NOM

Posted: **Tue Nov 22, 2016 1:03 pm**

In January my 3 year old child will be listed as a Sunbeam. I wanted to send an email to the primary president saying in the nicest way I can imagine that we know where the church is, we know what time it starts, if we want our child at church we will take them. Pass on the info to the "child's teacher," we don't want them contacting our 3 year old child offering them rides to church or bringing them any type of handouts or gifts.

My DH thought I was overreacting and would they actually do that? I know from experience here they... could, but will they? I feel like they will. My personality is that I would like to set the clear boundary. He has me second guessing my actions feeling as if it's either unnecessary or will just alienate people. (I feel like who cares if it does).

It came down to me saying to DH I could either resign myself and the kids or send a note to the primary presidency and CC the bishop. Side note: He is a total non-believer, doesn't want the kids at church, doesn't want people being weird about it, but also thinks I'm overreacting/being aggressive and should wait for them to make the move to be weird first. I have to decide soon if I want to send the preemptive strike or not. It will be hard to come up with good wording and I need to get to work on it. DH is not on board with resigning for family reasons and I don't like the idea of resigning without him, but I will if I feel like it's my only option to draw boundaries with the church and my kids.

So looking for opinions that aren't invested in the outcome. Should I strike first or wait? What would NOM do? We have zero intention of ever going back to church.

Posted: **Tue Nov 22, 2016 1:50 pm**

My 2 next door neighbors have been out of the church for decades. They sometimes go to another Christian church but mostly seem not engages in religion. They are great people, friends, and neighbors. I have wondered why they have not taken names off the records. We are in a MorCor area. They get bothered several times a year by zealous neighbors about coming to church and activiites.

You will have that forever if you don't remove your names. At the same time, they are polite about it and are not bugged. It works for them. They have remained on the records. Maybe for family. Who knows.

Good luck with your decision. I think you can be nice and pleasant about the pestering. They will respect your wished when they are known, but you will have occasional contact, either way I would imagine.

Posted: **Tue Nov 22, 2016 1:59 pm**

If your young child doesn't have any close friends in the ward, then I would suspect the probability of someone contacting you to take your 3 yr old child to church without you is pretty low. I can't imagine any rational person doing this.

MAYBE if your were close friends with some TBM's would they make this offer, but I would find it unlikely.

By the time 8-12 yrs old comes, this might be a bit more of an issue. But I believe sending such a message would put you on the radar more than attempting to stay off it.

Posted: **Tue Nov 22, 2016 2:08 pm**

We are definitely already on the radar. We used to be fully active in this ward. Our ward mostly leaves us alone right now, but with my kids I am a mama bear.

Possible draft:

I am aware that in January you will be placing [Name] on a class list for the Sunbeam class. I know it is customary/traditional in Mormon culture for teachers of primary classes to contact students listed as students in their class that are “inactive” by inviting them to church, offering them a ride to church, bringing a spiritual message to their home, bringing a treat to their home for their birthday, etc. I’ve served in a Primary Presidency in the past and I am well versed on the workings of the church and church culture. I know that attempts like these are done with the best of intentions.

However, my husband and I would like to clearly indicate, in writing, that we do not want our minor children contacted by any adult (or for any adult to encourage children to contact our minor children) about involvement or lack of involvement in the LDS church.

Please share this information with the person(s) you assign to be [child]’s teacher. We hope that you can respect our family’s boundary that we are setting now. It is our right to make decisions about how we raise our children. We have nothing but positive feelings for the members of the ward and we hope it will always stay that way. I see it as my responsibility to keep in contact with you and other leaders as time passes (annually) about this boundary or if anything should change in our views regarding the church. I understand sometimes callings are changed and it may be forgotten to communicate this to a new teacher. I will let that person know in the kindest way possible of the boundary we have set.

I am sure you do much to serve the children of our neighborhood. It undoubtedly goes unappreciated from time to time. Thank you for taking the time you do to serve the children, for taking the time to read this, but mostly thank you for respecting our wishes.

Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this matter.

Posted: **Tue Nov 22, 2016 3:32 pm**

I would absolutely set boundaries and make them known now. I can certainly imagine there will be contact, an all-out effort to use the child as an entree for the whole family and other engineered movements to reactivate. You are probably already being discussed in the Primary presidency if not in ward council. Also, it will only escalate when the child approaches eight years of age - I don't know if they have to report the number of 8-year-old kids (or older) who aren't baptized, but I remember one family being discussed every single week for the entire time my calling required me to go to WC meetings. I think they honestly could not understand that the parents may not want the child to be baptized.

One way to lead into the topic (in an email or whatever) might be to say, "Someone recently asked if our child would be at Primary soon..." That might make it sound like you heard there was an interest and realized it might be good to let them know your thoughts on it. Here - just to make sure that's a truthful statement, I will ask the question:

"Hey TrophyWife - will your child be going to Primary next year? Third birthday and all that?"

My personal vote is to create your own boundaries rather than having to react when you see them encroached upon. I did that when I resigned, and it worked beautifully - I laid the groundwork, very politely, and haven't been bothered at all. Good luck - let us know how it goes.

Posted: **Tue Nov 22, 2016 4:59 pm**

I used to go with the neighbors to Church from my late elementary school years through high school age. Mormon neighbors enjoy that sort of thing, but my guess is that 3-8-year-olds would be out of the question. Too much hassle, especially if the 3-year-old is not potty trained.

Posted: **Tue Nov 22, 2016 5:12 pm**

I think you’ve outlined what you want to say already in your draft letter. It comes across clearly with your boundaries but is respectful and gentle enough that I think it would be OK to send without upsetting someone.

I do agree with Korihor and your husband that it seems like it would be better to wait until someone in the church makes the first move. You’ve already outlined a good response.

That’s just me, though. If it is necessary for your own peace to establish the boundaries early on, I say go for it.

Posted: **Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:50 pm**

Don't discount the possibility that the primary president is someone like me and would be most happy to have one less family to chase and a good excuse to give to the bishop

I agree with silvergirl - set the boundaries but do it politely.

Posted: **Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:25 am**

Have you established boundaries for the family? If you and your husband have already said you wish to be left alone, then I think that is good enough. People don't usually volunteer to babysit a three year old, and that is what it would be at that age. I would wait to see if they approach you about your child, because a three year old is not old enough for most members to try to use as a tool to get the parents back to church. That usually starts when children are old enough to nag parents about going to church, about 7 or older.

Besides, the advantage of waiting till they cross boundaries is that people take boundaries much more seriously when they accidently step over them. Their embarrassment at "offending" you makes them remember and inform others. If you warn them off of something they had no intention of doing, they just think you are obnoxious and paranoid.

The second advantage of waiting until someone unintentionally crosses your boundary, is that it will happen over and over as your children grow, and if you just keep in mind that every time your boundary is crossed, you will send the polite letter to the offending organization, then you are not surprised or irritated because it was something you expected and arranged for.

My experience with the church is that it works best if I let them forget I exist. But then I am very forgettable and didn't ever have friends who would go out of their way to get me back to church. If you had a lot of friends in the ward, then you are more likely to have people approach you in an attempt to reactivate your family.

So, obviously different NOMs have very different approaches, so you have to pick the one that fits your personality and family situation.

Posted: **Thu Nov 24, 2016 5:10 pm**

I also think that 3-year-olds don't get invited to church. Also kids trust their parents for any opinion for quite a while : simply stating that Mom and Dad decided the Church was "bad" (maybe find a different way to put it) should suffice. Church is NOT interesting enough for a kid to want to go.

Posted: **Thu Nov 24, 2016 6:41 pm**

I would be surprised if they make much of an effort with your 3 year old. They will really start up around 7 when it's time to get baptized. That's more of an action list item the bishop will push.

Posted: **Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:17 pm**

Another vote for leaving things for the moment. If they approach you about it you can say, "No thanks, we're good!" and then follow up with a variation of your proposed letter if they push it. I think it's just asking for more attention to do it now.

That being said, I completely understand your desire to get it done and over with. Holding off means it's still unsettled and hanging over your head. For that reason alone going ahead with it is also a great choice.

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2016 8:45 am**

TheRunningmom wrote:Another vote for leaving things for the moment. If they approach you about it you can say, "No thanks, we're good!" and then follow up with a variation of your proposed letter if they push it. I think it's just asking for more attention to do it now.

That being said, I completely understand your desire to get it done and over with. Holding off means it's still unsettled and hanging over your head. For that reason alone going ahead with it is also a great choice.

RM - I think you framed the pros & cons of the choices very well. After reading the arguments for waiting, I could see how that can stir the pot in some cases. I also see how letting it linger would be stressful (it would drive me crazy to wonder if that shoe was going to drop).

It probably boils down to the personal comfort level of each person or couple, how they feel about preemptive types of communication, and whether there are other things such as nearby family or other pressures to consider.

My personal style is to avoid the unsettling feeling you mentioned and to draw boundaries if needed. But my situation of having no small children at home and no extended family to worry about (and living in an area outside of the MorCor) is very different.

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2016 7:10 pm**

Thanks to everyone for the input. I'm feeling pretty ambivalent about it right now. I appreciate the differing perspectives. Whether or not I send it, I am glad I sat down to draft how I feel and heard feedback from differing perspectives. I'll let you know what I decide!

Posted: **Sat Nov 26, 2016 7:01 am**

trophywife26.2 wrote:Thanks to everyone for the input. I'm feeling pretty ambivalent about it right now. I appreciate the differing perspectives. Whether or not I send it, I am glad I sat down to draft how I feel and heard feedback from differing perspectives. I'll let you know what I decide!

Sometimes writing down the boundaries helps you know where the line is for yourself and that turns out to be is all you really need to do. Once you know where your line is, then you can be confident in your ability to enforce it. What makes boundaries hard is not knowing exactly what behavior from others we will not put up with. What is just being friendly and what is being manipulative? Once we answer that question clearly in our own mind, then we can trust ourselves to act in appropriate ways when someone tries to love us back to church.

Posted: **Sat Nov 26, 2016 8:16 am**

alas wrote: Sometimes writing down the boundaries helps you know where the line is for yourself and that turns out to be is all you really need to do. Once you know where your line is, then you can be confident in your ability to enforce it. What makes boundaries hard is not knowing exactly what behavior from others we will not put up with. What is just being friendly and what is being manipulative? Once we answer that question clearly in our own mind, then we can trust ourselves to act in appropriate ways when someone tries to love us back to church.

Words of wisdom! I'm going to file this away - I need to write out how I feel about a few things (not related to the church), and this makes so much sense.

NOM

Should I draw first blood with primary?

Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?

Re: Should I draw first blood with primary?