After reading through the hand book of Instructions I can’t find any such guidelines.

The teacher shortage could be much-solved by giving up single-age classes. I’ve got six kids in my class. I could easily teach 15.

Another thing that would help: shorten the length of the Sunday meeting to two hours. You could run two classes: one for Jr. Sunday School and another for Sr. Sunday School and assign each a team of four. Stop making the kids sit by age, let them sit with siblings and older/younger friends within the Jr/Sr group to which they belong. I know it would be nice for the lone boy in our class of six.

When you give up the small single-age classroom, you give up asking questions with obvious answers to a very small group of children in a classroom. Instead: matching games on a board, puppet shows, and all the engaging group activities that make up Sharing Time and Singing Time now.

Of course Gospel Doctrine would be a much smaller class if the parents were teaching their children instead of socializing.

I was an assistant ward clerk for a period of time and the bishop said that he had been told that all classes in the primary (not just classes with male teachers) needed to have two teachers. The reasons given were as one other person stated, to prevent problems of abuse and to also have a witness in the event of an accusation.

I also heard that the policy came to be because of an accusation issue.

Like several others have stated, both in that ward and in my current ward it would be difficult to have two teachers for each class.

exactly, there is suppose to be two deep leadership for all young men activities and for male primary teachers. Bishop are suppose to have a clerk present when there is an interview taking place as well. The clerk is in the adjoining room. working in social work, i hate to say it, but the majority of abusers are men. that means sex abuse and domestic violence. Like 98% are men. so if that is the facts, then I applaud the church for being pro active in stopping the abuse of the most vulnerable of our congregation.

For campouts, there are supposed to be enough leaders (two or moer) to take a sick/misbehaving boy to the hospital/home, while leaving the rest with two-deep leaders. Fathers always grumble when asked to help on campouts, but there’s a reason for it — protection of the youth.

I don’t think it would be a bad policy to adopt in primary/Sunday School at all. I’m not offended in the least, because I recognize the value in it.

Sue M., the nursury room(s) in our building has windows on the doors, small windows, 5′ off the ground to peek in and check the kids. I don’t think there’s a need for a “huge” open window to the wandering youth/priesthood in the halls to distract the already-distracted 6 year-olds, though.

Just a note, but men can’t teach scouts alone. They frequently do, but they aren’t supposed to. I know because I was called to scouts as the assistant and then the leader’s work kept him from doing it. I refused to hold meetings alone and kept bugging them to call someone as a leader. So we just didn’t have scouts.

This is pretty prominent in the documentation you have to fill out.

Frankly, I hope this policy is in place church-wide. Men aren’t the only abusers of children, but lamentably, they are the majority. These rules just make sense.

Another example of outrageous policies caused by the actions of a few.

Men are treated in the Church as if they are weasels waiting to strike unsuspecting victims at every turn.

If their wives are abusive, somehow the man must be to blame. If their children are dysfunctional then the man must be to blame. And if the wife wants a divorce, the man must be to blame.

Then they wonder why there is a lack of enthusiasm among the brethern re: home teaching etc.

In fact, I’m surprised that home teaching is allowed by the brethern. We are clearly a bunch of perverts who are telestial beings waiting to die.

If those who are doing the calling do not have sufficient knowledge of those whom they call, then why are they in the position to make the call in the first place.
Does this illustrate some lack of diligence on their part?
If a man is a pervert let the rest of us beat the bl…y h… out of him and then the rest of us can live without the cloud of suspicion over our heads.

I taught primary twice…18 months each time…I took my calling seriously and loved every minute of it. If at any time someone felt to check up on me to see if I was abusing the children, I would have resigned on the spot.

This is outrageous.

On the other hand I support Clark in what he did, because when I attended scouts at a Baptist Church, when I was a kid, the Scout master was an abuser, and the assistant scout masters were too stupid to stop him. There was also a bishop who would go to scout camp with the express purpose of abusing the boys. He later became a patriarch.
Fortunately, he has been exed.