Should primary leaders be contacting minor children?

[_SoHo]

My two eldest children are not members of the Mormon church. They are each above 8 years and not baptized. My wife and I have not resigned yet for whatever reason. Over the years, including very recently, my children have been the targets of direct contact by primary leaders inviting them to participate in the church - including in-person visits, letters and calls, each time asking for one of my children. Each time, my wife has intervened to explain that we are not interested in having them be contacted in such a manner.

While I understand the mentality of those involved, I question the propriety of attempting to contact minor children without reaching out directly to the parents. This last attempt struck my middle daughter as being very "creepy".

[_EAllusion]

If they were 8 it would strike me as really wrong. If they were 17, not so much. As kids age they become better able to make decisions with complicated consequences and the parents stewardship over those decisions likewise should fade.

[_SoHo]

How about 10 years old? A child who has never consciously attended the local congregation (meaning, not attended since she was a brand newborn) and is being contacted by strangers who address her by name, know her age and know where she lives - "inviting" her "back" to primary as though she were an old friend?

[_epiginosko]

Mormon Perspective: an unbaptized child over the "age of accountability" is treated as an adult investigator. Their eternal life is at stake if they don't convert. Since the parents aren't being that example - the burden is placed upon the church; specifically primary leaders, home teachers, ward missionaries (since you are now listed as a part-member family), and the Bishopric.

The Real World Perspective: Common courtesy would rule that any event or activity invitations to a minor should be made directly to their parents or guardians. Contacting the minors directly is inappropriate. Continuing to do this, despite the parents instructions not to, is harassment.

Although Church HQ is silent on this issue, I would imagine that, if asked by press or an attorney, they would publicly side with the "real world" perspective.

[_MrStakhanovite]

Whoops, wrong thread

[_Joseph]

You should be able to contact the Bishop and ask that your family and/or children NOT be contacted. It is that easy most of the time.

[_SoHo]

You should be able to contact the Bishop and ask that your family and/or children NOT be contacted. It is that easy most of the time.

One would think - kind of a revolving door in the local ward. Couples move in from Utah, get the leadership callings, complete their educations and maybe work for a while, then move out. I guess name removal is an option - but I've heard that that isn't a sure bet when it comes to kids. I'm not all that fussed or annoyed, just questioning the propriety of it. In the end, it leaves a negative impression on my kids who perceive these well-meaners as cultish.

[_The Mighty Builder]

Have your daughter state that the person contacting her wants to touch her in her naughty places. It will stop.