Language:
Welcome Guest Login or Signup » LOGOUT

Go Back   LDS Social Network Forums > Organizations > Priesthood Quorums (Aaronic & Melchizedek) & Scouting

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-16-2011, 10:28 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United States -
Religion: Mormon / LDS / Christian
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Laughs: 0
Laughs at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Aaronic Priesthood, Home Teaching, and the "Two Deep" Rule?

Our ward has a large number of AP holders with either inactive or non-member fathers, meaning that these young men can't be paired up with their father for home teaching as would normally be done. One of the inactive fathers recently raised a fuss that he wasn't comfortable with his son going home teaching with an unrelated adult male. There are other issues in play with the father that make his motives suspect, but I do think he brings up a valid point.

My question is how do your wards/branches handle youth protection issues as they relate to the YM? I am a big believer in the "two-deep leadership" principle taught by BSA and it seems like most leaders observe that with respect to "Scouting" activities, but I often see the principle ignored as it relates to home teaching and other situations that aren't pure scouting (providing rides, etc.). Has anyone ever seen any guidance from Salt Lake on the issue? I've had YM callings in three different wards now and everytime I bring it up people look at me like I have a third arm growing out of my butt! Thoughts?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 03-16-2011, 10:36 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United States -
Religion: Mormon / LDS / Christian
Posts: 1,780
Thanks: 1,573
Thanked 649 Times in 441 Posts
Laughs: 651
Laughs at 183 Times in 114 Posts
Default

What is the "two Deep" thing-a-ma-jig?"
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 03-16-2011, 10:49 AM
MarginOfError's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: United States -
Religion: Mormon / LDS / Christian
Posts: 5,530
Thanks: 220
Thanked 4,294 Times in 2,120 Posts
Laughs: 208
Laughs at 1,386 Times in 588 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennarator View Post
What is the "two Deep" thing-a-ma-jig?"
The two-deep leadership principle means that an adult should never be in the presence of a youth without another adult present. That is, at least two adults when interacting with youth.

In the BSA, you may be allowed to have two or more youth with one adult for temporary periods of time if circumstances require it, such as transportation or skills instruction. In such cases, the group should stay within public view.

I imagine most people don't worry about this issue with home teaching, but if a parent is uncomfortable with the arrangement, I'm not going to begrudge him that. Protecting youth is serious business.

With home teaching, however, the only time in which the two-deep principle could be violated is during transport. Presumably, there would be an adult present at the home teaching appointment. None of the options to reconcile this are very convenient, but they might include

a) the young man's parent drives him to the appointment
b) the adult enlists another adult (spouse or otherwise) to accompany the drive to the home teaching appointment.
c) each young man is assigned to home teach with two adult leaders
d) two young men are assigned in a companionship with an adult

As it stands right now, the young man's parents bear the bulk of the burden of ensuring that the young man doesn't come in harm's way, as he would only be able to go home teaching with their permission. I don't know of any precedent to state that while home teaching, youth are in the care of the Church in the same way they are at young men activities (speaking about liability, anyway). If the legal liability were to change, you'd probably see more guidelines from the Church about it*.




* That being said, priesthood leaders should not be assigning young men to home teach with men whose records have been annotated.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_A_Guy View Post
Dude. When both Vort and MOE are in agreement, the thinking has been done.
Uncommon Dissent
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 03-16-2011, 10:53 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United States -
Religion: Mormon / LDS / Christian
Posts: 1,780
Thanks: 1,573
Thanked 649 Times in 441 Posts
Laughs: 651
Laughs at 183 Times in 114 Posts
Default

Hm....


Interesting. What if a ward is too small for this to work, like what if there is only one scout?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 03-16-2011, 10:53 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United States -
Religion: Mormon / LDS / Christian
Posts: 1,780
Thanks: 1,573
Thanked 649 Times in 441 Posts
Laughs: 651
Laughs at 183 Times in 114 Posts
Default

Oh sorry!! I don't mean to get off the subject!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 03-16-2011, 01:09 PM
rameumptom's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: United States -
Religion: Mormon / LDS / Christian
Age: 53
Posts: 7,073
Thanks: 1,805
Thanked 4,526 Times in 2,557 Posts
Laughs: 347
Laughs at 784 Times in 356 Posts
Default

Two deep applies to Scouting, not to priesthood functions. It is in place by the BSA, and the Church follows that practice for its BSA activities.

That said, youth are not to be home teachers until they are 14 years of age (Deacons may go with their fathers). This is the process in place for the Church. The HP/Elder's president should prayerfully consider each companionship, and ensure that it is working well. Both the MP leader and the YM president should occasionally interview the youth doing home teaching, to make sure things are going properly with the families AND with them as individuals.
__________________


Rameumptom: A Holy Stand or Podium, where I can pontificate to my heart's delight.

rameumptom.weebly.com
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 03-16-2011, 01:28 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United States -
Religion: Mormon / LDS / Christian
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Laughs: 0
Laughs at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rameumptom View Post
Two deep applies to Scouting, not to priesthood functions. It is in place by the BSA, and the Church follows that practice for its BSA activities.
If this is the case, then I guess the question is should two-deep apply to priesthood functions? I don't think the reasons for BSA's two-deep policy (mainly to protect the youth from inappropriate conduct by adults and to protect adults from baseless allegations from youth or their families) suddenly cease to apply to priesthood functions. Sadly, even priesthood holders can act inappropriately with youth. Additionally, an allegation can be fabricated against a priesthood holder (think of rebellous youth or an anti-LDS parent looking to lash out at the Church) just as easily as it could be fabricated against an adult scout leader.

It just surprises me that there is an apparent assumption by members that nothing bad could possibly happen when we are in the Lord's service, or that avoiding risk is not worth the minor inconvience it would create. IMO it isn't wise to put youth in that situation, and it is asking a lot of the adult priesthood holder to risk his reputation, his resources, and possibly his freedom (all of which could be lost in the instance of an allegation of inappropriate behavior) unnecessarily in performing his priesthood duties.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 03-16-2011, 01:40 PM
rameumptom's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: United States -
Religion: Mormon / LDS / Christian
Age: 53
Posts: 7,073
Thanks: 1,805
Thanked 4,526 Times in 2,557 Posts
Laughs: 347
Laughs at 784 Times in 356 Posts
Default

Two deep leadership is a rather new thing. BSA has had it only for a few decades now. Given that the BSA is over a century and the LDS Church is almost 2 centuries old, I'd say that two deep is a legal protection for the organization.

Yes, things occur. However, they actually occur rarely when it comes to home teaching. A man and boy are alone for a few minutes while driving to appointments in a car. That is very different than a man and boy alone on a campout all weekend long.

You are trying to compare apples to oranges. And while there is a risk, I think that the risk is low enough that it doesn't require us to go overboard with protection. We take boys out so they can learn to serve and to perform their AP duties. If 2 deep leadership was ever required, boys would only go out with their own fathers, or not at all. It would make home teaching too cumbersome to have 2 adult males and a youth each time (imagine trying to schedule!).
__________________


Rameumptom: A Holy Stand or Podium, where I can pontificate to my heart's delight.

rameumptom.weebly.com
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to rameumptom For This Useful Post:
gopecon (07-21-2011)
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:09 AM.

New Posts

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0



TERMS & CONDITIONS | HELP | CONTACT US | INVITE | RSS FEEDS | ABOUT US | GET INVOLVED | ARCHIVE
*** LDS Social Network ***
More Good Foundation. All rights reserved.

Header art used by permission of Mark Mabry and Reflections of Christ.

LDS.Net is not owned by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (sometimes called the Mormon Church or LDS Church). The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the position of the Church. The views expressed by individual users are the responsibility of those users and do not necessarily represent the position of the More Good Foundation. For the official Church websites, please visit LDS.org and Mormon.org.