Boundaries Workshop

Today I attended a workshop on Boundaries in Ministry for the Anglican clergy of this Deanery.

I was very impressed by the professionalism of it all, the preparation of the presenters and the way kept to our schedule, rather than just meandering through the topics of the day. (There is a time for that approach, I'm sure, but this wasn't one.)

Reps from our Insurance Company and Broker were there to make it clear to us that this discussion has serious financial aspects to it (in addition to the very serious emotional, spiritual and social aspects).

I had a chance to ask the lead Insurance person (unsure of his title at this point) a couple of questions I've pondered for a while now -- though fairly certain of the answers, especially since the first is an unnecessary dilemma.

Is it better to NOT to have any policies re. abuse (etc.) than to have them and not follow them? He said that it is always better to have policies than not, as it demonstrates some attempts at prevention.

He agreed however that requiring regular church attendance is irrelevant to an abuse policy, as it has little to do with predicting abusive behaviour. (Every sexual abuser I've known has been a very regular church attender.)

And, I would add (bearing in mind that I'm thinking primarily of a camp context), it's likely that it is a policy to which exceptions will be made. (Again it IS better to have policies, but none that are very likely not to be enforced consistently.)

It's perfectly acceptable to come up with a policy re. regularity of church attendance for camp volunteers, if it is consistent with one's goals and needs, but I believe that linking it with the Child Abuse policy is inadvisable. He's just one insurance expert, but this guy agreed.