leadership, it doesn't always mean the leadership is in the wrong and just because the leadership chooses to address an issue in a particular way (in a way that they feel protects their volunteers - whether it really does or doesn't), it doesn't mean they have their own issues. 

 

Anyway, as I said, not everyone will agree with the way the church handled it. That's fine. 

I was just answering the main question about what procedures and guidelines does your church have in place. That's all. It wasn't mean to be a thread where I have to defend my church family. So, I'll just leave it at that. :)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

No, actually, not really. I've actually been very pleased with the way the majority of the things have been handled. 

 

When you are in a very large church, people get upset and things happen. Same things happen in small churches. I've seen people get upset at leadership for tons of reasons.

Heck, at my old church, a family got mad and left because the pastor wouldn't let the man print incredibly racist and hateful propaganda in the church bulletin ("drums are of the devil and were brought over here by the slaves, so all blacks are evil" type crap). They caused a huge stink and left, all the while spreading rumors about the church.

Just because people get mad at leadership, it doesn't always mean the leadership is in the wrong and just because the leadership chooses to address an issue in a particular way (in a way that they feel protects their volunteers - whether it really does or doesn't), it doesn't mean they have their own issues. 

 

Anyway, as I said, not everyone will agree with the way the church handled it. That's fine. 

I was just answering the main question about what procedures and guidelines does your church have in place. That's all. It wasn't mean to be a thread where I have to defend my church family. So, I'll just leave it at that. :)

 

I disagree.  If the only way they know how to respond is a knee jerk manner then they do have some serious issues.  People like the ones in your leadership are part of the problem.

[Southern Ivy]

I disagree.  If the only way they know how to respond is a knee jerk manner then they do have some serious issues.  People like the ones in your leadership are part of the problem.

Please do not misquote me. I said "may have been a knee-jerk reaction". Obviously, as I am not in leadership at this church, so I did probably speak out of turn in stating that since I was not in the leadership and early childcare meetings to bring that change into place.

I have stated that I do not necessarily agree with the decision, however I have seen the leadership deal with other issues that have arisen with love and wisdom. So, no. I do not agree and until you know my leadership personally, please do not assume to know that they are the ones that are part of the problem. 

 

Sorry to hijack, fairfarmhand. :/

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Please do not misquote me. I said "may have been a knee-jerk reaction". Obviously, as I am not in leadership at this church, so I did probably speak out of turn in stating that since I was not in the leadership and early childcare meetings to bring that change into place.

I have stated that I do not necessarily agree with the decision, however I have seen the leadership deal with other issues that have arisen with love and wisdom. So, no. I do not agree and until you know my leadership personally, please do not assume to know that they are the ones that are part of the problem. 

 

Sorry to hijack, fairfarmhand. :/

 

I actually was not quoting you; we just happened to use a similar phrase. I also have no issue judging policies that support blank discrimination based on sex.

[PeacefulChaos]

Unfortunately, while it is a rather stringent guideline (or as you said "over the top"), it was put in place to protect the men, not to treat them like potential pedophiles. 

For awhile, men used to be allowed to do changes, until the day that it all blew up in our face. Someone falsely accused a volunteer of abuse. It later came out that the person was upset at leadership and made it all up. However, the damage was done.

 

Like Bluegoat stated,

 

I have actually had people ask me about the changing procedures. It wouldn't bother me if the guys changed my daughter, but there are some who freak far too easily.

It is fair to the men to be singled out like that? No, not at all, because I know that I could just as easily be accused of abuse.

So, while it may have been a knee-jerk reaction to the accusations, I do appreciate them doing their best to protect not only the children, but the reputation of the men (including my husband) who choose to serve in the children's area as well. 

It's certainly not meant to be sexist and appalling as another poster stated, but rather to try to prevent issues/accusations like the one we were in. I hope that makes sense. 

 

I realize not everyone will agree with the rule and not everyone will agree with how the situation was handled. That's fine, but it's how our leadership chose to handle it. So, it is what it is.  :001_smile: 

 

 

This makes complete sense to me.  The church we used to attend had the same rule in place, for the same reason.