"Mid-singles"

[Moderator note: This topic was split off from the New Handbook Coming? topic, since it deals with a separate issue.]

sbradshaw wrote:Some examples of changes off the top of my head since 2010: policies relating to "mid-singles"

There was? I don't think the Handbook ever covered that - that was always a "local" creation.

russellhltn wrote:There was?

Yes. They are not called "mid-singles". They are referred to as single adults from age 31 to 45.

lajackson wrote:Yes. They are not called "mid-singles". They are referred to as single adults from age 31 to 45.

Yes, the SA wards got capped at 45. There was weeping and waling and gnashing of teeth I could hear even from over here.

"Mid-single" is usually a group in the 27-45 age range. Too old to feel at home with the typical YSA, but too young to what to hang out with the widows and widowers in the SA.

russellhltn wrote:"Mid-single" is usually a group in the 27-45 age range.

Not around here. We have struggled mightily to follow the guidance in the Handbook that identifies age 30 as the transition point from Young Single Adults to Single Adults.

I am well aware that in some areas a younger age is used. Priesthood leaders in our area have been careful to follow the requirements of the Handbook. The guidelines for establishing a Single Adult ward allow those 31-45 to participate. It is good to see this defined officially.

lajackson wrote:We have struggled mightily to follow the guidance in the Handbook that identifies age 30 as the transition point from Young Single Adults to Single Adults.

Just as long as a 30 yo is allowed to say in YSA. I've heard of cases where people have been kicked out of YSA on their 30th birthday.

Regardless of what age is used, there's always a problem when one's friends are split between two age groups. I think the mid-singles was some leaders response to that.

russellhltn wrote:Just as long as a 30 yo is allowed to say in YSA. I've heard of cases where people have been kicked out of YSA on their 30th birthday.

Yes, although I am not quite sure what magically happens at midnight on the last day that a young single adult is 30 and becomes 31.

But we have taken to calling the 31-45 group the "Mid-Singles" group, and once that became the conventional definition in this area, a lot of conflicts went away.

Perhaps in new revisions to the Handbook this area will be better defined. It is the greatest challenge I face in the responsibilities associated with my current calling in the Church.

Alas, that discussion would necessitate the creation of a new topic.

lajackson wrote:But we have taken to calling the 31-45 group the "Mid-Singles" group, and once that became the conventional definition in this area, a lot of conflicts went away.

That's good. It's just that I think in some parts of the church (like California and Utah), "mid-singles" straddle the both YSA and SA groups. So you may run into confusion when talking to people outside your area.

I think "mid-singles" exists (outside of the handbook) because nobody approaching a certain age wants "young" taken out of their classification leaving an empty hole. "Mid" eases them in.

sbradshaw wrote:I think "mid-singles" exists (outside of the handbook) because nobody approaching a certain age wants "young" taken out of their classification leaving an empty hole. "Mid" eases them in.

I don't think it's the title as much as the fact that singles in their upper 20's with a career has more in common with the 30 somethings than the just-turned 20 who are still in school. And there's always been a problem when a core group of friends ("clique" has a negative connotation) start crossing the YSA/SA line and can no longer attend the same events. I see the mids as a way of softening that hard border.

I don't think the prior handbooks forbid the mixing between groups. Our stake had a policy that all singles were welcome to both YSA and SA, so we didn't have the problem with that hard border. People came if they were comfortable with that group. We didn't card anyone.

russellhltn wrote:I don't think the prior handbooks forbid the mixing between groups. Our stake had a policy that all singles were welcome to both YSA and SA, so we didn't have the problem with that hard border. People came if they were comfortable with that group. We didn't card anyone.

We don't card them either. But we read the Handbook to be a little more clear that there is a difference between the two groups, starting with the separate committees and the separate instructions for each of the two groups. On careful reading, there are some subtle but clear differences between the Single Adults and the Young Single Adults and their organizational structure.

Nevertheless, local leaders do receive inspiration, and there are plenty of areas where the Handbook is not clear. Leaders see things differently in different areas of the world.

russellhltn wrote:

sbradshaw wrote:I think "mid-singles" exists (outside of the handbook) because nobody approaching a certain age wants "young" taken out of their classification leaving an empty hole. "Mid" eases them in.

I don't think it's the title as much as the fact that singles in their upper 20's with a career has more in common with the 30 somethings than the just-turned 20 who are still in school. And there's always been a problem when a core group of friends ("clique" has a negative connotation) start crossing the YSA/SA line and can no longer attend the same events. I see the mids as a way of softening that hard border.

I don't think the prior handbooks forbid the mixing between groups. Our stake had a policy that all singles were welcome to both YSA and SA, so we didn't have the problem with that hard border. People came if they were comfortable with that group. We didn't card anyone.

I personally feel that the YSA should be allowed to join forces with the SA group being that age is just a number. Our current Prophet, President Nelson, is nearly 20 years older than his 2nd wife. He is living proof that there is no age limit that can prevent true love from occuring.

There is no official church programme called mid singles.

The church handbook was updated in 2019 and it is very clear there is the Young Single Adult Programme (YSA) for those 18 to 30 and then the Single Adult Programme for those 31 plus. In the handbook under single members it does mention single adults wards for those 31 to 45 with no dependents but they can only be created by Stakes and Areas under special circumstances. To note it says Single Adult Wards not Mid Single Wards. We have no Single Adult Wards in Europe.

The problem with the unofficial mid singles programme is that it causes division. When a ward and/or stake puts on mid singles programmes those members refused to support normal single adult activities. This then defaults the single adult programme into a 46 plus programme of which two thirds of those members are 70 plus. The 70 plus members are not interested in conventions or dances they just want to do board games. This leaves the single adults that are 46 to 69 (of which I am one) wanting conventions and dances, well the same activities that the 31 to 45 want but it does not happen because there are simply not enough single adults aged 46 to 69 to support this. Mid Singles direct discriminates those single members that are 46 to 69.

We also need to look very carefully, the Young Single Adult Programme is more and more being replaced by Young Adults. What I expect in the future that the church will merge YSA and SA as one adult single programme.