French Toast wrote: ↑Thu Jul 13, 2023 8:35 pm
Marcus wrote: ↑Thu Jul 13, 2023 8:17 pm
It doesn't take "a long time to introduce" something that needs to be done to protect children. That's just an excuse to justify why the LDS church waited so long in England, and is still waiting elsewhere.
You give the impression of posturing for intellectual superiority. Whatever. I am left wondering whether you are more interested in the challenge than the outcome.
I've posted about background checks and safeguards for children many, many MANY times here in the past. Do some research before you accuse.
...A little nugget of information about which you are likely to be unaware unless you live in the UK is that the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) — which is responsible for the background checks — is expensive, and checks must be undertaken annually. Performing background checks for all individuals who engage with children, youth, and adults (in all forms that takes), will be a significant financial undertaking.
Surprise, surprise, it costs money to undergo background checks in the US as well. It IS a significant financial undertaking, and most institutions here have absorbed that cost for decades now, as well as other costs that have been documented as necessary to protect children.
An organisation would be foolish to rush into something with major financial implications without due diligence.
Such as background checks for volunteers who will be working with children under the auspices of your organization?
How many years do you anticipate it will take the LDS church to reinvent that wheel and decide in favor of basic safeguards that virtually every other organization dealing with children has implemented? How many years does it take to read the research that is unanimously and overwhelmingly in favor of such safeguards?
Come on. Your arguments are meritless.